I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Fantastic!

Best movie of this year hands down!

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

The film The Anarchist Cookbook tells an intriguing tale and deserves our attention. Therefore I was pleasantly surprised to find that Amazon sells secondhand copies almost for free. The fundamental theme addresses by the film is the extent of violence that can be employed in order to attain ones political goals. Since anarchists reject the violence monopoly of the state, an anarchist setting was the obvious choice for the film makers. Note however that every person is confronted with this question, also the loyal elector in the democratic state. Do you support breaches of privacy? Long prison sentences? The death penalty? So actually the choice of the anarchist backcloth is more or less arbitrary, or perhaps an intended move in order to appease law-abiding citizens. Consequently the film did not evolve into an in-depth study of anarchist ways of life. If you want to delve into this theme, I would recommend the Swedish film Tillsammans (Together) instead. Nevertheless, The anarchist Cookbook gives a reasonable impression of the diversity in the anarchist ways of living. The story unfolds in a commune of squatters. It harbors a free socialist (who conducts a book shop), an advocate of free sex, and several libertarians. Of course the group embraces the vegan menu, and rather surprisingly, drugs are prohibited. The average group member in this commune is devoid of ideology, but simply loathes authority. This holds in particular for the main character Peter, or Puck, his anarchist alias. One day a man called Johnny Black joins the group. He wants to bolster the level of violence used by the group. Of course minor infringements are already common: shop lifting, vandalism, obstruction. But Johnny wants to step up the scale of destruction, and employ sabotage, explosives and physical assaults. Anyone who has spent some time in observing the extreme left, will confirm that such tactics do exist. Personally I have always had difficulty in understanding the sense in attacking common laborers and constables. Is it an expression of contempt? There have been times when some streets in Amsterdam were completely controlled by communities of squatters. They used reinforcements in order to turn the buildings into fortresses. Police raids were countered with the throwing of bricks and bottles, and sometimes the dumping of heavy appliances from the roof tops. Indeed these pockets of anarchy or autonomy were ruled by violent sections, who used repression to discipline the other group members. Johnny Black represents precisely this type, and manages to gradually seize power by means of the usual turnover and the introduction of his own comrades. Since Peter is a nihilist, he willingly adapts to the new leader. Others follow, including the socialist - which seems rather incredible, considering his principles. Under Johnny the commune starts to increase its means by the trading of drugs, and gets a criminal character. When Johnny forges an opportunist alliance with fascists, racists and nationalists, Peter decides to rebel. He betrays his former comrades to the FBI, and accepts a significant bounty in return (how far are you willing to go?). In the end we see him continuing his journey, traveling on a long straight road in the wilderness, towards the sunset. In conclusion I find the film satisfactory: the characters are steady (except for the socialist), the events seem possible, and dilemmas are elaborated on. For instance, after a police raid one of the group members is sent to jail, another to a mental institution, and Peter gets an ankle bracelet and is again brought under parental care. Although The anarchist cookbook does not evoke feelings of empathy, it is food for thought. If it is to your liking, consider also seeing Strawberry Statement.

Let's see, we have Anarchists, Nihilists, anti-government right-wingers, wealthy Republicans, Neo-Nazis, but no Democrats at all. Being a moderate Democrat which at times veers towards Centrism, I found this movie lacking a bit. While some scenes were smart, others came off as stupid, un-original, un-realistic and improvised. Puck lives with his friends in a Anarchist commune somewhere in Texas. These are Anarchist that resemble more flower children. One day, a Nihilist called Johnny Black shows up, offer everyone drugs and violence as a weapon and somehow becomes the leader. Later on, the Anrchist forge an alliance wit other anti-establishment groups such as Neo-Nazis. First of all, not all Anarchists are peace loving intellectuals. Many are upper-class spoiled brats that simply want to vandalize anything (Yes I know plenty of these, they do exist). Many do follow Anarchist theory but fail to realize it's utopianism. Johnny Red the early leader,constantly lionizes Sweden as an exemplary society but somehow Social Democrats are missing from the film's universe. Anarchists tend to be socially liberal and would NEVER form an alliance with Neo-Nazis. If Puck didn't agree with the system, he could of found ways to subvert it by integrating himself into alternative cultures and political movements (YES, lobbying does work). Other reviewers are correct in pointing out the similarities between this movie and SLC Punk and Trainspotting. Despite its plot's weakness, Anarchist Cookbook has a witty script and at moments stylish direction. Gina Phillips as the commune temptress, steals most of her scenes.

If anyones ever compared this film to SLC punk, Id have to agree.If I ignored the manipulative horrible ending, Id recommend it for Kids under 20 yrs old.Through the first half I found myself droning along with a bunch of perfect skin, conditioned hair Sh*ts fresh out of a teen hunk magazine, supposedly living in a punk squat. (though I enjoyed seeing John Savage from 'Hair' ...ect)The second half I guess there were a couple giggles.Do show it to your 14 Yr old Kid who's getting into politics.If Your Kid is getting into punk, show him 'Dogs In Space' instead. (this is coming from a 26 yr old)I wont give away the ending, but it could make you sick in the way that makes you wish you hadn't wasted your time.

This movie... I really don't have much to say about it. This movie was a waste of my time, and will surely be a waste of yours. The title is unbelievably misleading, and doesn't portray Anarchism in any way, shape or form. I nearly cried with frustration at how horribly wrong the entire concept was. I encourage you to throw this movie away if you own it, for it's nothing but a piece of right-wing propaganda that honestly portrays nothing other than the classic American troublemaker, which any true anarchist is far from. The only reason it really made it as far as it did- that is to say, the only reason people actually watched it- is because for once we anarchists thought that we would see a movie that showed Anarchy in all of it's potential glory. Boy, were we wrong.