|
Post by mllemass on Dec 29, 2019 2:46:46 GMT
I came across this tweet by Stephen King, who makes the point I was trying to make about the movie. I read through all the comments in the thread, too, and it’s a fascinating discussion.
|
|
|
Post by roverpup on Dec 29, 2019 3:49:01 GMT
[/quote]
This movie gives me the same vibes as Lady Bird, La La Land and Marriage Story to name some of the recent movies. All about white privilege imo. That is, white privileged people telling stories of privileged white people.
[/quote] Wasn't Patrick Melrose on the receiving end of a similar criticism that it was just a story by white posh people telling a story of a privileged white posh drug addict, so it had little worth? Why should anyone care about his sorry white ass? To me there are universal human themes that transcend whether the characters are white or "privileged" or posh. Patrick Melrose did this for me and so did Marriage Story.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Dec 29, 2019 13:59:55 GMT
I came across this tweet by Stephen King, who makes the point I was trying to make about the movie. I read through all the comments in the thread, too, and it’s a fascinating discussion. The comments are great! I found very interesting the one that says that a few of the lines added (and that are being accused of being too progressive for the time) are actually from other Louisa May Alcott's writings.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Dec 29, 2019 14:42:58 GMT
This movie gives me the same vibes as Lady Bird, La La Land and Marriage Story to name some of the recent movies. All about white privilege imo. That is, white privileged people telling stories of privileged white people.
[/quote] Wasn't Patrick Melrose on the receiving end of a similar criticism that it was just a story by white posh people telling a story of a privileged white posh drug addict, so it had little worth? Why should anyone care about his sorry white ass? To me there are universal human themes that transcend whether the characters are white or "privileged" or posh. Patrick Melrose did this for me and so did Marriage Story.[/quote] The attacks against PM were minimal but some of them despicable because there were woke people openly saying rape wasn't an issue when the victim was a white privileged man. Again it was just two or three persons. Most of them didn't even knew what it was about. Thay just didn't care because it was another white privileged man! I also saw a comment saying that no one needed a Louis Wain film. You know, a period film about white people.... who suffered mental illness and it's directed by a young Japanese-British guy. But they don't care about the details beyond showing the world how woke are they. This is also reminds me an attack against Scorsese. If we learn something with his recent Marvel clash is that a lot of influencing big woke accounts on Twitter are uber-Marvel fans. And I'm talking about people who write in mainstream blogs and sites. Not just randoms! There was a dichotomy: Scorsese was the bad guy and the biggest entertainment corporation in the whole world is apparently woke! (IMHO a lot of this modern activism is actually pretty conservative and I dare to say, racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic and everything they accuse others to be so it's not a surprise they defend big corporations and that big corporations use them as pawns). Anyway, Scorsese was asked about women in his films. He has a few great female roles but agreed they are minimal. Most of his movies are about toxic men not women. He answered something along the lines that he doesn't want to force characters or unnecessary plot lines. That was for Twitter, the worst (or maybe best) response! He was, of course accused of being a misogynist. The thing is Scorsese is doing IMHO the right thing when talking about representation out there. For example, he produced and championed The Souvenir. A film by a woman (a WHITE privileged woman, sorry for that!). He dedicates to rescue African films, produces new talents and champions female filmmakers! How it is possible that he is the villain here? He doesn't include to much women or POC in his very own films. Well, as most artists he does art about what he personally knows and understand and no one can force him to doing something different because, I agreed, would feel forced and fake. He is doing a lot already financing and championing new and diverse voices. Also his films could been read as feminist (as Amy Taubin did with Kubrick after his death): this is not a guy who hates women. He maybe is not good creating female roles but he doesn't despise them as he despises certain kind of men. His films are about everything that's wrong with masculinity. And he does those films with much more deepness that superficial Twitter politics artificially inserted in Disney franchises. There's also some obsession with movie stars, I think. Those people are very worried about actors and actresses but doesn't care too much about filmmakers. The thing is diversity on cinema won't be achieved until there is diversity behind the camera.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Dec 29, 2019 15:08:32 GMT
I just remembered that last year Scorsese also championed another female filmmaker, Alice Rohrwacher. She is also white and do film about white people but not exactly white privileged people. I really loved Happy as Lazzaro which was a poetical version of Dostoyevsky's The Idiot but between the poorest and underprivileged.
This guy helped two major female filmmakers to found a biggest audience in the last two years but he is a misogynist because he doesn't do the movies some people on Twitter think he should do.
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Dec 29, 2019 17:38:03 GMT
There are so few movies by women, and about girls and women, that I don’t think it’s fair to complain about this being another “white privilege” movie. I don’t remember reading any complaints that those Lord of the Rings or Hobbit movies were basically several hours of men walking or running and occasionally stopping to fight. There was probably more to them than that, but that’s all I got out of them.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Dec 29, 2019 18:11:42 GMT
There are so few movies by women, and about girls and women, that I don’t think it’s fair to complain about this being another “white privilege” movie. I don’t remember reading any complaints that those Lord of the Rings or Hobbit movies were basically several hours of men walking or running and occasionally stopping to fight. There was probably more to them than that, but that’s all I got out of them. Agreed. There are some criticism at male oriented or directed movies but the most vicious attacks from the right and the left are against women. Especially with popular or successful films.
|
|
|
Post by MagdaFR on Dec 29, 2019 18:54:46 GMT
Wasn't Patrick Melrose on the receiving end of a similar criticism that it was just a story by white posh people telling a story of a privileged white posh drug addict, so it had little worth? Why should anyone care about his sorry white ass? To me there are universal human themes that transcend whether the characters are white or "privileged" or posh. Patrick Melrose did this for me and so did Marriage Story. It is not the same. Those comments from people saying they didn't care about a posh white man victim of sexual abuse were from people who hadn't seen the series. That's prejudice. I watched all the movies I mentioned. In my case it is a founded opinion which you may or may not share. I think it is undeniable that Marriage Story is a story about privileged white people (the successful profession, the house in LA, the possibility of traveling frequently from coast to coast, no real economical worries), like, I guess, are Bambauch and Gerwig. Perhaps is the only kind of stories they can make. I kind of liked the movie but I think it is overrated. Too theatrical, especially the fight scene. Not natural. Super staged. Also, we really know almost nothing about their relationship except through frequent exposition. I didn't mind at the start where it has a real use showing part of their "happy" married life. We were shown Nicole's family but not Charlie's, some things about his mother were just shouted. They didn't show the deterioration of the marriage or when/how they grew apart. I just saw Driver and Johansson acting, not the characters Charlie and Nicole. The lawyers' part was really necessary? One of Charlie's complaints was the money he had to spend. First, he had the money. Second, he didn't have to spend it on lawyers. I doubt a "normal" person would have the same "problems". I liked the way it showed the change of Charlie's relationship with Nicole and her family or the family towards Charlie. Initially he was like part of the family and at the end he was like a stranger and someone else has took his place. Anyway, I think he was kind of horrible so I didn't feel anything for him at the end. Karma. What happened to Nicole and her need to find herself? Was a new love interest sufficient? Why we didn't get her perspective at the end?
|
|
|
Post by onebluestocking on Dec 29, 2019 19:19:03 GMT
I know I would rather see more diverse filmmakers, as opposed to female or POC shoehorned into existing stories or written by white men, who may not understand them. (Not that LW is written by a man, I just mean in general.) That said, I would have no issue if they chose to make Laurie black, although his family is supposed to be extremely rich (unlike the Marches) and IIRC have homes both in the US and Europe. It's an important part of the story, since he and his grandfather rattle around their big mansion alone, while Laurie envies the four loving sisters next door (even when they only have a baked potato to eat for lunch!) And his stern grandfather overcomes some snobbery toward the girls with time. So it would require some suspension of disbelief for the 1800's, or a serious rewrite. These issues are much more important to the story than how the book describes his hair and coloring.
|
|
|
Post by MagdaFR on Dec 29, 2019 19:41:14 GMT
There are so few movies by women, and about girls and women, that I don’t think it’s fair to complain about this being another “white privilege” movie. I don’t remember reading any complaints that those Lord of the Rings or Hobbit movies were basically several hours of men walking or running and occasionally stopping to fight. There was probably more to them than that, but that’s all I got out of them. Ha, ha, I never watched those movies. Anyway I think they are not about privileged people. They're movies about fantasy. Nobody is going to identify with an elf or a hobbit or an orc.
Also, I included La La Land and Marriage Story directed by men. I could add Call Me by Your Name or other movies by Guadagnino (except Suspiria), all about privileged people.
They choose to do movies about people who have no problems "from the real world" like paying a rent, not have health care, not knowing if they'll have money for food, etc. etc.
The characters in these movies are all artistic people who live for and from the arts, who are in other level that is where the directors live, I guess.
Of course you can empathize with their problems but sometimes is difficult. For instance, the problem with the money in Marriage Story. The guy had won a prize of thousands of dollars. How am I going to think "poor Charlie" because he had to pay for plane tickets. Come on.
|
|