1. "Why So Pretentious?": Fernando F. Croce on The Dark Knight, The Edge of Heaven, and Mamma Mia!.
["To be fair, The Dark Knight did provide the most chilling moment I have had at the movies all summer. I giggled at the ridiculous growl Bale employed from under his Batman mask, and was readily met with death stares from my neighboring viewers: Holy Mass had been violated. Please. Dude dresses like a bat, and suddenly cinema at long last fulfills its potential? It's bad enough when rabid fanboys become so prissy about the film's "awesomeness" that they fuse into one huge, fat-assed Comic Book Guy declaring "Worst critic ever!" at any questioning review; it's doubly depressing when the critics themselves swallow the hype machine's baby food and call it caviar for the ages."]
2. "Is Impeachment Too Little, Too Late?": From ABC News.
["There were 13 witnesses, including current and former members of Congress, most of whom accused the Bush administration of abuse of power. Democrats and Republicans on the Committee spent an hour on opening statements presenting their opinions either justifying Bush's actions or accusing him of being the worst president in U.S. history. Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., chairman of the committee, defended holding such a hearing while the president was on his way out of office. "And we're not done yet," Conyers said. "We do not intend to go away until we achieve the accountability that the Congress is entitled to and the American people deserve." Ranking Republican member Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, disagreed. "This week it seems that we are hosting an anger management class," he said. "Nothing is going to come out of this hearing with regard to impeachment of the president." But Democrat member Rep. Robert Wexler of Florida was angry at the president. "Never before in the history of this nation has an administration so successfully diminished the constitutional powers of the legislative branch," Wexler said. "It is unacceptable, and it must not stand.""]
3. "What Bush and Batman Have in Common": ReverseBlog points us to this one.
["There seems to me no question that the Batman film "The Dark Knight," currently breaking every box office record in history, is at some level a paean of praise to the fortitude and moral courage that has been shown by George W. Bush in this time of terror and war. Like W, Batman is vilified and despised for confronting terrorists in the only terms they understand. Like W, Batman sometimes has to push the boundaries of civil rights to deal with an emergency, certain that he will re-establish those boundaries when the emergency is past. And like W, Batman understands that there is no moral equivalence between a free society -- in which people sometimes make the wrong choices -- and a criminal sect bent on destruction. The former must be cherished even in its moments of folly; the latter must be hounded to the gates of Hell."]
4. "Johnny Griffin, 80; tenor saxophonist known as the 'Little Giant'": R.I.P. and see also our "Clip of the Day."
["Though he was often called the "world's fastest saxophonist," Griffin -- who jammed with such greats as Thelonious Monk, John Coltrane and Art Blakey -- did not see speed as the key element of his playing. "Everybody called me a racehorse, but feeling good is my thing," Griffin said in a 1995 Times article. "Art Blakey used to say to me, 'You fire that [saxophone] like it's a machine gun.' I'd say, 'Yeah, man, but those are pellets of love.'" Griffin is credited with helping to spark renewed interest in bebop in the 1970s, with performances at the Montreux Jazz Festival in 1975, in Tokyo in 1976 and throughout the U.S. in the latter part of the decade. "He was very original," said drummer Louis Hayes, who performed with Griffin and many other jazz artists. Griffin "had a great knowledge of his instrument and music and . . . he had a tremendous impact on this art form we call jazz.""]
5. "The Colbert McCain Challenge": This is just too funny. From Bright Lights After Dark.
["When Republican Presidential nominee John McCain addressed a crowd in Kenner, Louisiana on June 3, he did so in front of a green screen, thereby inspiring Comedy Central's Stephen Colbert to issue the following challenge: MAKE JOHN McCAIN EXCITING. Whoever accepts the challenge must use that footage (approximately 30 seconds), but there seem to be no restrictions on HOW the footage can be used. Here are two of my favorite responses:"]
Quote of the Day: Lord Jeffrey
Image of the Day (click to enlarge): Mothers lock up your lawnmowers!
Clip of the Day: Johnny Griffin plays "56."
_____________________________________________________
"Links for the Day": Each morning, the House editors post a series of weblinks that we think will spark discussion. Comments encouraged. Suggestions for links are also welcome. Please send to keithuhlich@gmail.com.
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Links for the Day (July 26th, 2008)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
Re #1: If you take out the parts where the critics and the audience are being reviewed, is there anything illuminating being discussed about The Dark Knight here? Or is it a bunch of angered declarations that aren't very well supported?
The response to Keith's review last weekend was appalling, but this isn't helping matters.
One is beginning to wonder if the perceived decline of importance of critics (due to layoffs) is causing this Armond White-like extremism in discourse on movies where movies are either perfect or the worst thing ever made. The quality of film criticism has taken a hit this year, in my opinion, with the formation of two sides of group-think to every movie.
Basically, what I'm asking is where has nuance disappeared to in critical debate this year? It was always hard to find, but now it seems to have completely vanished.
" I giggled at the ridiculous growl Bale employed from under his Batman mask,[...] Please. Dude dresses like a bat, and suddenly cinema at long last fulfills its potential?"
I think not being capable of suspending disbelief to the extent that you are accepting of the very basic idea of a "Batman," or at least the the idea that someone or multiple someones may take this Batman seriously, pretty much disqualifies any criticism you may or may not have about said Batman.
I'm a Batman fan, and a "Dark Knight" fan at that, but I'm fine with people having problems with the film -- heck, I cringe and Bale's "Batman voice" (accentuated by the actor's lisp). But as Steven points out, a lot of the "discussion" going around lately is of how "these fanboys can't handle any criticism when I insult their stupid movie."
Regardless of my reaction to the actual film in question, Croce is actually the one who comes off as pretentious, so I suppose the title is very fitting.
It would appear that the film's critical reaction is the polarizing element, not the film itself. That's kind of disappointing. It seems like the "non-nerds" took offense to the blind allegiance of the fanboys, and this is their way of striking back. I think both "sides" are at fault here, and as a result we have a high school back-and-forth war of words between two cliques. Don't we have better things to do?
I'm happy (more like relieved, really) to see intelligent arguments, especially after the reactions Keith got a week ago.
Steven's comment is especially acute. I still think the reception (critical and popular) of The Dark Knight is a much more interesting subject than the disappointing film that's precipitating it, but he brings up salient points about the write-up that, looking back, I'm not particularly proud of. Scorn for other people's opinions is something that makes me cringe and that I try to avoid in my own writing, yet I realize here that the need to battle fanboy bullying often results in mirroring it instead.
As for not being able to take the character itself seriously (or, more specifically, seriously enough to warrant the nuclear overpraise it's been receiving), well, guilty as charged. But I don't think that, just because the film takes it as a "given" that a guy in rubber suit is a tragic hero, I have to swallow it without chewing it.
And, as Dennis Miller used to say, that's my opinion, I could be wrong.
"I giggled at the ridiculous growl Bale employed from under his Batman mask,[...] Please. Dude dresses like a bat, and suddenly cinema at long last fulfills its potential?"
Being able to laugh at Batman was built into Tim Burton's take on the character, and kept his movies from sliding into the kind of somber pretentiousness that appears to be Nolan's only tone. It used to be that the only movies you weren't allowed to giggle at were middle-brow epics like SCHINDLER'S LIST. It surely is a sign of the times that comic book movies have achieved a similar high holy status.
The people, like film maker Kevin Smith, who overhyped TDK by comparing it to the Godfather II, may be easily accused of fanboyism, but the dismissive tone of Croce's (and many other negative TDK) reviews seems more like contraryism and not serious analysis.
Many so called critics seem to lack the facility to view a film on its own merits. They have to bring their personal baggage into it. So some reviewers hated it because they think its a validation of Bush's war on terror while others obsess about Bale's attempt to give Batman a distinctive voice from Bruce Wayne's.
Many of these complaints are either nit picking or an revealing flash of insecurity by a reviewer who thinks insulting geeks somehow makes them look cool. (It doesn't).
This film obviously deals with an unrealistic world. In a real world context the Joker would have the full force of the the Feds on his ass and Batman would be the least of his worries. And Batman himself would not be able to hide his identity in a world of paps and security cameras everywhere. There's a scene where Bruce is sitting in his penthouse with his mask off, but the Batman threads and you can see office buildings through the windows of his apartment. Anyone could look in and see him sitting there. He doesn't even use blinds.But to focus on things like this misses the point of the story.
To judge it as unrealistic betrays a literary ignorance. This is heroic fantasy. It's not meant to be "real". It's actually one director's comment on the Superhero genre, and he skillfully tells us how he thinks it would play out in such a world.
This story is about two sides of the same coin, so to speak. Individuals against the system. One fights to bring order to a chaotic society. The other seeks to show that chaos is the only true path. They are the yin and yang of a "might makes right" argument. Batman seeks to bring order by force. The Joker uses force to bring about chaos.
The movie actually has many themes and layers. It is a work of art on many levels. You may or may not like the tone or the message, but it succeeds in what it is trying to say. And frankly, when you compare it to many other crime movies, it's head and shoulders above most "less silly" films.
Post a Comment