Skip to main content

Cameron is to Bigelow, as Hillary is to Obama

Cameron is to Bigelow, as Hillary is to Obama

As a hunch, "Avatar" lost because it felt too cheery (or cheer-worthy), was too exuberant, when Hollywood was in the mood to salute those who kept things delimited, neutered (more broken, less affect), and controlled. We voted in Obama, not Hillary (though we found a way to give her kudos), and he's going to be around for more than a short while. (Does Bigelow smoke? Did Cameron quit a long time ago? I wonder.)

I would hope with these Oscars that many of us are realizing how predictable we want things to be right now. For awhile yet, we can still pretend we're really into change/progress by handing out crowns to yet another who's never known election, or maybe switch to handing out buckets of them at a time, rather just to one path-breaking singular, but at some point it will become obvious to us that we're for some reason terrified of moving on. I guess we figure we'll "deal" with this moment when we get to it, but for now and the short-term: what would it be like if all in one year the best picture, best director, best actor/actress were all female/black? What kind of a charge of affirmation would be get from THAT? -- enough to carry us on? How about along with HALF indie-selections? -- or would that leave us too little room for next time?

At the end of the day, the movie that has stayed with me, is Star Trek. True for anyone else?

Patrick

Yes, Star Trek is sticking with me. As a Trekkie, I was worried it would suck big time, but it won me over with its humor and its affection for the characters.

I haven't seen Avatar, but it looks like the usual bloated overkill to me. I am afraid it will strain my nerves to watch it. (Presumptuous Insect, response to post)

Link: Oscars: Hollywood’s war against itself (Andrew O’Hehir, Salon)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Discussion over the fate of Jolenta, at the Gene Wolfe facebook appreciation site

Patrick McEvoy-Halston November 28 at 10:36 AM Why does Severian make almost no effort to develop sustained empathy for Jolenta -- no interest in her roots, what made her who she was -- even as she features so much in the first part of the narrative? Her fate at the end is one sustained gross happenstance after another... Severian has repeated sex with her while she lay half drugged, an act he argues later he imagines she wanted -- even as he admits it could appear to some, bald "rape" -- but which certainly followed his  discussion of her as someone whom he could hate so much it invited his desire to destroy her; Severian abandons her to Dr. Talus, who had threatened to kill her if she insisted on clinging to him; Baldanders robs her of her money; she's sucked at by blood bats, and, finally, left at death revealed discombobulated of all beauty... a hunk of junk, like that the Saltus citizens keep heaped away from their village for it ruining their preferred sense ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Salon discussion of "Almost Famous" gang-rape scene

Patrick McEvoy-Halston: The "Almost Famous'" gang-rape scene? Isn't this the film that features the deflowering of a virgin -- out of boredom -- by a pack of predator-vixons, who otherwise thought so little of him they were quite willing to pee in his near vicinity? Maybe we'll come to conclude that "[t]he scene only works because people were stupid about [boy by girl] [. . .] rape at the time" (Amy Benfer). Sawmonkey: Lucky boy Pull that stick a few more inches out of your chute, Patrick. This was one of the best flicks of the decade. (sawmonkey, response to post, “Films of the decade: ‘Amost Famous’, R.J. Culter, Salon, 13 Dec. 2009) Patrick McEvoy-Halston: @sawmonkey It made an impression on me too. Great charm. Great friends. But it is one of the things you (or at least I) notice on the review, there is the SUGGESTION, with him being so (rightly) upset with the girls feeling so free to pee right before him, that sex with him is just further presump...
3 comments
Read more

The Conjuring

The Conjuring 
I don't know if contemporary filmmakers are aware of it, but if they decide to set their films in the '70s, some of the affordments of that time are going to make them have to work harder to simply get a good scare from us. Who would you expect to have a more tenacious hold on that house, for example? The ghosts from Salem, or us from 2013, who've just been shown a New England home just a notch or two downscaled from being a Jeffersonian estate, that a single-income truck driver with some savings can afford? Seriously, though it's easy to credit that the father — Roger Perron—would get his family out of that house as fast as he could when trouble really stirs, we'd be more apt to still be wagering our losses—one dead dog, a wife accumulating bruises, some good scares to our kids—against what we might yet have full claim to. The losses will get their nursing—even the heavy traumas, maybe—if out of this we've still got a house—really,...
2 comments
Read more