Richard Brody shared a link.
A longer word on I Love You, Daddy:
the release was cancelled, but—even apart from Louis C.K.'s misconduct—it's a
disgusting film that never should have been acquired for distribution in the
first place. (Absolutely not saying he shouldn't be able to show it—but that no
responsible company should ever have gotten behind it.) I saw it a few weeks
before the stories came out; it was an infuriating experience—like watching an
act of cinematic gaslighting; here are some of the details (I wrote twice as
much because there were so many more, but mercifully cut back on them): https://www.newyorker.com/…/why-louis-cks-i-love-you-daddy-…
C.K.’s movie doesn’t just excuse but actually endorses sexual
depredation as an artistic practice and as a way of life.
NEWYORKER.COM
Nat Magee This review is
astounding. I've been a big fan of Louis CK ever since "Louie" came
out, and I was excited to see what he could do on the big screen. However, the
confirmation of the stories that circulated about him have called most of his
work into question for me. At the moment, it makes me a bit sick to watch any
of his material/shows, but I know that one day I'm going to go back and view
some of it with my new awareness. What will I think of it then? What would I
have thought of this movie if it had been released as intended?
Marc Imbillicieri What does his misconduct have to do with the work?
Nat Magee This is my personal reaction, so objectively it might have
nothing to do with it, but I guess because his comedy/filmed content is so
personal and has a lot of sexuality involved. Knowing that he's hurt other
people with the same sexuality that's fueled a lot of his comedy feels painful
to me. The work is still brilliant and funny, but at this moment I can't
separate the work from the man.
Andreas Petrossiants Would really recommend this review as well, which was published
2 or so weeks ago: http://www.4columns.org/orange-michelle/i-love-you-daddy
Lisa Salazar Clear-eyed view without the taint of his latest revelations.
Linda Covello Thank you for sharing that review.
Sophie Krueger I think that this idea of “cinematic gaslighting” really holds a
lot of merit. I think that it’s definitely a phenomenon for liberal, male
writers and directors in their creation of female characters. Are there any
other movies you can specifically identify that do this?
Lisa Salazar Fatal Attraction, Disclosure are the first two that come to
mind. Nearly all action films objectify women as molls. The latest sci fi films
allege to have female heroes but they are all reduced to dressed up Barbie
dolls with no emotional depth. Geez, as I write this, what's left?
Raquel Herrera Great review.
Manhattan was my favorite movie when I was 18, although I never managed to
comprehend why someone my age would be so intent on having a relationship with
a clearly immature 42 year old. In time, I enjoyed many Woody Allen movies,
though I never got around to
accept the insistence on this kind of "relationships" between young
girl and older men. What is wrong with these directors? Lately, I had been
enjoying immensely some of CK's stand-up, naively believing he was actually
being sarcastic. Turns out he has a lot of problems and he should be held
accountable for them. All in all, I am extremely saddened by the recent news
and how they affect humor and criticism in movies.
Benjamin Homaii I’m afraid I don’t find the sentence “It's a disgusting film
that never should have been acquired for distribution in the first place.” a
compelling professional critique of a movie.
David Dean Daniel Agreed. This is a hatchet job and despite any current or future
protests it's clearly a reaction at least in part to headlines, as opposed to
merely the film. It's unprofessional and frankly I didn't expect it from Mr.
Brody. I am disappointed.
Miriam Bilsker he supports it with evidence and an argument about the film, so
I don't understand where your problem lies. The fact that he is making a
judgment in the first place?
Benjamin Homaii Look, there is no argument or supporting evidence for a critic
to categorize a film as disgusting and that it shouldn’t have been distributed.
Is a professional movie critic a moral judge? What authority a movie critic has
to talk about the distribution of a movie?! His unprofessionalism in regard to
“I love you, Daddy” is axiomatic and if it’s not evident to you, there’s no way
I can prove you otherwise.
Miriam Bilsker Do you not think
movies make moral arguments? I think Richard Brody has always argued that films
have worldviews and points of view. If a film is endorsing a disgusting
worldview, is it not disgusting? You may argue that perhaps his claim goes too
far, but not that it’s unsupported. It’s not a stray statement, it’s backed up
with the rest of the argument in the review. I teach writing to my first year
college students, so I am trained to recognize that claims have to be backed up
with reasons and evidence. Brody made a claim but it is not a throwaway
statement -- it was backed up with reasoning and evidence from the film. That’s
the essence of what a review does. So I’m not sure where the problem lies.
Miriam Bilsker as for distribution, Brody has argued in the past that movies he
likes should be more widely distributed (e.g. spike lee undistributed movies,
certain directors that are hard to see), and he has been thinking in print for
a while about how movies are made and distributed, so I see this as a continuation
of that critical practice.
Linda Covello Miriam Bilsker here, here...very well stated.
Benjamin Homaii Miriam, it’s not my intention to come off as cantankerous,
so when I see that our take on professional criticism is conspicuously
different right to the core, it will be of no use to discuss this anymore.
Discussions are fruitful when people share some fundamental concepts, but here,
the problem is with the very concepts. You don’t ostensibly accept that calling
a movie “garbage” is unprofessional for a critic and I won’t budge either that
it’s not. So, with all due respect, I just don’t share your point of view. And
I believe that concludes this thread.
Linda Covello Benjamin Homaii you may choose to withdraw from the "thread" and it is
your right to do so, however, as Ms. Bilsker has raised what others may see as
valid points for further debate, the issue may ostensibly be considered open to
others 
😑
😑
Benjamin Homaii Of course, Linda; knock yourself out.
Linda Covello Rather not, thanks anyway. I've said my piece, just pointing out
that no one has authority to shut a thread down other than the admin or the
original poster should he/they choose to do so. Have a nice evening.
Benjamin Homaii I wasn’t shutting down the thread, but merely insinuating that I
wouldn’t debate over this matter anymore.
Linda Covello Yea, I got that part too. Thanks. bye now.
Rodney Welch I don’t buy Brody’s
bottom line.
He gives a typically concise and even persuasive breakdown of what the film is about and why he doesn’t like it, but he takes a considerable leap when he says that — even without the revelations about Louis C.K. — it was irresponsible for any studio to release it.
He goes from being a critic to being a shrill moral cop, a defender of artistic suppression on the grounds of nothing more than the fact that he was morally offended. Need I remind him that a lot of people were deeply offended by the ideas promulgated by his hero Jean-Luc Godard — particularly “Hail Mary” — and also tried to prevent that film’s release? There are a lot of films that I find morally offensive. I don’t try to stop them from being shown.
Please understand that I fully grasp why Louis C.K.’s personal troubles destroyed this film’s chances of release. What I object to here is Brody assuming an unusual and unpleasant role as a guardian of public morality.
He gives a typically concise and even persuasive breakdown of what the film is about and why he doesn’t like it, but he takes a considerable leap when he says that — even without the revelations about Louis C.K. — it was irresponsible for any studio to release it.
He goes from being a critic to being a shrill moral cop, a defender of artistic suppression on the grounds of nothing more than the fact that he was morally offended. Need I remind him that a lot of people were deeply offended by the ideas promulgated by his hero Jean-Luc Godard — particularly “Hail Mary” — and also tried to prevent that film’s release? There are a lot of films that I find morally offensive. I don’t try to stop them from being shown.
Please understand that I fully grasp why Louis C.K.’s personal troubles destroyed this film’s chances of release. What I object to here is Brody assuming an unusual and unpleasant role as a guardian of public morality.
Pamela Royce The best part of
this:
“The result is, in effect, an act of cinematic gaslighting, an attempt to spin the tenets of modern liberal feminism into shiny objects of hypnotic paralysis. The movie declares that depredation is liberation, morality is tyranny, judgment is narrow-mindedness, shamelessness is creativity, lechery is admiration, and public complaint is private vanity.”
Thank you, Mr. Brody.
“The result is, in effect, an act of cinematic gaslighting, an attempt to spin the tenets of modern liberal feminism into shiny objects of hypnotic paralysis. The movie declares that depredation is liberation, morality is tyranny, judgment is narrow-mindedness, shamelessness is creativity, lechery is admiration, and public complaint is private vanity.”
Thank you, Mr. Brody.
Yankel Todris Where will this be available now that he's been blacklisted for
being afraid of sex and pitifully begging women to watch him masturbate?
Patrick McEvoy-Halston Yankel, this post
exacerbates the problem, which is macho. It also takes us away from the
victims' experience of this sex crime, which wasn't for them a laughing matter
but a matter of intimidation and humiliation and powerlessness. He is powerful,
and was very successful
in his act of predation. Other men who behave in a ways which make them immune
to your accusation are people like Weinstein. He didn't just masturbate but
raped; he didn't just beg but forced.
Yankel Todris Excuse me but the NYTimes article makes no mention of rape of
any kind.
Patrick McEvoy-Halston Yankel Todris I was referring to Weinstein. Is it your impression that the
women who were subject to C.K. weren't actually harmed by the experience, being
that he was so clearly pathetic, as you say?
Yankel Todris I think that the women who agreed to watch and the woman who
declined have zero moral fiber, trying to ruin someone's life to get in the
papers.
Who is talking about Weinstein? We are talking about Louis C.K.
Who is talking about Weinstein? We are talking about Louis C.K.
Yankel Todris Your problem definitely isn't machismo...
Patrick McEvoy-Halston Yankel Todris When I mentioned rape I was referring to Weinstein. But speaking
of Weinstein, do you think that the women who ended up not deterring Weinstein
from making sexual use of them were lacking in moral fibre, or Kevin Spacey's
victims? This is generally considered blaming the victim. C.K. has power over
them; he knows he's got them where they're overwhelmed and unsure of
themselves... unsure of what will happen to them if they balk and refuse; and
so they'll find them ostensibly complicit in a situation which can readily be
dismissed in macho culture as their own fault... for after all, why didn't you
just refuse? He's got all the cards, and playing them. He wants his victims to
feel powerless and used, as you are inclined to as well, considering your comments
about New Yorker readers and about me, personally. People aren't accepting this
kind of behaviour anymore.
Yankel Todris Kindly post a a statistical model akin to the tax bracket
clearly delineating which sexual acts become verboten for every million dollars
one possesses.
You are talking theology, my dear Savonarola.
You are talking theology, my dear Savonarola.
Yankel Todris Bringing up Weinstein is of course completely extraneous to the
discussion.
Like bringing up O.J. Simpson or John Dillinger.
And don't try to pretend you didn't mention rape because you don't have anything rational to say about the discussion of Richard "Phyllis Schlafly II" Brody's masturbation fixation.
Like bringing up O.J. Simpson or John Dillinger.
And don't try to pretend you didn't mention rape because you don't have anything rational to say about the discussion of Richard "Phyllis Schlafly II" Brody's masturbation fixation.
Yankel Todris You are a perfect example of Antonio Gramsci's theory that the
bourgeoisie uses cultural hegemony to make the proles identify with the
well-being of the bourgeoisie.
Slaving away at customer service and nodding approvingly at the moralistic coup perpetrated by powerful men writing for the New York Times.
Slaving away at customer service and nodding approvingly at the moralistic coup perpetrated by powerful men writing for the New York Times.
Yankel Todris Any links to a bootleg?
David Dean Daniel This so-called "film criticism" is a hatchet job and
despite any current or future protests that it isn't, it's clearly a reaction
at least in part to headlines, as opposed to merely the film. It's
unprofessional and frankly I didn't expect it from Mr. Brody. I am very
disappointed.
Yankel Todris Brody has cut himself off from his godardian roots recently,
praising the show Girls and attacking European movies as too anti-bourgeois.
Very sad he's become just another eunuch of the court of New Yorker readers.
Very sad he's become just another eunuch of the court of New Yorker readers.
Yankel Todris BTW im not a big C.K. fan but would like to see this movie which
was effusively praised by Peter Bradshaw before C.K. was shamed for his lack of
manliness and being stuck in a celibate rut of masturbation.
Yankel Todris Imagine if a woman was attacked and had her movie dropped for
stripping for a man and fingering herself
😂
😂
Russell Colwell Uh huh. And imagine a woman doing that.
Marc Imbillicieri Russell Colwell I was once groped by a girl in front of many people.
Russell Colwell The world is a strange and interesting place, Marc Imbillicieri, with exceptions to every 'rule', I
grant you that.
Yankel Todris Did you feel like a victim?
If that girl would one day become successful would you try to ruin her career?
I'm asking seriously not sarcastically I'm just curious as I liked your previous posts.
If that girl would one day become successful would you try to ruin her career?
I'm asking seriously not sarcastically I'm just curious as I liked your previous posts.
Marc Imbillicieri Yankel Todris I was embarrassed. I tried laughing it off, but I was pissed I
kept thinking that if I had done that to her, I'd have security guards grabbing
at my arms and pulling me out.
Yankel Todris Yeah that's pretty crappy behavior embarrassing you like that.
Yankel Todris In a room full of people
Russell Colwell Do you have any idea why she did it?
Patrick McEvoy-Halston Marc Imbillicieri That was sexual abuse then. Your feeling embarrassed by the
incident is absolutely valid.
Patrick McEvoy-Halston Marc Imbillicieri
It is also exactly the kind of molestation that generates shame and hate... a
desire for revenge. Women need to know that they can participate in generating
shame and hate in men too. The cycle can go that a woman who is shamed and
humiliated in life becomes a mother who does this sort of thing to her boys.
The boys grow up and abuse women for the crimes of the mother, women who when
they raise their own boys... No one humiliates someone unless they themselves
have experienced it.
Lauren Lauter Marc Imbillicieri- that's horrible you went through
that and it sounds abusive. But it seems like you are trying to use this
example in order to dispel larger conversations about abusive, entrenched
patriarchal structures that control the world we all live in. What happened to
you doesn’t change the fact that we live in a patriarchal, male dominated
society where both men and women have been and are routinely harrassed and
abused by MEN. It’s seen as “locker room” behavior. It’s seen as “boys will be
boys.” Women are routinely told to be quiet, to be attractive, that abuse and
harrassement are the fault of women or that they should be grateful for the
attention. While your situation sounds shitty--was this woman in a position of
power over you? Did you feel like as a man you deserved what she was doing to
you, and that’s why you didn’t say anything? Did yuou feel as though no one
would believe you or care/ Because that’s what women (and some men at the hands
of men) feel all the time in these situation
Diane Lake Great response to these sort of deflecting commenters and the
whole 'trust the poem and not the poet" homilies to prop up the
patriarchal status quo. So tiresome.
Anna Mulholland Yeah, right, that's
typical female behavior. Also, the female groper is readily deflected because
rarely is there fear of further consequence to the man. Not nevet, but the
routine nature of experiencing groping IS NOT COMPARABLE BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN. (I was groped by an unidentifed
stranger in a crowed at a concert when I was 14, most disconcerting, no long
term harm, but why should that be a routine experience for a young girl?) Also,
that was just the first, not the only, incident. As all women know.
Patrick McEvoy-Halston Anna Mulholland It
may be that we will go through this time without anyone much mentioning it,
because the greatest taboo is to speak averse of mothers, but where you will
find molestation of boys by women is women (what do women who've been
repeatedly humiliated become
when they become mothers? magically loving, or seekers of love through their
children?) upon their sons. Unwelcome handling, obtuse to the needs of the boy
but for the mother's own pleasure. Within this realm, there is inappropriate
touching to equal that we see by men upon women in the adult world. We won't
see this discussed, even as it is something that needs to be. So what will
happen is that revenge for this mistreatment will occur, via populist political
groups ... like the Bernie Bros, which parade "unquestionable virtue"
but which noticeably seem to sideline the concerns of women to rise in the
world.
Anna Mulholland Parental sexual abuse is abhorrent. But I think again much more
prevalent male adult. On boys and girls.
Patrick McEvoy-Halston Anna Mulholland In families like that, the fathers are mostly remote... mothers
spend most of the time with the children. Where both parents are equally
involved from the start, you will always find they aren't in any way significant
problems, because that level of genuine interest by both parents means
progressive, emotionally evolved parents.
Anna Mulholland Are you suggesting that sexually inappropriate behavior of the
mother with the son is commonplace and serves a role in explaining routine
sexual harassment of women by men? I'm not really sure what your point is. Good
parents work together? Bad parents screw up their kids? The idea that sexually
inappropriate behavior is hard to identify for men is just ridiculous. Treat
your colleagues like your mom's friends sexually, assuming nothing weird, it's
pretty easy to know what's going on, denial is just bullshit.
Patrick McEvoy-Halston Anna Mulholland Yes. That's what happens to women who are denied love in life,
are shamed, humiliated... their children will always be used to satisfy unmet
needs, and abandoned when they seek to individuate from them. Boys end up
reifying their mothers, but destroying women they've projected their abusive
mothers onto.
Lauren Lauter Patrick McEvoy-Halston What are you talking about? Your deflection of a very real
structural patriarchy, by using some sort of Freudian and ridiculous red
herring, is similar to those who claim that white Christian males are being
persecuted. Here are some stastics on child sexual abuse. “offenders are
overwhelmingly male.” We have always known this. This is common sense. This
doesn’t condone what some women do and the ways in which mothers abuse that are
less blatant, or even just violent. But it seems that you have a difficult time
coming to terms with the fact that we live in world and within systems that
privilege male power, and are looking for any way you--not well, mind you--to
find holes in it’s assertion.
Statistics
on Perpetrators of CSA
VICTIMSOFCRIME.ORG
Patrick McEvoy-Halston Lauren Lauter Origins of patriarchy, is what I'm talking about. Patriarchy
dies when people evolve to the point we're seeing in mass in Scandinavian
countries, and throughout progressive regions in North America, not because
they are taught differently, better, but because the early childhood
foundations have improved. They don't have adverse early experiences with their
mothers, and so the idea of making society some sort of massive fatherly
resistance to Her is absurd. Throughout history, though, that's the reason for
patriarchy.
Anna Mulholland that's ridiculous. Blaming patriarchy on women, gas lighting!
Lauren Lauter You said-
"Yes. That's what happens to women who are denied love in life, are
shamed, humiliated... their children will always be used to satisfy unmet
needs, and abandoned when they seek to individuate from them. Boys end up
reifying their mothers, b...See More
Patrick McEvoy-Halston Anna Mulholland No. Only women who have been severely abused will abuse their
children. The problem is ONLY that our start as homo sapien sapiens is as only
provisionally loving beings. We started off loving children because it gave us
stimulation, pleasure. Children were evolved to provide it, so to be cared for
at least until they had a chance not to be eaten readily by wolves. Love didn't
exist. From there, very slowly, love has crept into parental relations. Fathers
weren't really part of the family fold until very recently. Their contact with
children was equally as foul, but they only popped in here and there. There is
no one to blame but our terrible early start as a species, really.
Patrick McEvoy-Halston Anna Mulholland
Don't shame people for expanding the explanation for why men would find
themselves driven to purposely humiliate and destroy women, beyond the fact
that men have tended to find good sport in this. What I am arguing is that the
only way any girl or boy
could evolve into some monstrosity like this, is if they experienced grand
humiliation at the hands of someone who they imagine is a replicated in the
person they now find themselves so intent to destroy. I believe the only people
who hurt other people, are profoundly hurt people. For people like that, their
future behavior is determined for them. Either they will take direct action
themselves, or they will vote in regressives who'll do it for them societally.
Patrick McEvoy-Halston Lauren Lauter Men
don't benefit from patriarchy. Not really. Only provisionally. It's defence
against felt perennial worries of envelopment, of rendered powerlessness. It's
an emotionally retarded way of organizing society, built out of a time of less evolved people than
exist now. To anyone who came out of an emotionally well-nurturing household,
it is personally abusive and traumatizing to find yourself prospering in a
world where others are intentionally withheld and stigmatized. You want
everyone to enjoy and love life, become fully self-realized, for it's their
absolute due.
Anna Mulholland So frustrating.
Lauren Lauter Yawn- how nice that you get to over intellectualize enough to
believe your own bs.
Patrick McEvoy-Halston Anna Mulholland For both of us though, Anna. We both want a world where
patriarchy is left in the dustbin, and everyone is empowered to achieve
whatever they will in life. We all tried, and hopefully have a better day.
Patrick McEvoy-Halston Lauren Lauter That's a crude response, Lauren. I'm truly trying to seek out
answers, and I think that's apparent.
Yankel Todris Wishing Brody a great career as world-expert on lena dunham and
leading theorist of bourgeois prudery.
Emanuele Turricchia "[I love you daddy is] a disgusting film that never should
have been acquired for distribution in the first place". Damn, now I
really want to see it.
David Dean Daniel And it's a well-reviewed film, too. Hopefully it will get the
distribution it deserves at some point.
http://www.metacritic.com/movie/i-love-you-daddy
http://www.metacritic.com/movie/i-love-you-daddy
Shot on 35mm in black and white, the movie was…
METACRITIC.COM
Stephanie Swift I don't know much about what's happening with this film, and
don't want to read the article (no offense). It's just that I have ALWAYS
thought Louis was overrated, and far too angry and creepy. I've never
understood why he gets so much airtime.
Stephanie Swift And then there's this. Yikes. Ugh. https://qz.com/.../we-edited-louis-cks-statement-on.../
Scott Hartley I wish you would compare and contrast the film,
"Lolita," Kubric, 1962. I cannot, unfortunately, offer the customary
New Yorker rate, but wouldn't the project be interesting?
Bill Randolph as counterpoint to Brody's laboured tendentiousness compare:
https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/review/i-love-you-daddy
https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/review/i-love-you-daddy
I Love You, Daddy Film Review by Carson Lund
SLANTMAGAZINE.COM
Bill Randolph this is a simple-minded verging on mindless screed. one doesn't
normally defend the work of bad men as such, but as is appropriate to whatever
merit the work may embody. the goodness or badness of the maker is generally
unknowable, and in any case COMPLETELY irrelevant.
Diane Lake I didn't find the
article simple-minded. Sensible. Funny/not funny how this subject has touched
such a nerve in our movie club. Yes, I know, elevating the art over the artist
is one of the tenets of western critical thought. It's logic's slippery slope,
the moral quandary. No matter what our opinion, it all boils down to what level
of monstrosity we can stomach. I'm more than okay with not feeding the beast -
predator artists - by not buying what they're selling. None the poorer for it
either.
Pamela Royce I saw Murder in the
Orient Express yesterday. A friend of mine said she hesitates to see it because
Johnny Depp is in it.
Well, yeah, but so is Judi Dench and other fine actors. So, I went to see them—and it’s visual stunning cinematography, etc.
Besides, Depp’s bad guy gets stabbed to death, so there’s that.
Well, yeah, but so is Judi Dench and other fine actors. So, I went to see them—and it’s visual stunning cinematography, etc.
Besides, Depp’s bad guy gets stabbed to death, so there’s that.
Bill Randolph Diane Lake there's nothing the least bit slippery or slope-y about it: it's
a clear and distinct line in the firmament, as oppposed to pseudo logic's
slippery slope (next they'll be having us destroy films by redheads) of a
censorious fascist film burning mentality
Devi Yesodharan I found Manohla Dargis' take (rather, retake) both more honest
and nuanced. https://www.nytimes.com/.../louis-ck-and-hollywoods-canon...
NYTIMES.COM
Bill Randolph it's in no way more
anything than the slant review, except as personal, hermetic question-begging,
ranging from the relatively innoxious 'As if it were possible for me to watch a
movie in which women are abused for no apparent reason — without even a pretense of
narrative rationale': the reason may well be that women are in fact sometimes
abused for no apparent reason--to the IRRESPONSIBLE suggestion that Louis C.K.'s
attitude toward Woody Allen should become 'sour' because 'Mr. Allen was ACCUSED
[emphasis added] by his daughter, Dylan Farrow, of sexually molesting her'. so
she thinks an accusation whose veracity has been denied should be acted upon as
if proven!
Comments
Post a Comment