Here's another question:
Since Obama's been raising the most money, I think that one has to ask where the money's coming from. The claims that Obama's not taking PAC money sound bogus to me. Also, the Hillary- bashing got out of control a long time ago. It's in people's power to stop it. Hillary's dropping out of the race isn't the answer. Granted, she's been acting like a character from heaven-knows-where, and McCain is too dangerous and unstable (witness his legendary temper that he doesn't keep under wraps very well, and his points of views on many issues such as reproductive rights, etc.) to be trusted at the buttom, but, quite frankly, there's something about Obama that I really don't like or trust either; I think his charisma is totally fake, and all his talk about change, hope, unity and inclusion kind of ring hollow, imo.
I really don't think that it will come under any of the three Presidential candidates that we now have. McCain and Clinton would not make good presidents, and would furthur divide the country. I think that Obama would also. For a good long time, this country was divided by the good guys vs. the bad guys strategy, and I think that this would also occur under Obama; the Democratic Party consisting of minorities and better-educated, weathier whites, while the Republican party would consist of the whites that some people call "white trash" or "peckerwood trash" and the demagogic richer whites who wish to exploit white workingclass bitterness and pit the different classes and races against each other. This particular scenario, imo, is not a good thing. A big part of the Democratic failure has been because so many workingclass whites deserted the party in droves because their concerns and points weren't addressed by many of the Democrats. Don't get me wrong--there are lots of good, liberal democrats that I consistantly vote for because I like their positions and agree with them. However, imo, unless the Democratic Party finds a way to re-engage the white workingclass, it will continue to not succeed. All that aside, however, I think that an Obama-Edwards ticket might go along way towards achieving that end and bringing many white workingclass ethnics back to the Democratic Party, but who knows?
Here's another question: What would become of the arts in this country with a Barack Obama Presidency? I know this sounds wierd, and petty, but would the great, good venerable golden oldie-but-goody classic films quickly disappear into the dustbin of history because so many people, seeing them as dated or stereotyping all minorities and poor whites as being in gangs, or low on the totem pole of society, wouldn't want them around anymore, and wouldn't want them shown in movie theatres? Yet, under a McCain or Hillary Clinton Presidency, I see a continued ownership of the media by many corporations continuing, also making that possible.
__________________________
451, the temperature at which books burn.
Lincoln divided the country, things seemed to work out for the better because of it...
Things could get that way until Christian Bale comes along and restorts the equillibrium in the arts.
and The President isn't God.
__________________________In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Yes.
Batman will save the day. :)
BTW, the third trailer is out.
Can't wait....
Batman vs Superman, shortest fight seen ever.
You replied, and now I cannot fix my typo, thanks a lot.
"Things could get that way until Christian Bale comes along and [restores] the equillibrium in the arts.
"In the near future, freedom is a things of the past"
__________________________In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
Sorry to say this, but
movies like Equiilibriium and the upcoming Batman and other films where things constantly explode on the screen, or there's really excessive violence and killing aren't my idea of what's great. Frankly, the vast majority of films these days are long on style and short on substance, if one gets the drift. Movies used to have a real story and a real plot to them. Nowadays, they mostly don't. It's unfortunate. Also, I really don't have an interest in seeing movies that revolve mainly around the lives of people in developing countries, which, while I might be wrong, is probably what one could probably expect to see playing in movie theatres in the event of an Obama presidency, but it could happen with any of the candidates. I wouldn't mind that if I knew that the good older classics could be revived in movie theatres also, and there were also some real choices that people could make regarding that. Staying home and watching such movies on a fancy DVD'd home theatre system isn't my cup of tea, either.
Hollywood
I think the types of movies that are played in theaters is more a function of what makes money than who is president. I'm not sure where you get the idea that an Obama presidency would lead to bunches of movies about third world countries, but I think you are very much (very much) overestimating the influence of the president on Hollywood and popular culture. Personally, I'd go see the new Batman (and expect it would have been made) whether the president was George Bush, John Kerry, or Stephen Colbert.
__________________________We are the environment. There is no distinction. What we do to the earth we do to ourselves. —David Suzuki
You're right, Spiritual Lefty.
This:
is a point well taken, Spiritual Lefty. It's a matter of what makes money hand over fist, especially nowadays, and it sort of saddens me that most of the rerpertory/revival movie houses have gone the way of movie palace heaven so to speak. It's not that I've never gone to newer films and enjoyed them, because I have. However, I also tend to like some of the older films
of the 1960's-80's, (though mostly the 1960's), and it's good to have something like that to fall back on, imo. I also think that the home entertainment business, while I understand how and why it's flourishing so much, has all but killed the movie business. Since I don't have a famlly to take care of, I don't see the need or desire to sit home and watch a movie on DVD or whatever. There are times when I think to myself; whatever happened to the venerable pasttime, when family and/or friends would attend the movies in a real movie theatre together? I think that the home entertainment business has also isolated people from each other, and part of the fun of going to a movie theatre is just getting out, and sharing the experience of seeing movies on a great big wide movie theatre screen with the lights down low, with tons of other people, whether we know them or not.
There are times when I've gone to movies and concerts by myself, and there are times when I've gone with family and/or friends.
I don't know if I'll go see t he new Batman film or not. However, a film like Equilibrium, from what I've seen of the trailer of it, seems too bombastic for me. I've always liked action-packed films, and I don't even mind seeing a certain amount of blood, gore, or even explosions on the screen, when they're an integral part of the story, or if there's a point to be made. However, when they occur on the screen to the stage where it's utterly pointless, then it sort of kills the movie and strips it of all meaning. Today, Hollywood seems to think that the more graphic a film is, the more explosions, the more blood and gore, the better. Not so, imo.
Back to what I was trying to say earlier: In the day and age of presumed change, would a great, golden oldie but goody classic film such as West Side Story end up becoming obsolete because too many people would consider it dated, promotory of too many negative stereotypes, and/or too "white-bread" for their tastes? I certainly hope not. What about other wonderful older classic films, such as Dr. Zhivago, Wizard of Oz, to name afew?
However, I see your point about my overestimating the President's influence on Hollywood and popular culture.
In Equilibrium, the
In Equilibrium, the government used violence to crush decent and end the arts that created "too much' negative emotional actions.. Christian Bale's character turned the violence back at the government.
Equilibrium is not like Cobra, but its no Matrix either.
__________________________In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
I quite enjoyed equillibrium
Good action, a decent plot, decent acting. I can't bitch too much about that.
__________________________I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
I'd comment
but since I have a strictly heterosexual man-crush on Christian Bale, anything I say would be suspect.
And it had Sean Bean, too.
__________________________I'm listening to...
I'm still certain that what motivates me
Is more rewarding than any piece of paper could be -- Dennis Lyxzén
"strictly heterosexual man-crush"
hehehehe
If you haven't already,
I think you'd enjoy Giuseppe Tornatore's Cinema Paradiso, which uses the rise and fall of a small-town theatre as a statement about the life cycle of communities.
But I wouldn't worry too much: every art form goes through this cycle. If you want a good laugh, check out Walter Ardnt's early books on cinema: he thought that sound and color would be the death of the medium. And of course you'll find plenty of people who think that film killed the book. And video killed the radio star.
Incidentally, Victor Hugo argued that the book killed the cathedral.
We go through cycles.
__________________________Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
I've heard of that movie, and
maybe the next time if and when Cinema Paradiso comes around to one of the two repertory movie theatres left in our area, I'll to go see it. Thanks, pico.
or....
you can rent it...
Good movie.
However,
However, since I don't have a DVD player, and have purposely resisted getting one because I'm not much of a TV watcher and begrudge sitting at home watching good movies on TV, I'll hold out and keep my eyes on the Arts/Movies sections of our local newspapers.
Interesting
I mostly go the opposite way. With a few exceptions I'd rather watch the movie at home where I can be comfortable and pause or adjust the volume to my convenience.
Then again, I'm fairly antisocial anyway.
__________________________I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
To each their own, Tialoc, but
I like to go out to the movies, because it gives me the opportunity to go out and be among other people whether I know them or no, and to view movies on a great big, wide movie screen, in a real movie theatre, with the lights down low. Since I live alone, am not married, and have no kids, I've got no one to answer to in that respect, which I'm glad of, because I'm not one who's into sitting home and watching movies on a cheesy, elaborate expensive home-theatre system the way lots of people do. Subsequently, with one rare exception (March 2001), I've never, ever missed a screening of my alltime favorite film, West Side Story when it comes to town, whether it be to one of the only two repertory film theatres in our area, on TV, or even to a neighborning state.
Slightly different than the period you broached.
Then there is the "objectionable" neo-classics:
Pulp Fiction and storing dead "people" in garages
American Psycho and Huey Lewis & the News
. With Christian Bale nonetheless.
And the vile Star Wars saga
__________________________In our society, people are rewarded for pretending to be certain about things they're clearly not certain about. -- Sam Harris,
At the risk of sounding petty & narrow, I'd hate to think that
this:
would actually happen. Frankly, I don't think that people should be forced to make the horrendous choices of either going to view arts that they really didn't like or staying home and not bothering. Frankly, if many, if not most of the movies and live theatre, etc., and trashy, busy-looking stuff that passes for art that's coming out nowadays is any indication, the dumbing down of America would undoubtedly continue, no matter who got to be POTUS, whether it be HR. Clinton, McCain, or Barack Obama. Depriving people of seeing the great, golden oldie-but-goodies in the movie theatres because certain people feel too oppressed by these supposed "stereotypes" would contribute even furthur to this "dumbing down" of the United States.
Here's another point that you may not want to hear, but I'll say it out anyway:
The fact that the United States managed to produce such a great, golden oldie-but-goody movie/musical classic such as West Side Story, for example, can't be all bad, imo. In fact, if such a beautiful thing were to totally disappear into the dustbin of history, never to surface again, first of all, there's absolutely nothing like it, and, secondly, it would be an indication that censorship is as alive and well as ever in the United States, as well as the kowtowing to more extremist groups, which, while they'd claim to speak for everybody, in fact, don't. In fact, it usually takes a minority to manipulate and trap the majority, no matter whether they be on the Right or the Left. Imho, censorship is censorship, whether it comes from the Right or the Left.
I still remember the time several years ago, when Amherst Regional High School, out in Amherst, MA, a town 2-3 hours west of Boston, pulled a scheduled stage production of West Side Story exactly one week before its formal rendez-vous.
The pulling of the Amherst Regional High School production of WSS came about due to the circulation around the high school of a petition stating that
West Side Story promoted stereotyping of Puerto Ricans and how they were supposedly, along with all workingclass white youths, were in gangs, etc. It was signed by about 158 people. Instead of creating an atmosphere that would allow for debate and discussion about this issue, the school authorities and officials promptly caved in and pulled the WSS production. Amherst, MA, which is presumably a liberal, progressive and open-minded town, gave itself a huge pair of black eyes over the whole incident. Frankly, I'd hate to see this kind of thing happen with the film. Frankly, I think that the pulling of Amherst RHS's production of WSS happened for the same reason that the cancelling of the NY Theatre Workshop's production of the one-woman play My Name Is Rachel Corrie was pulled; fear of controversy and debate.
In fact, the people who'd signed the anti-WSS petition did not represent the viewpoints and opinions of the entire Hispanic community out in the Amherst, MA area, which was very divided on the issue. Nor did they represent the opinions/viewpoints of the entire Bay State. Fortunately, screenings and stage productions of WSS that I've patronized have been well-attended.
Fear of controversy and debate are at the root of such occurrences, and I think that, under any of our three candidates for POTUS, I have no hopes of it being reversed.
Never trust the charismatic
People should always be suspicious of the pretty, the glib, and the genial. Those traits circumvent our normal defenses. An extra dose of cynicism is required to maintain an appropriate skepticism.
And be doubly suspicious of charismatic politicians, because most of your fellows won't be. A charismatic president has a trifecta: power of authority, power of force, and power of persuasion.
That's worrying.
__________________________I came. I saw. I posted.
Veni, Vidi, Bitchy.
Tialoc:
This:
and this:
both articulate the point very well, imo. While some politicians are genuine and authentic, I have to be honest and say that there's something about Barack Obama's charisma that makes me not like or trust him much, even though his positions on a number of things are closer to mine than that of H. R. Clinton and certainly John McCain. Imo, he seems like a phony, as does H. R. Clinton. Charismatic polliticians will say anything to get elected, and Obama's no exceptioin. Hillary's trying to prove that she's tougher than the guys, and to belly up to the white workingclass men, really hasn't boded well, imo, and probably hurt her. Frankly, I'm not excited about any of them, and don't think that I really want any of them in the White House come November, either.