Here’s a lil’ diddy about Greasy and Emma… Two young lovers inna pig-a-sty. Please enjoy today’s post: The Biggest Little Farm – Film Review
Are You Shitake-ing Me!? This is Perfect!!!
This post may contain affliate links. Please read my disclosure page for more info.
On the flight back from our Cali trip last November, The Biggest Little Farm happened to pop up on the little in-flight telly. At the time (and to this day, for that matter), I was pretty enamored with learning about all things permaculture-related.
Apparently, I got a little side-tracked, considering I’m writing this film review now, roughly six months later.
The Biggest Little Farm -- Overview
John, a wildlife videographer, and Molly, a private chef, pack up their life in sunny Santa Monica, CA, embarking upon a grand adventure: to resurrect and transform a defunct 200-hundred acre monoculture farm a bit north of L.A.
Under the tutelage of Allen York, a champion of biodynamic, regenerative systems within viticulture (wine-making), high-level strategy and design benefit from an expert’s directive, yet its execution lay within the hands of amateurs.
The documentary is shot over a span of eight years.
A lot can happen in eight years, and it does, including the unfortunate passing of their friend and mentor, York.
Now, officially in uncharted territory, the couple must tackle the everyday challenges of farming solely on their own.
From a sick pig to chicken mauling coyotes, they climb a steep learning curve out of necessity.
The Good
The cinematography is exceptional.
John leverages his film-making skill-set (and some high-end equipment no doubt) to put together truly magnificent imagery.
I’m probably a bit biased, as I’m the type that could watch nature docs until the cows come home. But, hey.
Again, the film was shot over eight years, plenty of time to ruminate on how to lay out the story. This equates to a deliberate, thoughtful telling. It also delivers the audience a dose of reality – things take time. York calls it “building the flywheel,” with the goal being: “the highest level of biodiversity possible.”
As the couple (and a small army of college-age looking kids), struggle to find their farming way in the first handful of years, the story focuses on relationships within the natural world. From ducks and snails to chicken and fly larvae to owls and gophers to cover crops and fruit trees, we learn how problems are solved.
John, as narrator, calls it “observation followed by creativity.”
The Bad
Again, they had eight years to think about how to lay out this story. Maybe, that gave space to better coalesce clarity in message, but it can work against you, I think too.
The film is a documentary, but feels like a drama. Good and bad, I guess. It’s entertaining as can be and who would want to watch drawn out scenes of mucking stalls or spreading compost?
Well, me, but I’m weird. You see what I’m saying?
The key “plotline” is the couple’s relationship with their rescue dog Todd within the context of their new life and new antagonist: the coyote. I don’t want to ruin it for you, but I’ll just say it doesn’t end great for the coyote. John then narrates an existential experience, in which visions of Todd transmogrify into the stale, unmoving visage of the dead coyote.
Did this actually happen or did he shoot a coyote and then think long and hard about how to massage it so he didn’t look like a bad dude on film? Yadunno…
The Ugly
I don’t know if I should have done this, but I did. After watching the film and taking notes multiple times, I went to… wait for it… the internet.
I mentally revisited things that, although noted while watching, I essentially shrugged off previously. “It’s a movie, they can’t include everything.” I thought.
What are these things?
Well, first, they do not reference “permaculture” as a term. This omission comes despite demonstrations of Nature’s interconnected relationships, and even more specifically, plant guilds are featured throughout.
They call what they are engaging in, “traditional farming,” which is so ambiguous it loses meaning.
Their mentor, Alan York, was a superstar in the field of “biodynamic, regenerative farming.” They zip right by this.
To a certain extent, who cares?
I’ve written previously there’s “no such thing as the permaculture police.” These are all just words and who wants to have a debate around semantics anyway?
BUT, and I think this is a legitimate criticism (which I read and it resonated with me). By not acknowledging these fields of study, John (subconsciously or consciously) gives little deference to those before us.
At first, I sort of chuckled to myself in agreement with the criticism, but the more I thought about it, the more irksome it became.
The critique cites a specific example, in explaining their “observation, followed by creativity” approach. In discussing the relationship between ducks and snails, he essentially says the solution was derived by watching a duck eat a snail one day. Subsequently, they “unleash the ducks” in their fruit tree orchard and their snail problem is quickly ameliorated.
Did that really happen? Or did they educate themselves by relying on centuries of wisdom from the agricultural community. Who can say, really?
The second criticism I have is around the funding of the experiment. They allude to a “generous private investor,” who essentially makes this all possible from the get-go. It’s mentioned, as an aside a couple of times, and the story continues.
For practical and privacy purposes, it clearly wouldn’t make much sense to get into the nitty gritty financial details, but the oversight makes the project look fantastic rather than practical.
John says the purpose of the film is to be “a tool of inspiration.” This would imply he would be in favor of promoting this type of venture, this lifestyle for others…as long as they are backstopped by the deep pockets that may require a return on that investment?!
Full Circle - Lighten Up Buddy
Oh, no! You’ve gone and done those internets again…
This movie was shot over eight years. Have I mentioned that?
People change, people learn, people adapt… and life throws a constant avalanche of unpredictable variables that can act as anchors, detours, speed bumps, brick walls, chicanes and sometimes even… launchpads.
This humble blog has not yet reached it’s sophomore year, for example. What grand and noble ruminations was this blogger engaged in six years prior?
Gulp. Let’s change the subject, shall we?
So, let’s give John and Molly a little wiggle on the specifics maybe. Let’s give them an opportunity to share their story again in a different medium too, one that lends itself to more nuance.
Here’s something that I found. Check it out. It’s 2+ hours of nuance. You will greatly appreciate their intelligence, spirit and passion.
However, if I may…
Please go watch the movie first. Kick back, you’ll really enjoy it.
Conclusion
I originally drafted this Biggest Little Farm film review with only praise.
The more I mentally stewed and brewed, the more some of the details needled. But, like anything else, upon a few more walkabout-thinkabouts, I think I’ve come to a deeper appreciation of what’s going on here.
Here’s the skinny: if you’re interested in Nature, sustainability and farming, this is a visually rich and entertaining film that may be right up your alley.
You’ll really enjoy it.
If you’ve gone down the organic, permaculture, regenerative, and/or biodynamic farming rabbit holes from an academic standpoint or if you’re an actual farmer, you might get slightly miffed by the dilution/lack of details and attribution.
But hey, I don’t think it’ll ruin anyone’s day.
So, thank you for checking out this film review, now let’s give the podium to John and Molly for the final word. On “the hero” of The Biggest Little Farm:
The hero is our humility within the admission of our vulnerability and need for nature… this was the part that was hardest to learn…that Nature can become the hero if you can connect with it in a vulnerable way
