pc in the movies
Lee S. Bumgarner
Why is it that movies seem to so much more important than other forms
of media? More people watch a popular t.v. show in one night than do watch a
very popular movie? I suspect some of it comes from the higher regard people
have for movies as a medium.
This higher respect comes inpart from the postion movies have in our
socity due to the age of the medium. People's lives have been changed by
movies. Also, I suspect some of a movies greater importance comes from the
vast expense of creating one. But part of it is simply we need something like
movies to talk about.
What gets on my nerves the most is when group starts to talk about how
bad a movie is because of this or that in it. The Lion King is bad because an
effenate lion is a bad guy. The Program is bad because some group of drunk
dumbasses decided to mimic something they saw in it. Where is all of these
leading?
Will we one day reach the point where *everything* in a movie has to be
checked so it won't offened *anybody*? I don't think movies are enough of a
social force to cause someone to think differently about a miniority or
anything else simply because of how they happened to be portrayed. Yes, maybe
images in a movie might renforce those already present, but not enough to
warrent editing the lyrics to a song (ie Alladion).
________________________________________________________________________________
Phone:7706 * Reality is only a consentual hallucination * Room: Wompler 106
lsbu...@vax1.acs.jmu.edu
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Billman
> Why is it that movies seem to so much more important than other forms
>of media?
It's because movies are not as accountable as other media. If a TV show
bombs, it's cancelled and soon forgotten. If a movie bombs, it's
occasionally looked upon as a work of art unappreciated by the masses.
This has happened so often, in fact, that some filmmakers neglect a
potential audience entirely while making a film under the pretense that
the film *has* to be made.
> This higher respect comes inpart from the postion movies have in our
>socity due to the age of the medium. People's lives have been changed by
>movies.
No more than any other medium. But perhaps I'm misinterpretting what you
mean by "changing lives"- could you elaborate?
> Will we one day reach the point where *everything* in a movie has to be
>checked so it won't offened *anybody*?
Yep. D2 (sequel to "The Mighty Ducks") is an example. Patriotic
American triumph over the evil... er, what was their name again? :-)
Can't tell the cold war is over, can you? [BIG grin]
Speaking of PC in the media, saw the Emmy's (Emmies? Emmys? I give up...)
last night. Learned some interesting things, too- like the fact that
it's "PC" for those in the various media to criticize conservatism no
matter what country they're in. Hearing the producer of Mystery! gripe
about the evils of the (British) administration these past 15 years
reminded me greatly of the tripe we in the United States heard two years
ago.
Also, I noticed that folks are still wearing the ol' red ribbon. Now
while I find AIDS a terrible disease for which we should be spending
great efforts finding a cure, I fail to see how ribbons are going to
accomplish this goal, especially now. Before, it was somewhat effective
in showing that this is something we need to be taking seriously instead
of criticizing those who have the disease. But now, I believe the only
folks ignorant enough to criticize those with HIV+/AIDS are people so set
in their ways as not to be swayed by red ribbons. So, why the ribbons?
As a measly attempt (for some, not all) to show that those wearing them
might actually care about something more than their paychecks, even while
they don't?
It all adds to the image many have of some sort of "Hollywood elite
conspiracy". My guess is that its nothing sinister at all, just the fact
that some folks (and there are plenty of exceptions to the rule, so bear
with me) have been pretending so long that they've lost a grip on
reality. Am I fighting strawmen? Yeah, probably. But bear in mind that
anything that goes on in the media or is discussed about the media is
rather inconsequential in the larger scope of things. What I'm saying,
then, isn't part of a noble crusade; just a part of a minor pet peeve.
Oh, well... The media will be the media. :-)
--
Jeff Billman jbi...@bgsuvax.bgsu.edu Bowling Green State Univ.
"Please file three copies of this electronic e-mail message in triplicate
as per the guidelines set forth by the Bureau of Redundancy Department,
which implemented these procedures."
Mike Weber
: LSBU...@vax1.acs.jmu.edu (Lee S. Bumgarner) writes:
: > Why is it that movies seem to so much more important than other forms
: >of media?
: It's because movies are not as accountable as other media. If a TV show
: bombs, it's cancelled and soon forgotten. If a movie bombs, it's
: occasionally looked upon as a work of art unappreciated by the masses.
: This has happened so often, in fact, that some filmmakers neglect a
: potential audience entirely while making a film under the pretense that
: the film *has* to be made.
Yeah, like any movie with Keanu Reeves or Sylvester Stallone in it...
: Speaking of PC in the media, saw the Emmy's (Emmies? Emmys? I give up...)
: last night. Learned some interesting things, too- like the fact that
: it's "PC" for those in the various media to criticize conservatism no
: matter what country they're in. Hearing the producer of Mystery! gripe
: about the evils of the (British) administration these past 15 years
: reminded me greatly of the tripe we in the United States heard two years
: ago.
: Also, I noticed that folks are still wearing the ol' red ribbon. Now
: while I find AIDS a terrible disease for which we should be spending
: great efforts finding a cure, I fail to see how ribbons are going to
: accomplish this goal, especially now. Before, it was somewhat effective
: in showing that this is something we need to be taking seriously instead
: of criticizing those who have the disease. But now, I believe the only
: folks ignorant enough to criticize those with HIV+/AIDS are people so set
: in their ways as not to be swayed by red ribbons. So, why the ribbons?
: As a measly attempt (for some, not all) to show that those wearing them
: might actually care about something more than their paychecks, even while
: they don't?
Simple. It's just like the liberal PC movement. All style, no
substance. They figure if they look like they care, no one will call
them on it.
: It all adds to the image many have of some sort of "Hollywood elite
: conspiracy". My guess is that its nothing sinister at all, just the fact
: that some folks (and there are plenty of exceptions to the rule, so bear
: with me) have been pretending so long that they've lost a grip on
: reality. Am I fighting strawmen? Yeah, probably. But bear in mind that
: anything that goes on in the media or is discussed about the media is
: rather inconsequential in the larger scope of things. What I'm saying,
: then, isn't part of a noble crusade; just a part of a minor pet peeve.
: Oh, well... The media will be the media. :-)
--
"This is a test of the Emergency Broadcast System. This is only a test.
Had this been an actual emergency, you'd be writhing on the ground in
unspeakable agony, bleeding from every orifice, with your blackened skin
falling away in ragged strips." -Geoff Miller