In Reply to: Re: Well, it appears that this stream is almost fished out. posted by Victor Khomenko on January 24, 2002 at 05:10:54:
You, Victor, turned this discussion into one about agendas, not I. Calling a movie "trash" that in the opinion of many has social relevence is as far off base as suggesting that it's two featured characters are supposed to be "heroes" in the literal sense (mine, as you casually insinuate or your daughters, as you apparantly fear) and "brainless morons" or whatever.Since you don't like Roger Ebert (are there any critics that you DO like or is it simply a matter of your believing that your own viewpoint ascends to a height superior to all others?) I'll link Peter Traver's impressions; perhaps his observations will persuade you since my opinions have failed so miserably in that effort.
FTR, I don't demounce actresses like Myrna Loy, et al., but they are from another time and representative of a system that abused women without remorse. Perhaps you, as a father, would prefer dressing your daughters in Victorian attire (okay, 1930's era), which isn't an uncommon thought among fathers of girls I'd wager, but one really should try to appreciate the complexities of life in the new milennium, IMHO. Films are, after all, movies and not reality, but they do reflect social change. If T&L offends you, perhaps it was intended to by drawing attention to FEELINGS women have about abusive relationships.
OTOH, by taking Callie Khouri's screenplay too literally, latching on to the films depiction of violent feminine outrage as an indication of moral decadence rather than a symbolic release of repressesd inhibitions, it's easy to see why issues like relationship abuse get shoved into the closet by well meaning folks like yourself.
AuPh
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Hey, you can hate Ridley Scott if you like; "it ain't my problem" as the saying goes. - Audiophilander 09:22:23 01/24/02 (0)