Skip to main content

American Reunion -- Review


Perhaps it's the foremost goal now for most people, not to be a runaway success, but to situate yourself so you get a comfy-enough seat in which to watch how it all unravels.  It's been 13 years, and it seem the point of the reunion is to strip away whatever attenuations becoming visibly adult after high school brings upon you -- something for self-esteem purposes you need to feel you'd donned -- to mostly lounge back, lifelong, into a niche, a "knit," you've always known as pleasing and comfortable.  Well, for these characters -- good for them.  It'd be nice to see people settle into their permanent habitat after they're fully formed rather than while shadows of greater essences -- of true world-exploring adventurers, of truly individuated, mature couples; but I think even with where they remain they'll have fun, know some good living.

I think they'd be wise, though, not to be made subjects for any further films.  Stifler, the only one of them who remains an agent of true living -- that is, not just a joiner in common-place activities like horking down hotdogs with genial-enough friends, but generating, initiating upon them new adventures, experiences and landscapes -- seems pretty much near used up by film's end, exhausted from having to play through all the requisite and predictable (note:  in a time where collectively to help bide time we make ourselves feel evolved and accomplished perhaps primarily by ridiculing white male alphas, it plays out as requisite, not a surprise, that his high school sports-mates are all gay) humiliations that have to be suffered upon him.  

The film seems to realize as much, as an effort -- a sustained one -- is made to resuscitate him in the last few moments before the finish.  All of a sudden after so much victimizing he's generously funnelled every plausible available target to feast and food for himself through thorough banging or deflating -- without of course -- or at least done in a fashion that gives ready avenue for denial -- chisseling away one iota at categories of people we are fully vested in remaining righteously affiliated with -- some renewal and vitality.  But it still plays out with him seeming more like their potentially straying, thoroughly wrought-over, hyper-respondant traumatized dog than a co-equal who can confirm with what he generates that yet still with ample provisions, mapped-out destinations, and of course, pre-selected accomodations, they'll know in life some subsequent true adventure. 

Comments

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 ...

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...

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,...