Posts

Showing posts with the label queer theory

you can take your moral turpitude...

Image
Bob Clark directed Black Christmas , Porky's and A Christmas Story . There is either something really wrong with that fact or something really awesome. On the one hand, those are three very different films. A horror film, a sex comedy and a nostalgic family picture. I don't think the odd man out here is A Christmas Story , though. I think it's Black Christmas . Black Christmas , whatever its faults--check this blog last December for details on that film and A Christmas Story --is a fairly straight forward film, played for realism (unlike the over-the-top remake). Porky's and A Christmas Story , on the other hand, are actually both quite nostalgic. The simpler time for A Christmas Story is 1939-40, before World War II really twisted the 20th century around, before the Cold War. The simpler time here in Porky's , on the other hand, is decade and a half later, World War II has come and gone, young men are fighting across the world in Korea now, but it's not t...

all you need is love

Image
Today's title is, at once, total bullshit, and profoundly true. I quoted a line from bell hooks regarding "love" tonight in my presentation on queer theory. Love, she says, involves "care, affection, recognition, respect, commitment, and trust, as well as honest and open communication" (1999, p. 5). Key to the profound truth above is all of these things. Love, the romantic, shallow stuff we see in most films--that isn't so interesting. But, if there's recognition and respect, you've got something. If there's commitment and trust, you could keep it. Or leave it behind and move on because maybe nonmonogamy is the way you want to go. Just looking for... And, I don't want to suggest that it can't be love and be temporary, that it can't be love and be left behind in the short term. Mother Culture tells us to seek out the long term, but research-- No, screw research for the moment. As they start singing "With a Little Help from My F...

where the rich played with the young and beautiful

Image
Moulin Rouge! is a movie. I don't mean that the obvious way because, well, that's obvious. I mean that the movie is almost constantly separating itself from the usual emersion and suspension of disbelief. It throws its contents in your face and then takes everything overboard so you cannot help but keep looking even as you recognize every falsity. The opening shot, for example, is a theater proscenium and the orchestra conductor conducts the Fox logo after the curtain opens. This framing device is deliberately artificial. But, that one's obvious. Less obvious is Toulouse's role as pseudo-narrator. The opening lines are his, and yet the rest of the movie tells us that it is Christian telling us this story. This means that Toulouse is telling us the story of Christian telling the story of, well, all the events we see. And, Toulouse is within that proscenium. Get into "Spectacular Spectacular" and you're several story levels deep. And, Christian is effect...

to make you a star

Image
First of all, I really wanted to listen to a commentary track tonight, but I cannot get a subtitle track to turn on, and I don't like doing commentary without subtitles... it's not like I've got this movie memorized just yet. Groundhog Day , sure--it'd be like bring on the commentary track because I know every word... and I've heard the commentary track like three times. But, Moulin Rouge! --I do not have it all memorized yet. The songs, maybe. But, not all the dialogue. Anyway, outside the world of this blog, it is Oscar day. Awards ended about an hour ago, as I am starting this entry. Since it is Oscar day, I thought it worth mentioning that Moulin Rouge! was nominated for best picture, for lead actress and for cinematography and editing and makeup and sound, and it won for costume design and art direction. Kidman won the Golden Globe for actress in a comedy or musical, and Craig Armstrong's score won--which is surprising; I know there are percentage standar...