Films/DVD Asylum

Posted by AuPh (A) on February 06, 2002 at 12:28:04

In Reply to: Put that H word where it sticks posted by Victor Khomenko on February 05, 2002 at 14:37:21:

Just teasin'!

My statement: *** "If I said that Charlton Heston was "stupid" because he reflected the narrow-minded views of the Hollywood "wrong"-wingers I'm sure that folks like you would get on my case about dragging politics into the film forum." ***

Your response: >>> "You are simply starting to invent the facts now. Show me where I got on your case for discussing Heston, or simply drop the silly presumptive tone. That H word is all yours." <<<

My first comment was an obvious speculation (i.e., as exemplified by my use of the word "If"), but not without just cause as those of us with a more Liberal perspective are often asked to take our views "Outside" the moment any controversy developes on one of the linked AA boards. Those with a more Conservative bent can get away with spewing anti-Liberal venom because they feel comfortable in the belief that they're preaching to the choir.

For you to say "Show me where I..." when I stated "folks like you..." (i.e., indicating like-minded people; not you in particular) is a bit disingenuous on your part unless you really didn't understand the context of my message.

The next two points we differed on had to do with actor's who speak out publicly on issues (i.e., "wear it on every sleeve of their Gucci cloth" as you put it) and my contention that the political debate has no place in this forum. My response to the former is that actors are entiled to be spokesmen for whatever cause they choose (i.e., even hammy has-beens like Charlton Heston) as an aspect of their private lives, and it shouldn't reflect either negatively or positively on their careers, their abilities to perform various roles and the profession itself.

The second point was simply my restating the opinion that contentuous political debate doesn't really belong in this forum even when the debate rises out of a thinly veiled reference to an actor's comments in an interview. Obviously you differ with that opinion, as you are entitled to do, but the other stuff about my making "demands" is simply unnecessary hyperbole. You need to learn the difference between a request and a demand.

I stated: *** "How? Left-wing movie plots? Which ones?" ***

Your response: >>> "I provided two, and could dump many more, but see no reason." <<<

Obviously, we see these plots entirely differently. I'm actually quite shocked that you view "Philadelphia" as a Liberal movie plot. If that's the case, then so much for "compassionate Conservatism", right? What provided you with the perspective of the film having a pro-Liberal point-of-view? The fact that the Tom Hanks character developed AIDS and was then discriminated against by the law firm which employed him? The fact that it even dealt with the subject of AIDS and homosexuality? The fact that it concluded with the little guy beating a system that was heavily weighted against him?

You see, I didn't get the impression that the film promoted alternative lifestyles or preached left-wing propaganda. Of course, it's been awhile since I last saw the movie (i.e., having viewed it only when it was in theaters), but my impression was that the film didn't carry an obvious Liberal message. So, perhaps you'll enlighten us as to how this "Philadelphia" is an example of a left-wing movie plot.

I won't pursue another discussion of T&L because you obviously have a problem with it's depiction of women rebeling against authority. Messages aside, I don't think this film was ever intended as high art. I'll give you this: if "Thelma and Louise" is viewed as a feminist assault on male supremacy in our society, rather than as a violent albeit groundbreaking farce with an anti-abuse message, it could be interpretted as having a Liberal bent.

>>> "Regarding the ribbons - you seem to be missing the point entirely. Wear them any place you want, on any part of yoru body, that is perfectly fine with me." <<<

I don't especially care for ribbons (i.e., it's a bit overdone and risks becoming cliche`), but I respect other's rights to wear them without contempt. I detest the idea of making the wearing of ribbons a personal issue and a cause celebe` for denouncing actors who are merely expressing compassion for others and solidarity for their causes. Again, I say it's a personal issue, one of choice, and not a suitable subject for ridicule except perhaps from the lowest form of anti-intellectual hate monger. Note: So we're crystal clear on this point, that assessment may or may not apply to you; only YOU would know that.

>>> "I think you are refusing to think while reading. I don't really care whether you discuss their agendas - do it all you want. You yourself brought the T&L plot up as something of social value - did I request you stopped talking about it?" <<<

Talk about twisting the facts. As I recall, you pretty much dropped out of the discussion in the original thread, which in effect ended debate since you were the film's harshest critic. As for the politics involved, you are only making my point about what SHOULD BE and what SHOULDN'T BE fair game for discussions on this board. Politics in the context of a film, studio agenda, or even an actor who is portraying his own beliefs through his film and television work is gristle for the talk mill, AFAIC (i.e., as long as the remarks aren't stated in such a way as to insult the personal politics of other inmates). However, once you cross the line into displaying contempt for an actor's personal views or how he conducts his/her private life, you get into tabloid country and, worse yet, risk offending the personally held beliefs of other inmates. I reiterate, isn't that what Outside is for?

>>> "But your tone is getting sillier and more capricious. Why don't you simply just read the posts that don't offend you, and let others say and listen to other things." <<<

The simple reason is that Mike made the issue personal by showing contempt for the actor's beliefs rather than just stating that Mr. Alda's political views shouldn't have been expressed on Inside the Actor's Studio. In other words, it wasn't really about Alan Alda's political views, it was about Mike's political views. That's not what this forum is intended for, now is it?

Respectfully,
Audiophilander