Change Your Image
tinydr47
Reviews
Gone with the Wind (1939)
Beautifully Shot, Utter Trash
Before I eviscerate this film, a word in its favor. This is, in many ways, a wonderfully shot movie. It is certainly a masterpiece of Technicolor, with lovely painted backdrops, etc. Much of the acting is, in my opinion, wonderful. Personally I think Scarlett as a character falls a bit flat, but beyond that I have few complaints. Except, perhaps, for the nearly 4 hour running time... but hey, people like an event, I won't knock them for it.
That being said, here are a few problems I have with the film: note that some of these objections could easily be answered by turning to the censorship of the period, but I don't see that as much of a response.
1. It "whitewashes" slavery. From the very beginning the film takes cheap-outs to avoid difficult and real subjects. In the beginning, the overseer's impregnation of the "white-trash woman" is clearly a poor substitute for what they're really getting at, the rape of black women. The slaves/servants are portrayed throughout as stupid and or slow, or liars (Prissy for example). Without coming right out and saying it, a later reminiscence on the "glorious past" casts slavery in a similar light as Joel Chandler Harris, essentially as "the laughing times."
2. Misogyny. Scarlett (letter anybody?) seems to make the key mistake of sexual agency, and of not knowing her place. Again and again it is drummed into our heads how "evil" she is for conniving to steal other women's men. Again and again it is driven in that women should know their place (Belle for instance, while noble, is clearly a "fallen woman" or a "low woman" who realizes her position and respects it). Ultimately Scarlett "must" pay the price.
Sexual violence is also simply passed-over. The build-up to the "rape" scene (I'll call it what is so clearly is, non-consensual sex, aka rape) alludes again-and-again to what will come... what with Rhett and his "if I want to come in, no door will keep me out" tirade and demonstration. Bam! Kicks down the door. And what is Scarlett's apparent reaction to the morning-after Rhett has drunkenly raped her? Happiness?
Again, I laud the film for its technical achievements. However, if you were born post-lib or raised by a feminist in the post Women's Lib years, or perhaps are a History major and not someone simply nostalgically wishing for a past that never existed as portrayed, I would urge a critical eye. I am reminded of a quote from Vincent Canby of the NYT regarding Liliana Cavani's "The Night Porter" and I hope my direct reference of the source will suffice for copyright purposes. To butcher his comment somewhat, I have just reviewed "a piece of junk."
Munich (2005)
In some ways it worked, in many ways it was terrible
To begin I have to say I can see in some ways why other people may have liked this movie. The movie moves along well enough, and the general storyline is engaging.
That said I have strongly felt, since "A.I.," that Spielberg is a disturbed individual. "Munich" did not change my opinion. In two cases I found what I felt to be gratuitous sexualized violence (the killing of the Dutch woman and the final "love scene"). I suspect Spielberg was going for some grittiness in those scenes, but it felt hollow and unnecessary to me. Another word that comes to mind is "exploitative."
The lack of subtleness in the Golda Meir and the "you look like your mother" part, which I found to be mind-numbing, is essentially repeated again and again throughout the movie. Wait, what? We're (Americans) suppose to identify with Avner and see our own War on Terror in the same light? No way! Could the fact that all of the Israelis speak English and the final scene with the Twin Towers in the background made that point a little more obvious?
Yeah, OK, if the initial scene's dialog had been in Hebrew with English subtitles the movie would never have done well with American audiences, I can accept that part. But given the subject matter and the analogy Spielberg is making, it would've added a lot of subtlety and reduced the opportunity for criticizing the film for having a pro-Israel bias.
Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song (1971)
don't just take other people's word for it, see it.
reading others reviews of this film, I find myself both agreeing to some degree, and alternately being in complete disagreement.
"sweet sweetback" is a confusing movie. the first time i saw it, having already been exposed to the plethora of "blaxploitation" that followed it, my reaction was... "huh?"
really... people aren't being entirely unfair, this movie is kind of a big mess in some ways... on the other hand, one could say the same thing about some of the writings of say, James Joyce. And like Joyce I think it's a piece of work (and yes, art) that needs to be meditated upon again-and-again, not simply dismissed.
I do, as I implied, at the same time disagree with the negative reviews posted by some others... clearly everyone has a right to their interpretation, myself I think, as I've watched the film again-and-again, that it deserves far more credit than it's being given...
The Russians Are Coming the Russians Are Coming (1966)
eh... this is supposed to be a comedy?
I'm glad I got this out of the library, because I didn't personally think it was all that funny. I can see how living through the scare years of the Cold War might've changed that, but I also think (no offense to anyone) that people of that generation seem to have a certain appreciation for a type of humor that seems a little stilted today. It was perhaps the phony Russian accents that bugged me the most, personally I thought the Cape Anne impression had charm, and was somewhat convincing visually. All-in-all I'd say it's worth seeing, at least as a reference piece... not paying to see it would be a plus.