Skip to main content

Obligatory statement of purpose

 I love movies. I collect dvds and watch movies almost daily. The object of the game is to see both as many movies and as many types of them as I can before I die. 


Roger Ebert once said the movies are a machine for generating empathy. I agree with that. I watch movies to see other people's perspectives and experience. I go into movies wanting to be entertained, to be told a story, and hopefully a story told from a different point of view than mine. 


Every movie I see gets full benefit of the doubt, suspension of disbelief, and sympathy for its characters until it ends. I do not watch movies with a checklist of my sociopolitical values in hand, keeping a running tally of all the ways it pushed my buttons by failing to conform to my values. Movies exist for my entertainment and enjoyment, but they are not about me. My values and I are not more important than the movie while I'm watching it. 


I like Hollywood movies. Mainstream, middlebrow, middle class entertainments. I see plenty of art films, indie films, foreign films, any kind of film that interests me or that I hear might interest me. Still, I grew up on mainstream Hollywood multiplex fare in the '70s and '80s and '90s and onward and those films are my sweet spot. 


I do not write about film to debate film. I don't write about it to air grievances with other genders, races, or cultures. I do not write about Hollywood product to back up my pet thesis about why someone or other has offended everyone else and needs to be destroyed. If people want to write about these things through the lens of film I think they should. That's not what's happening here. 


I'm eager to engage with folks over why a screenplay contradicted itself all over the place, how characters felt inauthentic or a music cue seemed to stop the picture dead in its tracks. I want to talk to people about the movies and the stories they tell and how effective - or not - they are at doing it. 


I will not engage with comments such as, "You like this movie because you're a middle aged cis-het white male and you want to enslave...." I will not engage with those who refuse to suspend disbelief and extend sympathy until the picture ends. I will not engage with individuals who say, "I don't need to see this movie to know it's offensive." If a person hasn't seen the movie, no comment s/he makes has an ounce of validity here. Contempt prior to investigation will be met with contemptuous silence. 


Again, I'm not saying those approaches to movies are wrong. It's not for me to say, because I don't do that. They won't and don't fit here, however. I ask only for a fair hearing and the bare minimum of courtesy and respect for my right to my opinion, even if my opinion, itself, doesn't merit a reader's respect. 


With that out of the way, let's love us some movies. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Cuck Fiction: Charles Vidor's GILDA

 Rita Hayworth, Glenn Ford, George MacReady, Steven Geray. Dir. Charles Vidor, Columbia, 1946 My favorite erotic fiction deals with cuckolding. The stories fascinate me. As people, cuckolds don't seem to think they're worth nice things. Or happiness. On the other hand, the cuckolding partners and their multiple lovers don't come over as the clear victors, either. Part of the fascination - maybe most of it - lies in trying to decide which party comes out the MOST degraded.  Is it the submissive, sensitive husband and his unsatisfactory size/staying power? Is it the "slutwife" who finds satiety in being transformed into a fuckdoll to humilate her husband? Or is it the lover - often black - who gets to degrade the sexy white lady but who doesn't otherwise matter? As in bdsm scenes, if the cuck is most degraded, that means he also "wins," as his desires to see his wife turned into a promiscuous slut while he gets to be bi without shame are most fulfi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Obligatory TL;DR Statement of Purpose

 A not-so-brief explanatory note as to how this blog works: I can't recall a time when movies weren't my passion, my compulsion, my addiction. Ever since my parents took me to see Disney's Bedknobs&Broomsticks, I've been hopeless. Born in 1967, I grew up with free range parents. They took my brother and me to all kinds of movies, often using Hollywood as a babysitter. We saw movies about which many parents today would cluck their tongues (though nothing R-rated until I was 12. My first R-rated movie was MONTY PYTHON'S LIFE OF BRIAN.) Though my parents were professionals and we grew up affluent, our home saw its share of dysfunction. Dad was in the house, but not often present. Mom, stressed and disappointed at discovering her marriage wasn't an equal partnership, took out her frustrations on me.  Without getting too far into the weeds, let me just say my adult life has been far from typical middle class stability. I've never had a career. Never finished ...
3 comments
Read more

Personal Movies: Robert Redford's ORDINARY PEOPLE

 Donald Sutherland, Mary Tyler Moore Timothy Hutton, Judd Hitsch. Dir. Robert Redford, Paramount, 1980 I have been fortunate - I suppose that's the word - to see my story on the big screen. Twice. We talk of identifying with movies, with characters, of moviegoing being our identity, but I never went to the movies expecting to see my life reflected back to me. The second time it occurred, with Jonathan Demme's RACHEL GETTING MARRIED, it at least had the benefit of being about a woman, so I can't get all theatrical about how I totes get Rachel. I don't, but I went home from treatment for family events and man, it looked a lot like that movie. The first time it happened, with Robert Redford's directorial debut, ORDINARY PEOPLE, it was a guy, and that guy, if older than my 13 years, lived a life that looked a whole lot like mine, minus the dead brother. In my case, my brother, my parents' biological son, is extravagantly the favorite, and my Mom & I know the...
Post a Comment
Read more