Steven Soderbergh had a pretty good year in 2000. He directed both Erin Brockovich and Traffic, and both films got nominated for Oscars -- Soderbergh himself got nominated as best director for both films, something that hasn’t happened since about the 1930’s.

No doubt that the director and his films were nominated for their social issues. Erin Brockovich dealt with Julia Roberts’ investigation of the victims of pollution, brought about by a corrupt energy company, while Traffic deals with the war on drugs, and the players and victims on the battlefield. In either case, the film manages to discuss the issues in a fairly intelligent, if obvious, fashion, while at the same time, managing to remain fairly safe in the confines of Hollywood storytelling.

Traffic contains multiple storylines, which all collide in one form or another. The film begins in Mexico, where Benicio Del Toro, as a cop, makes a major drug bust, only to be pulled over himself by a high-ranking general. The other storylines take place in the USA, and include Michael Douglas as a recently-appointed “drug czar”, Catherine Zeta-Jones as a woman shocked to realize that her husband has been arrested for being a drug kingpin, Don Cheadle as a DEA agent hoping to make an arrest of a local drug leader, and, finally, the teenage daughter of the Douglas character, who turns out to have major drug problems of her own.

Many of the individual stories are quite interesting in their own right, and would make good movies of their own. Del Toro’s character, after having made a drug bust, is intercepted by the general. Later on, that same general proposes that Del Toro work for him, and help him out in fighting one of the major cartels in the area...... but Del Toro finds out later that there is a more insidious reason why the general wants this particular cartel taken down.

The teenage daughter of the drug czar is a very troubled kid. We see her with her friends, all on drugs, when one of them has a seizure from an overdose. They go to the hospital, drop the unconscious kid off, and attempt to drive away, but are arrested. This experience opens her dad’s eyes to the real problems of drugs; it’s easy for a drug czar to just say “I’ll be extremely tough on the drug problem”, but more complicated when your own flesh and blood is an addict.

Cheadle’s character, and his partner, catch an important fellow, and have to protect him, because he is due to testify in court against Zeta-Jones’ husband. And Zeta-Jones wants this squealer dead.

All of these stories connect, mainly due to the connections between Mexico and the American storylines. The two cartels referred to in the Mexican plot have connections with the drug boss that Cheadle arrests, and with Zeta-Jones’ husband. And Douglas travels to Mexico in order to find out the full cross-border situation, and to meet the general. Besides making for interesting ensemble drama, the format creates the message that the effects of drugs and the drug trade are more far-reaching than one may realize, and hold many people in its grip.

One thing that I thought was peculiar was the clashing of production values with American and Mexican scenes. The American scenes are shot in standard film stock (35 mm, perhaps, but I wouldn’t know), while the Mexican segments are presented in grungy, overexposed digital. There doesn’t seem to be any reason for this -- certainly the film stocks do not change the nature of the story. What do I think? I think the studio needed to save some money by shooting on location, so they went for the digital cameras.

The film is quite entertaining, with much good drama and good moments, but it didn’t rock me to my core. I liked how all the plotlines were linked to each other in a particular fashion, and I liked some of the stories. The stuff in Mexico is quite compelling, and the stuff with Michael Douglas is also very good. But some of the other material didn’t do it for me...... I really didn’t quite get the whole thing with Zeta-Jones and Quaid. I didn’t even quite understand who Quaid’s character was supposed to be, although I’m notorious for missing what ought to be important or obvious elements. I wasn’t sure if he was connected with the drug trade, or if he was just after Zeta-Jones, or perhaps their dirty money.

As well, I wasn’t really too shook by this movie, because there really isn’t a whole lot said that is particularly new. Probably the only real novelty is the drug czar’s experience; the script actually tries to make a politician, a drug czar at that, into a sympathetic character, rather than some out-of-touch idiot. He seems to really want to do his best to find out what, if anything, can be done about the problem -- especially now that his daughter is part of the tragedy.

Other than that... of course, it’s obvious that drugs, mainly due to their illegality, harm people in many ways. The cartels need that illegality in order to maintain their high profits, and to maintain their territory. The officials (both American and Mexican) need that illegality in order to look good to the voters by saying that we’re going to win the war on drugs. And of course many regular people are caught in the crossfire, from the ordinary beat cops who try to do a job, from parents and friends of drug users, and from those who are stupid enough to try drugs themselves.

What would the solution be? To legalize drugs? Perhaps. I think it’s kind of silly that people can actually get arrested for ingesting something... anything.. even something as harmful as crack cocaine. The thing is, though, I’m not of the mind that these people should be allowed to express their liberty... I’m of the mind that if they are stupid enough to try it, they get what they deserve. If those kids in this movie drop dead of an overdose, it’s hard to fully pity them... hey, nobody forced them to take the drugs. My feelings also ensure that I’m not totally unsympathetic to people who are against drugs. While I think it is kind of a waste to spend billions to go after users, it’s hard to suggest that the people who actually produce and sell such stuff should get away scott-free. After all, even legal products like tobacco and alcohol cause a lot of harm. Illegal drugs are even worse, for the most part. And, while I might say that it’s hard to feel a lot of pity for the users, it’s probably not as hard to feel pity for the people around them, who have to put up with their problems. So, really, it’s difficult to pin down what the solution ought to be. There are pros and cons to everything. Traffic doesn't pin down a solid solution either....... which is surely a good thing. And while Traffic is not an overpowering masterpiece, its raising of issues, and its unwillingness to take sides, ensures that the viewer will have something to think about, when it comes to this important issue.

Recommended:
Yes

Viewing Format: VHS
Video Occasion: Better than Watching TV