Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hollywood Bias: "Redemption of man by a woman" movies usually greenlighted.
me | Dec. 2 2003 | gobucks

Posted on 12/02/2003 1:45:13 PM PST by gobucks

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-25 last
To: bluebox
"An Officer and a Gentleman" is an old movie and one of the last of the male hero genre.
There are very few male heroes anymore which I believe is the initial point of the article.
As a general observation, check out new children's programming. If there is a boy hero or lead anywhere, I have trouble finding him. They are ALL girl as leader/lead/heroine oriented and the boy is either a bumbler or a clueless follower.
Very sad for the next generation of boys coming up. We will have to reverse this trend of "it was ok when boys were the leaders, now its time for the girls." whining. Whats wrong with doing BOTH?
21 posted on 12/03/2003 7:41:44 AM PST by Adder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: gobucks
redemption of a man by a woman? It is a theme as old as Beauty and the beast (a retelling of the story Psyche and Cupid, that goes back about 3000 years)...sorry, but this story is universal, not hollywood (the most amusing rewrite of this old story is an Atlantic Monthly article about how Syria deprogrammed some young terrorists by marrying them off and getting them a job...)

The main problem with OUR society is that we have degraded sex, so promiscuity is promoted as "better" than living with the same woman who you love and cherish...
However, the last step in domestication is marriage and family. Many "wild" men learn to control their wilder impulses with the love of a good woman...

Alas, nowadays too many lack both the responsible role model, and women don't bother to make the sacrifices worth settling down to raise a family...

Oh: The "braveheart" romance was based on the old poem about Wallace...the poet was not a historian, and so the academics claim the poem was merely made up...however, it was probably based on stories told around the fire at night, i.e. folktales and has some truth in it...
22 posted on 12/06/2003 5:01:47 AM PST by LadyDoc (liberals only love politically correct poor people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gobucks
Speaking of Matrix, Mark Steyn did a great review of the last one...

Neo is back, though he's looking somewhat paleo for a guy who's only been around four years. When first we met him in The Matrix he was some computer programmer in an anonymous metropolis who gets roused by Morpheus and offered a choice of pharmaceutical producrs. "You take the blue pill, the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill," teases Morpheus, "and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes."

Neo takes the red pill, and wakes up to find his so-called real life is a fiction. And so is everyone else's. All his chums are lying down in incubators wired up to the "Matrix", which feeds them a continuing simulation of experience. Mankind has been put in a collective comatose state by evil computers. The only real reality is that of a small band of renegade humans holed up in an underground town called Zion until they can figure out how to deMatriculate mankind.

The notion that reality is an illusion is an eminently respectable one these days, particularly for French intellectuals, understandably enough. The line in the original film about "the desert of the real" came from Jean Baudrillard, a great proponent of the philosophical idea that reality is simulation and author of, among other books, The Gulf War Did Not Take Place. He could probably sue for plagiarism, though in turn the film's producers could argue that his theory that reality is a simulation is itself a simulation and that their alleged film did not take place.

The point is Andy and Larry Wachowski figured they'd hit on the perfect wrinkle for a classic post-modern nerd franchise -- the Star Wars of our generation. And if you say, "Hang on, old boy, surely Star Wars is our generation?", I'd say, nah, it's too 1930s radio serial, and its grandiosity is plonkingly squaresville instead of coolly impenetrable. Sadly, Matrix Recycled ...I mean, Reloaded came overloaded, lacking anything like the first film's sudden peeling away of surface reality and so attempting to duplicate it over and over: Was Zion perhaps a Matrix-within-the-Matrix? Was Neo maybe a Matrix-within-the-Matrix-within- the-Matrix? He was supposed to be "The One". But maybe one of the others is The One. Maybe The One flew over the cuckoo's nest.

By the sequel, the Wachowskis' "innovative visual style" was looking a lot less innovative: they did all same things they did in the first film all over again, just more expensively and even more arbitrarily -- the scene in which Keanu Reeves (Neo) is fighting a hundred guys in black and doesn't win, doesn't lose, but just gets bored and flies off after 15 minutes pretty much sums it up. By the second movie, Keanu had perfected his morose blank look; fine actors like Laurence Fishburne were turning in performances so clunkily solemn you'd think they were auditioning for George Lucas; the subterranean city of Zion proved to be just the usual generic dystopian underground parking garage, and the orgiastic dance party looked like a provincial rave.

But, having fallen for the series' self-importance, the Matricians or Matricists or Matrons or whatever the anoraks are called were reluctant to admit they'd bought a dud. In the original film, Neo discovered that the meaning of our lives is an illusion; in the sequel, the meaning of the film is an illusion. It doesn't make much sense as it's flying by, and it makes less if you buy the DVD, slow it down and write out all the dialogue. The rabbit hole doesn't go deep at all; the buck stops about four inches down. But it has the illusion of meaning. Halfway through, at the moment when a severely cropped Monica Bellucci (in dystopian movies, there is, alas, no Charlie's Angels hair) asks Keanu to kiss her, I became convinced that my watching the film was only an illusory reality; somewhere, there was another me watching Monica Bellucci seducing Italian schoolboys in Malena and having a much better time.

Which brings us to The Matrix: Revolutions -- that's "revolutions" as in "coming round again". This is one rabbit hole that's looking pretty tapped out. This is the big final showdown between the denizens of Zion and the Sentinels, and the Wachowskis lay off the psychedelic LP liner notes philosophizing to concentrate on a not altogether comfortable mix of your basic up-against-the-clock action sequences and celestial choirs on the soundtrack serenading Keanu as if it's consecration day and he's the last gay bishop on the planet. The romance between Neo and Trinity (Carrie-Anne Moss) is barely less comatose than the mass of humanity they're supposedly trying to save. Unlike the first sequel, the dialogue isn't pretentiously obscure, just perfunctory: "I'm afraid hope is an indulgence I don't have time for." Or maybe "indulgence is a hope I don't have time for". Or "time is a hope I don't have indulgence for". Makes no difference. It's modular furniture. Say it portentously enough and it fills in the time until the giant steel bores tunnel into Zion and the explosions start.

Is Matrix a myth for the ages? No. I doubt it will resonate through the end of the decade. Why then did so many intellectuals go ga-ga for it? Because it confirms their view of the world: huge corporations manufacture a reality that sedates the masses and only a handful of supersmart humans know enough to spot it. Needless to say, the film series confirming the great thinkers' worldview is itself made by a huge corporation, which suggests they -- and not the philosophy profs -- are the really supersmart guys. Or, as they would say, The Ones.

23 posted on 12/06/2003 5:39:38 AM PST by MitchellC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MitchellC
You're right, great review - I haven't bothered with the 3rd film. The first one mystified me so much b/c it was so completely well done - I could find only two small flaws in the continuity after multiple viewings. The shock was how incredibly effective the one liners were - it was a tour de force of pithiness...

Oh well ...
24 posted on 12/06/2003 6:01:07 AM PST by gobucks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: LadyDoc
You really, really inspired me with your comments - hope you like this post! And please, for pete's sake, I am not trying to offend you.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1035244/posts
25 posted on 12/06/2003 11:14:05 AM PST by gobucks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-25 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson