April 25, 2024
The Hot Blog
amit on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
Christian on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
YancySkancy on: Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Hcat on: Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
movieman on: BYOB Fall Back, Film Forward
movieman on: I Should Be Doing Box Office
Review: Little Women (no spoilers)
Why You Should Be Afraid Of The End Of The Paramount Decree
Review: Frozen 2 (spoiler-free)
Review: Marriage Story (spoilers only in the broadest sense)
see all »
[twitter-widget username="DavidPoland" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"][twitter-widget username="MCNTweets" hiderss="true" hidereplies="true" hidefrom="true" items="3" showts="60" title=" " targetBlank="true"]
Quote Unquotesee all »
It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” ā some novel, you know?
So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.
And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it ā I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.
There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.
I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury ā he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” ā and I’d forgot who he was.
So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging ā I was with her at that moment ā she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.
But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy namedā” “Yeah, sure ā you want his phone number?”
My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher
“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that Iām on the phone with you now, after all thatās been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didnāt seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. Thereās not a case of that. He wasnāt using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had ā if that were what the accusation involved ā the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. Iām not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, āYou know, itās not this, itās thatā? Because ā let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. TimesĀ piece, thatās what it lacked. Thatās what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.
~ David Simon
This doesn’t quite fit the current discussion re: Twilight, but the complementary polls prompt me to bring it up here. I was wondering the other day whether there are any female “chosen ones.” We’ve got plenty of guys in that role from Achilles to Anakin, with the likes of Neo, King Arthur, Harry Potter, and others in between. But is there anyone from the distaff side in that mix? I’m asking because I don’t know. The heroine in Twilight doesn’t seem to fit. So who, if any, does?
yikes, what did i do? i feel like i’m in trouble with the teacher. but i’ve been on the piss so maybe i’m being paranoid
(and ftr i never said anything about ‘boy’ movies in general, except that silly popcorn boy flicks are considered legitimate mainstream brainless fun, while silly popcorn girl flicks are not)
the truth is, women have been conditioned to identify with and root for male protagonists in male-themed stories as the ‘norm’ – that’s the usual for us girls, what we see most of – but the opposite isn’t true; men are not typically conditioned to identify with and root for female protagonists in stories about women as the ‘norm’ in our culture, and there are far fewer female-centric stories told. thus the perception of ‘validity’ comes in, where male-centric stories are viewed as being for ‘everyone’ but female-centered flicks are just ‘for women’ (pixar is an excellent example of this as producers of quality family films: lots of supporting female characters but not one single movie with a female protagonist/main character from whose viewpoint the story is told, because girls are used to rooting for/relating to male protagonists, not so much the other way around)
“an urge to impose my feminism on the entire internet”
the mental midgets are coming out (women on the internet? shock horror! shut those dumb bitches up)
‘the chosen one’ in ‘the fifth element’ was female
At the same time, a lot of smart filmmakers and TV people have learned that it’s not a bad idea to center their stories on female characters who kick ass and therefore appeal to both genders: James Cameron, Joss Whedon, Tarantino, etc.
But no, I can’t think of any female ‘chosen ones’. That would be nice for a change.
And yeah – Leah’s argument is definitely a good point in revealing an unfortunate imbalance. We didn’t have this discussion over Transformers or GI Joe or any other crappy movies lately.
“At the same time, a lot of smart filmmakers and TV people have learned that it’s not a bad idea to center their stories on female characters who kick ass and therefore appeal to both genders: James Cameron, Joss Whedon, Tarantino, etc.”
that’s what i was trying to get at the other day in the other thread, make movies that appeal to both genders (and make more money in the process). i think women tend to dig cameron’s or ridley’s early female characters like sarah connor and ripley (or even buffy for that matter tho she does have ‘powers’ which makes her a bit different) not just because they ‘kick ass’ but also because they are ordinary, vulnerable women who find the strength and courage to rise to the occasion, which women can relate to
I’d dispute the interpretation of Sarah Conner’s character slightly – in T1 she’s more of a horror “Final Girl” as a victim of circumstance with Reese being put in the “heroic” role (albeit creepy coming back based on an old photo… ‘Man, your mom was hot when she was young’). In T2 she’s definitely moved to the side, taking on a more Vasquez role than a Ridley.
I don’t think the appeal to audiences can be disputed though.
It’s… unfortunate though (I can’t think of a better word to use). I saw an interview with someone from Pixar (Brad Bird? I can’t remember) where they asked him about the skew towards the male voice – the tortured defence (“but we INTEND to do them!”) made me squirm a bit.
(Having said that, I’ll offer a partial Straw Man to say that generic demands of “hollywood should make more female centered movies” tend to annoy me too. Given the current writer population, you can either have a few good ones or lots of shitty ones. Take your pick.)
Though I haven’t seen it, I wonder if the girl in Babylon AD fits your ‘chosen one’ profile, Jeff. And also the girl from Firefly.
“there are far fewer female-centric stories told. thus the perception of ‘validity’ comes in, where male-centric stories are viewed as being for ‘everyone’ but female-centered flicks are just ‘for women'”
Not sure what you mean, but as for women in action movies: The collected works of Jovovich, Jolie, Catwoman, Jennifer Garner, that Duschku woman I think. The woman in the dismal AvP movie. Bridget Fonda, Geena Davis, Kiera Knightly in Pirates, etc.
Best of all: Jackie Brown
And how could I forget Kate Beckinsale! This may sound crazy but personally I like Beckinsale much more as an action heroine than Angelina. I find her just scorchingly hot and riveting for some reason, even in the often trashy material of Underworld. I think Angelina is great but she always seems like she’s slumming in the action stuff. It’s like filmmakers haven’t figured out how to make the indelible genre of picture unique to her, the Jolie picture.
thus the perception of ‘validity’ comes in, where male-centric stories are viewed as being for ‘everyone’ but female-centered flicks are just ‘for women'”
Not sure what you mean…”
torpid bunny, i was wondering if what i’d written last night made sense because it was late and i was boozy, but really, did you read the entire paragraph from which you cherry-picked those few sentences above? if so, in the context of the entire paragraph i don’t see how you can be ‘not sure’ what i mean, i would think my point is fairly clear.
in our patriarchal culture women are conditioned to accept male protagonists/stories/leaders as ‘the norm’ – the assigned male gender of ‘God’ and the assumed gender of ‘the president’ for quick examples – while men are NOT conditioned to do the same, to view female protagonists/stories as the ‘typical norm’ inherently deserving of equal time and prominence; a male bias exists
the assumption is, male-centric stories can be universal, in which both sexes can find something to relate/laugh at/get excited by/connect, often aided by female supporting characters (and this is partially true because as women we ARE culturally indoctrinated to accept, identify with and root for male protagonists, so this is not a big stretch for us)
but female-centric stories are often viewed differently, as ‘the other’, ‘niche’, held to a double standard or dismissed as trivial and as appealing only to women, to which there is also a kernel of truth in so far as our culture does not typically indoctrinate and condition males to accept, identify with and root for female protagonists and female-themed stories, so men tend to avoid ‘women’s stories’ and even view them with disdain, thus drastically cutting down on potential viewership.
and thus a double-standard and imbalance persists, whereby lots of women go to see and enjoy movies with male protagonists/themes AS WELL AS female-themed flicks, but men are far less likely to do the same (tho of course some do), which serves to perpetuate the notion that male-themed movies are more legitimate and mainstream, ironically only because women go to see and support them!
(for instance, what if the ‘toy story’ movies had female lead characters instead of male, but the same dialog, same characters off on the same adventures, would the films still be the same widely-seen, universally enjoyed family hits? lots of girls went to see and loved the ‘toy story’ movies (myself included), and it was just expected/assumed that girls could relate to and root for the male main characters, and indeed we did. but if the tables were turned and the main characters in ‘toy story’ were female toys with a few token males thrown in and owned by anita instead of andy, would the same assumption exist, that the movie is for ‘everyone’ including boys, who are just assumed/expected to relate to and root for the female toys in the context the story? or is it far more likely a female-centric ‘toy story’ movie, even with the same exact premise, would instead be considered a ‘girl thing’ and sold as such)
For a long time the standard view was that females were biologically deficient, i.e., they were males who hadn’t fully developed in the womb and therefore came out in the inferior female form. The universality of the male crops up in all kinds of places.
I gotta question for you, Leah, based on your comments. What do you think about women who excel in athletics? Are women who are successful at, say, basketball or soccer, achieving their own success, or according to terms defined by their brothers? Is that an example of women being encouraged to conform once more to the supposedly universal male standard? I guess my basic question is, does playing sports equal “acting male,” to coin a phrase? There’s no right answer here, since I hadn’t thought about this issue at all until prompted to do so a few minutes ago by your comments. But it did strike me, so I thought I’d ask you as you clearly have given the broader issues much consideration.
This whole thing happened last year a lot with both Twilight and Sex and the City. I was a fan of the latter, but not the former. But so many people were saying they were the two worst movies ever made, but were able to accept GI Joe this year as “Hollywood fun” or whatever because it had some explosions and people wearing silly outfits and not women chatting about sex and wearing silly outfits.
KC, it once again goes back to the startling fact, that any little brother knows from having a big brother. Guys can be assholes. They can enjoy what they want to enjoy, but HOW DARE YOU ENJOY ANYTHING THEY DO NOT LIKE? HOW DARE YOU KC? HOW DARE YOU!!!!
So I hope New Moon grossed a lot of money today. I hope it at least made enough to beat TDK’s opening weekend. Why? I love it when the ladies and gay guys can give a big middle finger to all of those douchebag guys out there. It makes me very warm inside.
Bulldog, I never saw Babylon AD, so no opinion on it. As for Firefly, I was spending most of the movie just trying to figure out what was going on since I had never watched the show, but I’d say that one common feature between it and The Fifth Element is that the female ‘chosen ones’ are basically the macguffins and not the protagonists.
io, you go boy with your unabashed edward + bella ‘twilight’ love. seriously. don’t take shit from anyone or let them make you feel bad (not that they could anyway or that you could be swayed) for liking what you like and having the guts to admit it
kam: those delightful double-standards
“I gotta question for you, Leah, based on your comments. What do you think about women who excel in athletics? Are women who are successful at, say, basketball or soccer, achieving their own success, or according to terms defined by their brothers? Is that an example of women being encouraged to conform once more to the supposedly universal male standard? I guess my basic question is, does playing sports equal “acting male,” to coin a phrase? There’s no right answer here, since I hadn’t thought about this issue at all until prompted to do so a few minutes ago by your comments. But it did strike me, so I thought I’d ask you as you clearly have given the broader issues much consideration.”
interesting question, blackc. i’d have to put on my thinking cap to express my thoughts coherently and i’m too pooped to even reach into my pocket to put it on, so i’ll get back to you when i can get the gears in my head turning, they are out of service being oiled at the moment or something (i’ll try to keep it brief and not blather)
(jeff i agree, corbin dallas – or whatever his name is – is definitely the protagonist of ‘the fifth element’, not leeloo)
blackc, in response to your question: no way!
the question actually relies on a fatally flawed, sexist premise/assumption that natural athleticism, competitive drive, mental toughness and the desire to excel at a physical feat and the joy derived from doing so are inherently ‘male’ characteristics, which is, of course, bollocks. these are human characteristics.
athleticism and and the mental toughness required to excel at any physical endeavour are shared traits common to both sexes, and in so far as not all women are athletic, neither are all men, not by a long shot. if athleticism was a ‘male’ trait, why aren’t all men athletic? only some men are athletic, as are some women. there’s a range of body-types/physiques that occur naturally in both males and females, certain types of which lend themselves to natural athletic ability in both sexes.
while athletism has been traditionally discouraged in girls, boys have been encouraged into athletics/sport for far longer. like most areas where girls’ abilities have been suppressed, female athletes are slowly but surely coming into their own and narrowing the gap. the most athletic of women will likely never have comparable muscle mass to the most athletic men – and thus female athletes may never match male athletes for strength and speed – but that matters little. in endeavours where pure strength is of little consequence and skill, technique, determination and mental toughness are key, such as ‘the iditarod’ – often called the greatest race on the planet and which women have won several times – or skill-based coordination sports such as table tennis and archery, the best male and female competitors are already on virtually an equal footing (tho apparently it helps a great deal to be chinese to win at table tennis, the chinese must be absolutely mad for their ping-pong)
on an anecdotal note, i grew up with a girl who went on to become an olympic medalist in cycling; from when we were just girls she was always racing around on her bike, leading the charge through the bush and just generally running around like a banshee, basically because it filled her with joy. i was quite athletic myself but me and all the girls (and boys) in our ‘hood struggled to keep up with her. it was clear she was special. was she conforming to some male standard? of course not, and i guarantee if you asked her that she’d laugh in your face (but not in a mean way, she’s absolutely lovely).
perhaps one area where women likely do conform a bit to male standards is in some of the sports they play, which is likely influenced and dictated by existing infrastructure based on traditionally male-dominated arenas, but who’s to say women don’t enjoy playing basketball or whathaveyou every bit as much as their male counterparts
(so much for ‘keeping it brief’ but my two cents anyway)
Leah: thanks for responding. I agree with you. Or, to put it another way, if God didn’t want women running, swimming, or jumping, he wouldn’t have given them legs. Or gills. What’s up with that, anyway?
gills are just a matter of time. didn’t you see ‘waterworld’?!
Sarah didn’t need to conform to male standards – she sold her soul to McDonalds!
Sorry, couldn’t resist. š
“gills are just a matter of time. didn’t you see ‘waterworld’?!”
Oh, yeah.
The biggest problem with putting women in action movies is that a guy can get punched in the chest lots of times and that’s cool, but no one wants to punch a woman in her boobs. That’s what I think.
Not in Hong Kong action movies…