Love and scandal are the best sweeteners of tea. —Henry Fielding
Showing posts with label tate taylor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tate taylor. Show all posts

01 January 2013

Some Thoughts on Violence and Ethics in the 2012 Awards Season

Even all these years after his first, vicious movie, Quentin Tarantino's brand of violence still has the power to shock. His new film Django Unchained, which is an overly long re-writing of the history of the American South, has an inordinate amount of violence. Tarantino's films are known for their violence, of course, but to my mind, the nuance of Tarantino's representations makes them worth talking about and worth analyzing. Tarantino doesn't make shoot-em-up pictures. He doesn't make action films. The violence in his films does not look like that in the films of Martin McDonagh or Eli Roth or Michael Bay or Martin Scorsese or David Cronenberg. (Each of these directors has his own way of using violence that is interesting in its own right. I only mention them to give us all a little perspective on QT.)

Much of the violence in QT's films is fun to watch and is meant to be fun to watch. It can also be quite satisfying. Django, like Inglourious Basterds before it, is a revenge film: a kind of complex post-Jacobean revenge-comedy where the audience positively glories in the revenge taken by QT's protagonists. (I marveled at this in Kill Bill: Vol. 1, as the body count mounted and mounted, while at no point did I feel as though The Bride should stop killing people.) By the end of Django Unchained, when Jamie Foxx's Django finally has his revenge on all of the people who have wronged him – by which I mean basically any and every white Southerner – I was having a complete and total blast watching him blow all of these slave-owning motherfuckers to smithereens.

This violence at the end of the film is positively cartoony. QT films it like an homage to Sam Peckinpah, but his version of Peckinpah involves bodies exploding and emptying their liquid-filled contents everywhere, walls covered in blood, multiple gunshot wounds to every body part imaginable, and at the end: a crimson, bloody mess. It's funny. It's not to be taken with total seriousness, and there's even a moment when a single gunshot blows a woman six feet in a completely preposterous direction like something out of an episode of Wile E. Coyote. This is violence for the sake of pleasure. Django's revenge on the white slaveowners is simultaneously QT's revenge on the entire institution of American slavery (as Shosanna Dreyfus's revenge on Hans Landa is simultaneously QT's (delicious) revenge against Adolf Hitler). Revenge is sweet, and these acts of vengeance are shared with the audience: we also get to feel as though we have had revenge on Hitler, on American slavery, on the genocide of European Jews.

This is nonsense, of course: a total fantasy that allows audiences to feel really great about all that they've done to combat racism/slavery/oppression/history. Rooting for Jamie Foxx seems like it is the same thing as fighting racism. (I was at a screening populated by about 95% white people and I couldn't help but notice how much all of those white people were loving watching other white people get killed.) Vis-à-vis race I find Django sort of questionable and easy. Still, I loved its unabashed hatred of racism, its powerful black central characters, and most importantly its attention to the violence of slavery itself.

For while the violence committed against white people by Django and Dr. King Shultz (Dr. King?!) is treated in a chiefly cartoon manner, QT treats the violence committed against black people by white people during American slavery as absolutely horrific: like the attempted genocide it truly was. The audience watches, horrified, as dogs rip apart a middle-aged man. Django's wife Broomhilda is brutally whipped and subjected to other tortures. The camera shies away from none of this. Instead, QT asks his audience to sit with this violence, to pay attention to what happened. This is not The Help. Django Unchained presents the racist violence of slavery in an incredibly graphic fashion: the audience at the screening I attended squirmed and covered its eyes; the tension and sorrow in the theatre were palpable.

In other words, all violence onscreen is not created equal, as you probably already knew, but QT's ability to switch back and forth between certain techniques for representing violence strikes me as ethically responsible. For my money, Tarantino approaches screen violence with care, sensitivity, and a very clear political agenda.


Samuel L. Jackson, by the way, steals the entire film. Just let that be known. He has the wittiest, funniest dialogue, and he says motherfucker about ten thousand times. I was delighted.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Zero Dark Thirty – Kathryn Bigelow's film about the CIA's hunt to find and kill Osama bin Laden over the period of ten years following 11 September 2001 – also involves a good deal of violence. Like her previous film The Hurt Locker (which I loved), this violence is always presented in a realistic, almost banal fashion. It is a part of Bigelow's project to present violence as ubiquitous in the areas where USAmerican soldiers are stationed. These young people's bodies exist in a state of constant risk and ever-present tension; Bigelow's way of representing violence, therefore, tends to bombard the viewer with so much violence, that violence itself begins to feel normal. This is a reality on the ground for both civilians and military personnel in these regions invaded by the United States military.

There are at least three scenes of torture in Zero Dark Thirty, as well. These Bigelow handles expertly. The USAmericans who torture their unarmed prisoners are shown in an evenhanded manner: it is apparent that they feel that what they are doing is justified and necessary. But Bigelow's way of representing the victims of these tortures makes clear that what we are watching are acts of violation: excessive, reprehensible, and totally ineffective as tools for gathering actionable intelligence.

Zero Dark Thirty is a character study, really, a kind of window into the mind of someone who tracks down difficult-to-find enemies of the United States. Jessica Chastain's central performance is marvelous: at once steely and terrified and angrier than Howard Beale in Network. She will be winning the Best Actress Oscar come February. Make no mistake about it.

Still, though I liked it very much, I didn't love Zero Dark Thirty like I loved The Hurt Locker. There are sequences that look lifted directly from HBO's The Wire, and if ZDT is clear about torture as something wrong, the film asks no questions about USAmerican presence in Pakistan or Afghanistan or its black sites in other locations in the world. Not that the film needs to be more philosophical about the reasons for United States war efforts in the Middle East, but I would have liked it better had it taken USAmerican involvement in the Middle East a little less for granted.

16 September 2012

Telluride at Dartmouth #1

One of the perks of working for a College that is a thriving arts institution is that I get to see a few films from the Telluride Film Festival before they are given a nationwide release. I had no idea this kind of thing happened at schools like this one. (I have clearly gone to public school for too long. It is fancy here.)

The first movie I got to see here was Roger Michell's Hyde Park on Hudson which stars Bill Murray as Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

Honestly I don't actually think that there is much more to say about this movie.

If you look to the poster at left you will see that the movie is plainly a comedy. And it is a comedy, of the whimsical, fast-and-loose-with-history type. FDR is reimagined as a charming womanizer who also manages to be the generous, forgiving father we all wish we had. And life at Hyde Park on Hudson (which is a kind of summer home for FDR) is portrayed as identical to life in a fairy tale.

All of this, of course, got on my nerves, although the film does have one really beautiful moment where the King of England (George VI, at this time, who was most recently played to great acclaim – and with lots of sentiment – by Colin Firth in The King's Speech) gets really frustrated by his stutter while talking to FDR. Goddamn this stutter, he says. And FDR thinks for a beat and says, What stutter? It brought tears to my eyes, and it's a lovely moment.

But upon reflection, this bit of fantasy felt to me as phony as the rest of the movie. I mean, it's a lovely thought, but it's hardly realistic. The film is narrated by Laura Linney's character Daisy, and neither this character, nor anyone else in the President's retinue, could have known what FDR said to King George.

The movie's larger problem is Roger Michell's direction. He is never sure whether what he's directing is a comedy or a drama. In Hyde Park on Hudson's more serious moments, one feels awkward, as though the laughter suddenly stopped. And Michell doesn't know how to feel about FDR, either. Is he a bad man? Is he a great man? Are we supposed to understand that even great men are "human"?

There is a lot of hilarity about the King and Queen eating hot dogs, and Olivia Williams' Eleanor Roosevelt is the butt of countless jokes which felt to me both unkind and rather misogynist. Samuel West and Olivia Colman are both great as the King and Queen, and I loved Elizabeth Marvel, who plays the President's assistant. Mostly, however, I was unimpressed. It was like a candy-coated historical drama in the vein of The Help or a Lasse Hallström movie. Not my cup of tea.

08 February 2012

2012's Nominees: Part 2 of 10

The Descendants
5 Nominations
  • Picture
  • Director: Alexander Payne (Sideways)
  • Actor: George Clooney (Syriana, Michael Clayton, Up in the Air)
  • Adapted Screenplay: Alexander Payne (Election, Sideways), Nat Faxon, Jim Rash
  • Editing 
Director: Payne
Cast: George Clooney, Shailene Woodley, Beau Bridges, Nick Krause, Amara Miller, Robert Forster, Judy Greer, Matthew Lillard.

This is great. I am not used to really liking Alexander Payne movies, but this one was moving and sensitive and generous, and the performances are truly excellent. This already won the Golden Globe for Best Picture (Drama) which means that a lot of people like it even though it got only five nominations and Woodley got snubbed in the Supporting Actress category (a bit of a surprise). The screenplay may still win. If Clooney wins it will be his second acting Oscar. And he is great in this, so who could begrudge him?
Will Win: Adapted Screenplay
Could Win: Actor
My Rating: #16 out of 64

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo
5 Nominations
  • Actress: Rooney Mara
  • Cinematography: Jeff Cronenweth (The Social Network)
  • Editing
  • Sound Mixing
  • Sound Editing
Director: David Fincher
Cast: Daniel Craig, Mara, Robin Wright, Christopher Plummer, Stellan Skarsgård, Goran Visnjic, Joely Richardson.

Okay, so this wasn't my favorite movie in the world when it came out – I spent a lot of time comparing it to last year's Swedish version – but it is easily one of the best made film's of the year and this movie seriously got robbed of some nominations and I'll say it. Most importantly, I think it really deserved a nomination for Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross's incredible score, and while I didn't think the screenplay was anything to write home about, the art direction certainly was. Dragon Tattoo definitely deserves its cinematography nod here, and I am betting on it to take home one trophy.
Will Win: Sound Mixing
Could Win: Cinematography, Editing, Sound Editing
My Rating: #33 out of 64

Midnight in Paris
4 Nominations
  • Picture
  • Director: Woody Allen (Bullets over Broadway, Crimes and Misdemeanors, Hannah and Her Sisters, Broadway Danny Rose, Interiors, Annie Hall)
  • Original Screenplay: Woody Allen (Match Point, Deconstructing Harry, Mighty Aphrodite, Bullets over Broadway, Husbands and Wives, Alice, Crimes and Misdemeanors, Radio Days, Hannah and Her Sisters, The Purple Rose of Cairo, Broadway Danny Rose, Manhattan, Interiors, Annie Hall)
  • Art Direction: Hélène Dubreuil, Anne Seibel
Director: Allen
Cast: Owen Wilson, Rachel McAdams, Marion Cotillard, Carla Bruni, Kathy Bates, Tom Hiddleston, Alison Pill, Adrien Brody, Corey Stoll, Michael Sheen, Kurt Fuller, Mimi Kennedy.

This is why I can't be mad at the Academy for things. My favorites still get nominated for things. Four of the films in my top ten are nominated for Best Picture. It's hard for me to get angry about things like that. This movie deserves every accolade its getting. It's very funny, and smart, and boasts some superb performances. If you look at Allen's name up under Screenplay right there, you'll see that this is his fourteenth nomination for writing a movie. He is the man with the most writing nominations ever. He's won twice. I don't expect him to win this year, but the man is brilliant, and – evidently – he's back.
Will Win: N/A
Could Win: Screenplay
My Rating: #9 out of 64

The Help
4 Nominations
  • Picture
  • Actress: Viola Davis (Doubt)
  • Supporting Actress: Octavia Spencer
  • Supporting Actress: Jessica Chastain
Director: Tate Taylor
Cast: Emma Stone, Davis, Bryce Dallas Howard, Spencer, Chastain, Chris Lowell, Allison Janney, Cicely Tyson, Sissy Spacek, Ahna O'Reilly, Mike Vogel.

Viola Davis is great in this – she's also great in everything: Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, Solaris, Far from Heaven, Antwone Fisher. Even bad movies: Doubt, It's Kind of a Funny Story, you get the idea. I saw her once in a production of Lynn Nottage's Intimate Apparel and, well, I just love her. I will be completely delighted if she wins Best Actress. She's wonderful and she deserves an Oscar. Octavia Spencer has been doing excellent supporting work for years, as well, so I am delighted to see her get her due. And... I am not going to say another word about The Help.
Will Win: Supporting Actress
Could Win: Actress (this is really close, I think, but I am predicting Meryl to win)
My Rating: #55 out of 64

13 November 2011

Viola Davis


I know this was making the rounds a month or so ago, but I wanted to share it again. If The Help is dumb about race (and it is) the actress who anchors the film is certainly not, and the clarity and hope that she shares about representation and roles for people of color on film are communicated beautifully in this speech.

Love her.

15 September 2011

Smart about Race

So, on the way back from Chicago this summer, Julien, Becky and I were talking about The Help. The movie hadn't been released yet, but both Becky and I were skeptical. Julien asked about our skepticism. Do you think the movie will be racist?

The point, I said, was not that the movie would be racist. Most everything is racist. Hollywood itself, for that matter. But when I think about films, I told Julien that I think some films are smart about race and some films are stupid about race. I assumed from the trailer that The Help would be stupid about race.


I was right. The Help is actually extremely stupid about race. From its total ignorance about the state terror under which black people lived (and continue to live) in the South to its insistence on black women's love for the white children they're forced to raise to the almost total absence of black men in the film to the humorous way The Help deals with black women's fear of white men, The Help is just dumb about race.

Any film with a magic negro in it falls in the category dumb-about-race for me.

But all this got the three of us to thinking about what films are smart about race. I might need some feedback on this. I could not think of that many. These are the films I could think of:

Two films by Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck: Sugar and Half Nelson. The first is about a baseball player from the Dominican Republic who comes to the U.S. and is transplanted to a midwest farm team. The second is about a teacher who is addicted to crack. Half Nelson in particular taught me about my own racist prejudices when I watch a film. That film stars Ryan Gosling and Anthony Mackie. So good.

I also recently watched the film Claudine from 1974 with Diahann Carroll and James Earl Jones and found it funny and moving and extremely smart about race.

I always thought Monster's Ball was pretty smart about race, too, but it's been a while since I saw it, so I can't remember that all that well.

Of the films I've seen in the last ten years:
Precious.
The Class.
The Visitor.
The Last King of Scotland.
Caché.
Junebug.
Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle.
Dirty Pretty Things.
Raising Victor Vargas.

There are probably a couple more that I am missing here. Anyhow, the point is: the list as such is not very long.

Thoughts?