Skip to main content

Stephanie Zacharek, and the news of Avatar 2, 3 and 4


Stephanie Zacharek's review of the film, we note, was very harsh.  It's always great to have her take, but it'd be nice if she'd accord some of her assertions, particularly this one -- "But if you're out to change the face of filmmaking, you have to work much harder at a lot of the thigs Cameron just shrugs off" -- and perhaps also this one -- "In Avatar, the technology is everything" -- and also this one -- "'Avatar isn't about actors or characters or even about story; it's about special effects, which is fine as far as it goes" -- with what actually ended up happening.  Cameron didn't leapfrog off this project; the world, the people in it, mattered to him -- and do we doubt that audiences haven't either?  And this, his sticking to the Avatar universe, isn't because he's old, or because Avatar is ideal ground for his special effects fetish, or because the aquatic's hold on its lifeforms doubles nicely its recent long hold on him; but rather because despite his early errancy -- i.e., Titanic's "Goodbye, mother!" - he means to spend the rest of his life in the lap of his mother deity, Eywa; it really does come down to that. 
Stephanie was astray from the life in this film as she was from the life in Avengers.   This line from her review of Avatar, "It's a remote-control movie experience, a high-tech 'wish you were here' scribbled on a very expensive postcard," just like this one from her review of the Avengers, "all a filmmaker really needs to do is put them all into a big stock pot filled with elaborate set pieces and some knowing dialogue and he's golden," shows she's been sending up movies that it turned out audiences have bought into -- and brother, have they!
Or, audiences these days are such that they fall head over heels for movies that really are all about special effects and already-cultivated prejudices, with tedious characters, no meaningful story development, and removed directors (Armond White thinks so).  It'd be nice to see her take a momentary break from movie reviews and write an account of what it's like to draw back from an appraisal of a film to situate oneself amongst what-turn-out-to-be zombies, who clearly accepted as hearty feasts what you had established as cold film corpses.  

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Superimposing another "fourth-wall" Deadpool

I'd like to superimpose the fourth-wall breaking Deadpool that I'd like to have seen in the movie. In my version, he'd break out of the action at some point to discuss with us the following:
1) He'd point out that all the trouble the movie goes to to ensure that the lead actress is never seen completely naked—no nipples shown—in this R-rated movie was done so that later when we suddenly see enough strippers' completely bared breasts that we feel that someone was making up for lost time, we feel that a special, strenuous effort has been made to keep her from a certain fate—one the R-rating would even seemed to have called for, necessitated, even, to properly feed the audience expecting something extra for the movie being more dependent on their ticket purchases. That is, protecting the lead actress was done to legitimize thinking of those left casually unprotected as different kinds of women—not as worthy, not as human.   


2) When Wade/Deadpool and Vanessa are excha…

"The Zookeeper's Wife" as historical romance

A Polish zoologist and his wife maintain a zoo which is utopia, realized. The people who work there are blissfully satisfied and happy. The caged animals aren't distraught but rather, very satisfied. These animals have been very well attended to, and have developed so healthily for it that they almost seem proud to display what is distinctively excellent about them for viewers to enjoy. But there is a shadow coming--Nazis! The Nazis literally blow apart much of this happy configuration. Many of the animals die. But the zookeeper's wife is a prize any Nazi officer would covet, and the Nazi's chief zoologist is interested in claiming her for his own. So if there can be some pretence that would allow for her and her husband to keep their zoo in piece rather than be destroyed for war supplies, he's willing to concede it.

The zookeeper and his wife want to try and use their zoo to house as many Jews as they can. They approach the stately quarters of Hitler's zoologist …

Full conversation about "Bringing Up Baby" at the NewYorker Movie Facebook Club

Richard Brody shared a link.Moderator · November 20 at 3:38pm I'm obsessed with Bringing Up Baby, which is on TCM at 6 PM (ET). It's the first film by Howard Hawks that I ever saw, and it opened up several universes to me, cinematic and otherwise. Here's the story. I was seventeen or eighteen; I had never heard of Hawks until I read Godard's enthusiastic mention of him in one of the early critical pieces in "Godard on Godard"—he called Hawks "the greatest American artist," and this piqued my curiosity. So, the next time I was in town (I… I was out of town at college for the most part), I went to see the first Hawks film playing in a revival house, which turned out to be "Bringing Up Baby." I certainly laughed a lot (and, at a few bits, uncontrollably), but that's not all there was to it. I had never read Freud, but I had heard of Freud, and when I saw "Bringing Up Baby," its realm of symbolism made instant sense; it was obviou…