Review: Netflix Documentary Seaspiracy

Hi friends,

Not sure if everyone has watched this documentary but it has stirred up quite a lot of debate amongst netizens, specifically on Twitter.

To be completely honest, I watched the documentary with a bit of bias. My housemates have watched it and was talking about it over dinner, opinions like humans are evil, there is no more faith in humanity, is going plant-based the right answer or is stopping seafood the consumption the solution? were raised. I also saw a few comments on my Twitter feed about the inaccuracies of the film and the racist undertones as well.

My first impression of the documentary was I did not like the style at all. If I’m not mistaken, it’s in first person’s about the filmmaker’s quest of searching answers about the ocean. I didn’t like the first’s persons format. No hate to the film but its my personal preference. I prefer documentaries like Planet Earth, the style is very much different. The other thing I noticed was that a lot of the claims are backed by Sea Shepard, sure that professor came in a few times but most of the time it was someone from Sea Shepard, Sea Shepard this, Sea Shepard that. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a good thing that there are organisations out there doing something that not many people are doing but I feel that the claims might not be credible if they only feature one NGO and its not a whole view of the fishing industry/ work done by NGOs.

The film is actually under fire for its credibility. News reports from different media sites suggests that some figures in the film were outdated and has been retracted a long time ago. You can see here for the untrue facts cited in the film. I’m not sure to what extent you’ll believe in the website considering that the film has persecuted that most organisations do not care about the welfare of the ocean and that they are not talking about the issues highlighted in the film. because they could be getting monetary gains in sweeping the issue under the rug. The films states that there is a reason why people are only focusing on reducing plastic straw consumption but not fishing problems. I somewhat agree with that but I feel that their claims and perspectives discredits the hard work that people in the industry have done to ensure that the oceans are where it’s at now. The film focuses on all the negatives and did not highlight any positives of what the industry has done which in my opinion is the most dangerous aspect of the film. I’m sure different agencies are doing their best to protect the oceans but putting a blanketed statement saying that no ones is doing anything is very harmful. It only focuses on the good things that ONE NGO has done, but what about the others? Isn’t sinking ships illegal? Sure, more things need to be done but is it so difficult to highlight what has been done to help the ocean?

I suppose that is not the point of the film. The film wants people to see how eating seafood is detrimental to the sea. To some extent, I can see the problem. With dubious fisheries and unscrupulous businessmen, there must be some dirty fishing going on. But what about coastal cities, people’s whose livelihood depend on fishing, what is going to happen? I suppose there needs to be a proper action plan recommended in place before making the claim. Give suggestions to the people who will be affected by it. With the release of the film, I bet that demand will drop and with the pandemic, people in some part of the supply chain will be made redundant. The film opposes fish farming and I can see why but taking a hard left in supporting aquaculture at the end of the film is a bit ironic isn’t it?

I think what went well for the film is that it got people’s attention albeit dramatized because these problems have been previously talked about but might not have gained traction with the public. I also think that we need to be wary that the filmmaker isn’t a scientist nor an industry insider, so the problem of credibility may be somewhat understandable? However, don’t most people know that citing tabloids isn’t real citation? Perhaps, from a filmmaking standpoint, this documentary is a successful one because it’s gotten people to talk about it, maybe not for the good but its still talk no?

There are a lot of things that went wrong with the film but at least it gained traction. If you’re wondering what my stance is, I think that a heavy plant-base regime plus some meat each week is the way to go. I personally don’t think that cutting meat out completely is healthy. It’s the absorbency or something. Like we absorb most proteins from meat but to get the same amount of proteins we need to eat heaps and heaps of vegetables.

There are a lot of issues that has been raised about the film ,here are some links to a few things I’ve read about after watching that was quite eye opening:

I may be misinformed or maybe my opinions are not build on the right research. If so, please let me know, I’m happy to learn 🙂 Food for thought: What did you think of the film and what is your stance about it?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s