 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
82.229.229.57
In Reply to: "It's rage against the machine by the machine." -- Owen Gleiberman posted by clarkjohnsen on March 19, 2006 at 10:29:58:
..you/he's just painted a picture of a world without hope where 'the machine' sucks in and transforms everything into it's own image.
Oh well...
Follow Ups:
Yes, the picture is bleak, but not hopeless. The success of the individual through force of numbers and a strong desire for liberty overcome their fear. Without support of the masses and a manipulated media, an overbearing dictator, his corrupt aristocratic machine and christian-nazi enforcers can't spin their way out.The only unanswered question is whether society would crumble from within following the collapse of this regime or rebuild on a new stronger foundation, but while this remains ambiguous the implication is that the good within society will rise to the surface. The destruction of the symbols of a corrupted government had the feeling of London's version of the Boston Tea Party, a bloodless celebration complete with fireworks. This is what one should take away from the film; apparently this is an element Owen Glieberman completely missed.
Cheers,
AuPh
...I was just hitting at the critic and CJ because, if, as they seem to imply, the film is just a 'product' of the machine whilst it's message seems to be the opposite, then that leaves the world a bleak place.
I think it was just a 'hip' critic ploy (critics are like that)but I'll see the film first before committing myself and am looking forward to it.
I saw little in the way of "hip" rhetorical sophistication; it came across more like humbug in a smug-ular vein (to paraphrase Mad's old slogan), if you know what I mean.> > > "...if, as they seem to imply, the film is just a 'product' of the machine whilst it's message seems to be the opposite, then that leaves the world a bleak place." < < <
Well, CJ & OG may not be aware of this, but the world is already bleak place; if you doubt it, just turn on the news. As cautionary films and literature go, Moore's story & Wachowski's screenplay is no bleaker than Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 or the cautionary allegories in George Orwell's Animal Farm and 1984.
I'm not sure where all of this Hollywood "machine" rhetroric is coming from, unless there's a ghost in it that Japanese animators haven't recovered or a Son of Deus ex machina from Mel Gibson lurking about. ;^)
The movie industry can be faulted for being too predictable (trendy) at times in the effort to mirror popular themes and/or target certain demographics. In that regard, I guess Hollywood is manipulative and machine-like, but I'm of the opinion that film producers are fully aware that they can guarantee sizeable profits from movies which go against the grain through the publicity that controversial themes generate.
For instance, The Passion was controversial AND manipulative, but through ingenious marketing, this film and it's producers were the beneficiary of LOADS of free publicity; it made a killing at the box-office.
Narnia, another example of manipulation, was a poorly made, logic challenged, Disney-ized flick based on the popular work of C.S. Lewis. It also generated a lot of free (word of mouth) publicity as a christian-friendly, "safe" fantasy film for god-fearing parents to take their Harry Potter crazed kids to see.
V for Vendetta's bleak tale is politically rather than spiritually manipulative; it's allegorical subtext is timeless, but feels so blatantly contemporary that some will undoubtably find it's cautionary premise offensive. However, this film is no more reflective of the Hollywood "machine" that produced it than Mel Gibson's Aramaic bloodletting or Narnia's mythological characters bowing to the "sons & daughters of Eve."
> > > "I think it was just a 'hip' critic ploy (critics are like that)but I'll see the film first before committing myself and am looking forward to it." < < <
Good for you!
BTW, I tend to appreciate critics who are clever over those who try to appear sophisticated through use of subtlety and smugness; I'm even less impressed with critics who fall back on playing the in-joke game. Note: These are critics tend to think so much of their deftless prose that they believe everyone regularly reads their columns and should be instinctively be able to divine their genius & decipher where the critique is headed.
Sorry about the verbosity, Jeff, but the bottom line is that we're basically in agreement here.
Cheers,
AuPh
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
