Blog For Free!
Archives
Home
2004 December
2004 October
2004 September
2004 August
2004 July
2004 May
2004 March
2004 February
2004 January
2003 December
2003 November
My Links
The Mixed Reviews Blog, featuring reviews by Jill Cozzi, Gabriel Shanks, and Ned Depew
Cinemarati: The Web Alliance for Film Criticism
The Online Film Critics Society
Flak Magazine
The Kansas City Film Critics Circle
Mixed Reviews
The Filmsnobs Main Page
Jill Cozzi's Brilliant at Breakfast blog
Gabriel Shanks' Modern Fabulousity blog
tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images
Sponsored
Blog
|
| Do the Weinsteins Know the True Meaning of Christmas? |
| 11.23.03 (10:32 am) [edit] |
The answer is "no" according to the head honchos at Walt Disney Pictures this week. The Mouse Ears expressed displeasure at their independent red-headed stepchild's Miramax's red-headed stepchild Dimensions Films for the new Billy Bob Thornton film, [i]Bad Santa [/i]. You've seen the ad: Billy Bob plays the mall santa who drinks, has improper relations at his display in the mall, and hates kids. There's also the late John Ritter obsessing about sex with fat women and a sassy black midget. He plays an elf if you couldn't make that connection. The rated "R" film was called "horrifying" by an Eisner spokesman and "portrayed an image of Christmas that would have shocked Walt Disney." One can only imagine what Walt will think when he's sees this movie once he's unfrozen.
What's shocking is not this delayed reaction at a moment when seemingly nothing can be done. But the fact that Disney saw no warning signs with the hiring of Terry Zwigoff as the film's director. Now, I know everyone loved [i]Ghost World [/i]when it was released two years ago. I even felt bullied to give it three stars despite my reservations. But quite simply, the film was the offshot from the mind of a pervert. Not intent with merely adapting the graphic novel for which it was based, Zwigoff personally added Steve Buscemi's Seymour as a major character. This is the character that we're asked ultimately to feel sorry for after he has sex with the main character, a teenaged girl. Many found this to be tragic and ironic; the Filmsnobs merely found it ironically tragic. The film had such an impact that we've yet to see Thora Birch recover. She faced the brunt of the sexual prowessness of the film and lost so much respect in many eyes that she hasn't been cast in anything subsequent. Scarlett Johanssen, who played the best friend, was subject to none of the same twistedness and now look at her. As much as I love Scarlett, anyone would have said Birch would have been in the lead role of a Sofia Coppola film two and a half years ago.
Honestly, have you thought of [i]Ghost World [/i]since the fall of 2001? The only reason I have was to compare that to the fantastic [i]American Splendor[/i]. So, Disney didn't know any better but now you do. Hopefully Disney will reconsider giving the new Cinderella to Todd Solonz. Although that would probably be more interesting than [i]Bad Santa [/i]will be.
|
|
|
| |
| I Personally Disgust General Wesley Clark As He Kicks Off a Four State Tour |
| 11.11.03 (7:28 pm) [edit] |
Sunday afternoon at 12:30, it became clear that the Kansas City Chiefs were well on their way to another victory, so I rolled over to my computer and checked my email. Lo and behold, the Greene County Democratic Party (which actually has a few members besides me and and JimmyO) sent me a notice that General Wesley Clark was going to be speaking at the Holiday Inn (a couple miles down the road from our filmsnobs offices)---[i]at 1:00[/i].
I have been meaning to write a review of Al Franken's [i]Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them[/i], which was supposed to double as the filmsnobs official endorsement of General Wesley Clark for the Democratic Nomination to the Presidency. I'll probably get to that over Thanksgiving--but anyway, there I was, thirty minutes from the General's arrival, and still unshowered and in my pajamas. Screw it, I said--I'm going to see the General.
There was a big turnout for General Clark, especially for a Democrat in Springfield, Missouri. I saw the usual gang of Democrats there (it doesn't take too long to memorize the entire GCDP), and the veterans showed up, of course--but surprisingly, I saw a lot of teachers there as well. The Ozarks Greenways tree-huggers were there, as well as some college professors, and a couple union guys. And you can always count on the Ashcroft-haters at Springfield rallies--if you think you're a Democrat who hates Ashcroft, the venom spews deadlier from those who know him personally. Also, there were a lot of women, too. The audience for the General seemed a lot more...diverse than the Dean or Gephardt audience.
The General arrived right on time and gave his stump speech. He ran down the President, of course, "This is a man who loves to take credit but doesn't want to take responsibility. No real commander in chief would ever blame his soldiers for making him look like a fool with that banner"--that sort of thing. He spoke on the economy for a bit, and then played to the anti-Ashcroft crowd: "I've got two things to say to Attorney General John Ashcroft: One, since he doesn't understand the Constitution, he's not a very good attorney. And he sure as heck isn't a general!" Somebody must have alerted the General that the teachers were in the house; he spoke for a bit about repealing the No Child Left Behind Act, which got me raising the roof. All things considered, I came away from the General's speech convinced that he's a Democrat in his heart, will govern by our core values, and is the only Democrat who can beat Bush.
This is why: He thwarts Karl Rove's only political strategy, which is making all Democrats look like puny little Alan Colmeses to the Republican's pseudo-macho Sean Hannitys. They call us anti-American and weak (see Saxby Chambliss' Ralph Reed directed campaign against wheelchair bound Vietnam veteran Max Cleeland in Georgia) and testosterize the campaign. Rove's are bully tactics, and so far the Democrats have had no answer for them--because the Democrats have shown no balls themselves. Clinton lied to us, we supported him anyway, conceding the moral and ethical high ground; we voted for the war, now we criticize Bush for it...and on and on.
But imagine the juxtaposition of General Wesley Clark with George W. Bush during the first presidential debate. Clark is everything Bush is not--and more importantly, he pulls back the curtain on the bully. I believe, and I know most Democrats believe, that George W. Bush's essential character is still that of the spoiled frat boy. Bush bullies us on the war, his jes' folks anti-intellectualism undermines genuine debate, the continual discussion of the internal messes in his administration point to a lack of leadership. Standing next to him will be a man who has written a best-selling book on strategy for the war on terrorism, who has experience working with the same allies Bush has alienated, is a Rhodes scholar in economics, and has impeccable leadership credentials. General Wesley Clark will expose George W. Bush as the spoiled frat boy we know he is, and there's nothing Karl Rove can do to Colmesinize him.
In fact, Clark's theme music alludes precisely to this idea: He comes out and shakes hands to U2's "Even Better Than the Real Thing." Any U2 would have done, but the fact that the General chose not to go with the overdone "Beautiful Day" shows me that he has the vision to lead this nation to sunnier days--this is a leader who understands Bono's geopolitical and cultural importance, and wouldn't dare draw Bono into the long, hard slog that would be Iraqi debt relief. The General's clear-headed analysis of OutKast also leads me to believe that he realizes that we can't afford to have Bono wasting his time in Baghdad.
So there I am in the rope line right behind the veterans. The General takes some time to chat with the vets, to thank them for their service, to promise to take care of the backlog of medical services at the VA, etc. The General shined as he talked with and hugged these guys; I really think that Wesley Clark is running for President for these brave men and women, and that's a noble cause by me. Clark moved quickly down the line because he had three other states to get to that day (Oklahoma, Colorado, and New Mexico, I believe). It was going to be a long day for the General, but he sure as heck wasn't going to hold back--not in a swing state like Missouri, not in John Ashcroft's backyard.
So the General gets done with the veterans, and there I am--all 160 lbs of me in my plaid flannel pajamas, U2 concert t-shirt, oversized blue Airwalk shoes, and greasy, unkempt hair. That gleem in the General's eye seemed considerably less sparkly when he looked at me (I think he actually looked directly at this huge zit jutting out from my right eyebrow), as if to say: "Is this what I have to pander to? Wussy English major twig boys?" And as the General leaned in to perfunctorily shake my hand, I thought I should say something macho, just to let the General know that the Democratic base isn't all wussies. "GIVE'EM HELL GENERAL!" I said, in my best Show-Me State, Harry Truman impression.
The General didn't buy it. "We're gonna..." and then he spotted another veteran to shake hands with.
Listen, General, I want you to know that you don't have to pander to wussy twig boy English majors like me. You had me at "Rhodes Scholar." You had me at "Four Star General who is pro-choice, supports affirmative action, and thinks 'don't ask, don't tell' is a stupid policy." General Clark, I'm sorry you had to see me at my most whiny-liberal looking. I'm sorry it depressed you, even for that brief moment of our encounter. I could see the disappointment in your eyes, even a touch of disillusionment. But General, tree hugging wussies like me will vote for you if you show that you're the guy to take out Bush. Please, don't waste your time pandering to guys wearing oversized blue Airwalks and U2 concert shirts to political rallies. We understand. The more you pander to the base, the less likely you'll convince the base that you can win--even Dean's supporters know he can't win. I know how I look to you, General, and I'm ok with that if you are willing to accept my vote. You just go out and get those moderate indepedents, ok?
Give'em hell, General Clark. I'll be a foot soldier in your campaign army. Though, I'd rather hand out flyers door-to-door after it gets a little warmer--if that's ok with you, sir. I chap easily.
---shimes
|
|
|
| |
| Jimmy O's Review of Meet the Press |
| 11.10.03 (2:25 pm) [edit] |
Instead of observing the Sabbath, I spent yesterday morning shaking my head at North Carolina Senator John Edwards "crossing over" to political suicide at the blade of Tim Russert on [i]Meet the Press[/i]. He says the war in Iraq is bad? Show the clip where Edwards says we must remove Hussein with force! Patriot Act should be repealed? Show his 'yes' vote in addition to his remarks on the floor that "it's a good bill." The only thing Edwards wouldn't waver on was the fact that he's from the South and knows people with Confederate flags in their pick-up trucks.
Yes, that now famous quote by Howard "Dr. Death" Dean was supposed to be a "springboard for a discussion on race in the Democratic party." Huh? Really? There are two reasons why Dean's quote means nothing. (1) It's just more pandering from a candidate who talks to the voters like they're a patient with a finger in their ass. The reason Dean works well on the Internet is because no one has to see him to support him. And (2) The South will not necessarily matter in this race. Look at Gore in 2000. Not a single Southern state. Not even his own state of Tennesee. Not even the Democratic-rich West Virginia. But, if Gore had worked harder in a swing state like Missouri, it wouldn't have mattered. All sorts of people made hay with the fact that Republicans took over the Governor's office in Mississippi and Kentucky last week. Funny, no one ever stood up for Gov. Musgrove until he actually got beat. Just because they have a D doesn't merit any respect. And a region that Dems lost for generation over something like the Civil Rights Act shouldn't be fought for when blue-collar voters in Penn, Ohio, Michigan, and Missouri are the ones that really matter.
Watching Edwards stick up for the South allowed me to reflect on Russert's guest last week, Georgia Senator Zel Miller. Miller, a Democrat who publicly endorsed Bush's re-election bid, made some comments about what Democrats needed in the South to win. He spoke of JFK and Bill Clinton and how they captured the imagination of people everywhere with their ideas. Right now, no one is offering any great ideas. There are no compelling stories being told by these candidates. Zel might not be the best source, but his words speak volumes to the problem of national politics. Dems are bad at reacting and attacking. That is the party of optimism and ideas. Tearing at Bush will, in essence, only make him look better.
Next week, Russert will interview a 4-star general from Arkansas who has spent most of his campaign dodging attacks from his opponents. [i]Meet the Press [/i] may eventually prove that the South will indeed rise again.
|
|
|
| |
| An Urgent Call to Congressional Democrats |
| 11.06.03 (11:18 am) [edit] |
This week, the Senate passed the $87 billion Iraq spending bill, despite many Democrats' protest that part of the spending be appropriated as a loan to the Iraqi people. To counterpoint, Nobel laureate in Economics Joseph Stiglitz makes an impassioned and prudent argument for Iraqi debt relief in the November 2003 issue of [i]The Atlantic Monthly[/i]. [url=]http://www.odiousdebts.org/od...[/url] His article "Odious Rulers, Odious Debts," draws upon the experience of John Maynard Keynes, whose book [i]The Economic Consequences of Peace[/i] correctly forcasted that the "burden of reparations imposed on Germany would lead to economic crisis and social and political turmoil." Stiglitz contends that debts "incurred by a regime without political legitimacy, from creditors who should have known better" should not be the responsibility of those that the money was, in all likelihood, used to oppress. The process of rebuilding a nation--not just the infastructure, but also the national psychology and identity of the people--is exhausting enough. Creditors may clamor about the sanctity of contractural obligations, but the argument lacks moral authority--blood-stained bills should not be the currency of democracy. This is especially true as the Bush Administration acquieses to debt relief when the money is owed to foreign creditors (namely French and Russian), but insists upon repayment by countries such as Indonesia, which overthrew the dictator Suharto in 1998, who had incurred debt to none other than Enron. In short, there is no moral inpunity for creditors--even American ones--for doing business with tyrants, and the moralistic argument of contractual obligation fails precisely on moral terms.
Congressional Democrats, it seems, are using the repayment argument to antagonize the public over the Bush Administration's wasteful spending, but without having the courage to address the real issue: The surreptitious Halliburton contracts, evidence about which points to egregious price gouging, cronyism, and wasteful sub contracting and even sub sub contracting. It seems that Democrats are unwilling to engage the Bush Administration on these terms because they are gun-shy of the patriotism and support-the-troops questions. But this repayment argument is irresponsible--it smacks of politics designed to mask cowardice, witness the ninety-four abstaininations on both sides during the Senate vote.
But there's a far more compelling argument for Iraqi debt relief--one the Democrats could have utilized during Tuesday's Rock the Vote forum on CNN, rather than running those insipid thirty second MTV-style montages:
If we don't forgive Iraqi debt, we force Bono into Baghdad.
Iraqi debt owed to companies like Halliburton and Bechtel will undoubtedly become a top priority for the Jubilee 2000 team. Bono, who has already spent considerable time and resources lobbying African leaders like Bishop Desmond Tutu and South African President Nelson Mandela, will be forced to redirect his efforts toward Middle East principals like Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah, King Hussein of Jordan, former Halliburton CEO Dick Cheney, and perhaps even U.S. backed Iraqi exile Ahmed Chalabi. The question we must ask ourselves is this: Can we afford to ask Bono to fight a two-front war against unpayable debt?
It's true that U2's best work rises from the search for morality within settings of political turmoil: from "War"'s inspiration by Irish protests to the "Elevation" tour's post-9/11 tribute to the victims of the terrorist attacks. Yet, if U2 is allowed to indulge for too long in style and theme, they get preachy and/or incoherent, the result of which is that from from "Boy" we get "October," from "The Joshua Tree" we get "Rattle and Hum," from "Achtung Baby" we get "Zooropa." Can we, in such a barren musical landscape, afford another Zooropian follow-up to "All That You Can't Leave Behind" by bogging down Bono in the minutia of debt relief from Big Energy? U2 inherited the legacy of the Beatles, and there's little argument that they are the most important and influential rock force since 1980--thus, it is our leaders' moral obligation to do everything in their power to ensure that another PopMart tour never happens again. The appropriate measure to ensure this geopolitical imperative is to forgive Iraqi debt to foreign creditors.
Simply put, Bono does not need to put up with this shit right now. The IMF and World Bank have had their hands full with The Fly thus far, and a lot of progress has been made. But there is still much to do. The last thing Bono needs is another front to fight on--especially when the pop audience seems more cynical to his pleas than his political audience. The cynical American audience has mocked Bono the last couple of years, but the criticism rings hollow: Art is inseparable from politics. That the American audience wishes its meritious artists to "stay out of it" simply points to the vacuousness of its pop culture. But art and politics are indeed inseparable: Solzhenitsyn cannot be divorced from the Soviet regime, nor Shakespeare from the morality of the monarchy, nor Sophocles from the whims of the council of Greek gods. Rock n' Roll may be a trifle of an art form, but it's [i]our [/i]voice of revolution. In the post 9/11 world, America's rock's legacy is embodied almost entirely in the blue jeans of Bruce Springsteen, whose "The Rising" was pop culture's most appropriate response to the fall of the World Trade Center. But as far as artist/activists go, who has parlayed their fame into more power and influence than Bono? And for such a wonkish, but important, cause? How can this be worse than those artists who sit on their arse and simply enjoy their luck?
It's not in our best interest for Bono to spend potential studio time climbing the pedastals of fallen Saddam statues, belting out "Pride in the Name of Love" and "Sunday Bloody Sunday" so that Halliburton will close an expenditure stream in new Iraqi government's budget. He will if he needs to--we can count on Bono for that. But we can avoid that and get U2 back in the studio where we need them to be. There's enough turmoil in the world to fuel a double-album's worth of material--but is it in our vested interests to distract Bono and risk another "Zooropa"?
It's not. It's in our best interests to get U2 in the studio as much as possible before they descend into the Voodoo Lounge of Rock n' Roll's hangers-on. The boys are getting up there (they're in their mid-forties), which means we've got a limited number of albums before they become, as Bono's devil-horned alter-ego Mephisto once said, "tired old pop stars in platform shoes." In a Grammy landscaped dominated by Beyonce and Justin Timberlake, now more than ever [i]we need those albums. [/i]Bono's got enough on his palette without American Big Energy siphoning off interest from the impoverished Kurdish minority for the next thirty years.
Democrats, we have a moral imperative to help the Iraqi people, and we have a cultural obligation not to burden Bono with this shit right now. Just consider the money an investment in the future of Iraq--and rock n' roll. Bono is only one man, and he can only do so much: U2 needs him. The struggling Ethiopian business men who are working to repay the debts of the Mengistu "Red Terror" regime need him. And [i]we[/i] need him. Let us free the Iraqi people from the economic quagmire of foreign debt, and let us free Bono from a potential musical quagmire the likes of "PopMart."
--shimes
|
|
|
| |
| You Say You Want a Revolution? |
| 11.04.03 (7:02 am) [edit] |
This may come as a surprise. But one of the biggest phenomenons ever witnessed by modern audiences is about to hit multiplexes this Wednesday. This Wednesday? That's right. You may recall some hoopla back in May about a sequel opening to one of the biggest surprise hits of the 1990's. This sounds fuzzily familiar. And despite magazine covers, video games, comic books, and $190 million gross, you might not have seen it.
[i]The Matrix[/i]! Now we all remember! This is going to be such a big deal and I knew that our loyal readers should know as much about this as soon as possible. So I went down to my local Time Warner/AOL-friendly multiplex and asked for an advanced ticket to the 12:01 showing on Wednesday morning. The freckled young man looked puzzled. "We don't have any advanced screenings scheduled this week." But I explained that [i]The Matrix Revolutions [/i]was supposed to change all of my preconceived notions of science-fiction. "Oh", he said. "That's opening this week?" This must be really good if the studio isn't even showing the film early. My spit glands are already in full swing!
So why the wait? I thought this would be the end of the beginning of the future of cinema. I know Neo can beat hundreds of Agent Smiths. But can he beat a thousand Agent Smiths? Will he prove he's The One? All the Matrix geeks filing out of [i]Reloaded[/i] were disappointed but hopeful: "The third one will be so better than getting laid!" Whoa. I totally want to get laid by Keanu Reeves. Wait a minute, that came out all wrong. I meant Trinity. She can be in my fan fiction any day of the week. While the average, lay reader may be in the dark about this blockbuster, the Filmsnobs are on the case. See you at Caveman Comics!
-Jimmy O
|
|
|
| |
| Brad Pitt Hasn't Forgotten His Roots |
| 11.03.03 (9:40 pm) [edit] |
Greetings Filmsnobs, and welcome to our online journal. JimmyO and I would like to take this moment to reiterate that this is not a blog. We know: It looks like a blog; we're using blogging software; it's housed by t [b]blog[/b]. We know. But this isn't a blog in the formal sense--this is where we are going to keep our informal musings on art, culture, and maybe a little politics here and there...Ok, so it's an f'n blog. We also said we were never going to get cell phones.
The first item up for blogging is last night's season premier of "King of the Hill." When KOTH first debuted five or so years ago, it seemed like a one joke sit-com: Hank Hill is really square. But the show's staying power stems from the depth of keen observations about the Texas mindset. Hank is not a rootin' tootin' Texan, nor is he testostorized death penalty cheerleader; Hank Hill believes in honesty and integrity as well as the old fashioned values laced in the power of negative reinforcement in coaching. Mike Judge believes Hank to be naive, but the most important and endearing aspect of the show is that Hank is not condescended to. He's a Texan, by God, and that means he's a man of his word--whether he's turned off by Governor W. Bush's limpwristed handshake or befuddled by Anne Richards dating Bill Dautrieve. Rather, most of the humor of the show lies in the incongruence between Hank's Cherry Tree honesty and the world around him. That's the biggest statement about the current state of Texas in pop culture--the Dixie Chicks and Toby Keith be damned.
This season's opener features Hank ordering up some "professional entertainment" for Boomhauer's brother's bachelor party (Hank thinks he's getting karoke singers, and he's taken the special precaution of getting a permit from the Arlen police to generate noise above 70DB). The episode features what has been a new avenue of exploration over the show's last few seasons: The emotional vulnerability of Boomhauer. He's been a womanizer (he even brought home Lou Anne in an early episode), but lately Boomhauer's mumbling has couched the emotional compass of the series. As the series has matured, so has Boomhauer. Here, Boomhauer has a moment of clarity and regret with an old girlfriend, who, it turns out, is about to marry his louse of a brother, Patch. There's only so many Bill-suicide, Dale-conspiracy jokes one episode can handle; the new depth of Boomhauer's evolution from man-slut to lonely bachelor is a welcome development, and is sure to keep the series alive for at least another few seasons.
The revelation of this first episode in particular is Brad Pitt guest starring as Patch. Patch unbuttons his silk shirt down to his sternum, revs up his bitchin' Camaro, and keeps his mullet finely curled. At first, Brad Pitt may not seem the first choice for so white trash a specimen, but the sleazy charm which Pitt effortlessly finds in the Boomhauerian mumbles reminds us of one thing: Brad Pitt is a product of Southwest Missouri. Patch Boomhauer is stuck in the early eighties, the sort of guy who clings to his car and hair because to lose them would force him to face the fact that the best days of his life were in high school. The AC/DC roars and the camaro grumbles as Patch still roams bars looking for "fags" and "pretty boys" to beat up. Those memories are all he has to hold onto (which is why he can't grow up, even to marry the catch he's landed in girlfriend Catherine).
This is the same white trash, SWMO hoosier who made fun of Brad Pitt in high school for being a "drama club pussy." Twenty years later, "Brad the Drama Fag" is married to Jennifer Anisten. And with his new role on King of the Hill, Brad's revenge comes full circle in a masquerade as the enemy.
--shimes
|
|
|
| |
|
|
