Part 2 of my podcast w/Uncle Crizzle
So late last night, standing in line for BRUNO (see my Twitter feed to the right, as of 130pm EDT, for a quick reax), I get a call from my mother asking what “mo-fo” means. Obviously she had listened to Part 1 of my Podcast interview with Craig Lindsey for his Crizzle’s Critical Condition. (This is, BTW, the only interview in recorded history to have someone say both “mo-fo” and “mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.”)
Now Craig has put up Part 2 of the interview at his blog on the News-Observer site … I’m expecting a call probably scolding me for wasting brain cells on Beavis & Butt-head.
Thanks a million, Craig… on more counts than one.
Rightwing Film Geek 
Victor- thank you. As a film major at an uber-liberal college and a Christian, it warms my cockles to hear a strong voice of faith in the film-snob racket. You employed the twitter criticism form beautifully concerning “Away We Go” and “Whatever Works.” I thought the Nazi-propaganda comparison was cheap, but I agree that Woody’s latest put out in the open what he *really* thinks about, well, everyone who is not a nihilist, hedonist, bohemian, etc.
But I think the weirdest thing is how timid the bile is in “Whatever”- too earnest to be satire, too cutesy to be remotely serious. Like the scene where the mother talks about how “I prayed to Jesus like I never prayed before” during her financial crisis, waving her arms and talking in a blustery mumbo-jumbo voice (because that is what silly religious people do). She finishes: “I prayed to God just to give me one sign that it wasn’t all for nothing” (or something like that). Larry David gives a snide retort- “And nothing happened, right?” (blah blah blah, you religious people are silly) And that’s THE END OF THE SCENE. The mother doesn’t even get to act preachy and obnoxious in defense of her faith; Woody can’t be bothered to allow her any reaction. Apparently, Woody considers David’s snarky comment a victory in itself (since he proves completely correct about her). And the scene where the father “comes out” is so painfully painless- the “Yup, He’s a decorator” joke is clever but lazily set-up and obviously insufficient to make even the most wishy-washy Christian shrug off their beliefs instantly. For a film where the protagonist (our tour guide/mascot in Bohemia Land) talks so much about the world being full of suffering and violence, the proceedings are oddly bland and amusing- everyone transforms smoothly into a New York hedonist and lives in pleasant “entropy” for all of their days.
For a movie with something to say about suffering and violence, I have a recommendation, if you haven’t seen it: “Drag Me to Hell.” I just saw it a few hours ago and immediately wanted to tell the world. (and what better way to do that then… uh… comment on your blog?) The title is not a joke or gimmick; the movie really is about the theological concept Hell- how we fear it and how we try to muscle, weasel, and whimper our way out of it… to no avail without the grace of God. This may not be Raimi’s intention; the last three words of that sentence are only vaguely suggested. Raimi may have just wanted to make an effective (and how!) campy horror movie. After all, the movie is gleefully chock-full of outlandish special effects and cheesy pseudo-spiritual mythology. But camp or not, I was terrified far beyond the pleasurable scare response that typical well-done horror provokes; I was afraid to my very soul. Seriously- try to see that one if you haven’t.
God bless,
Daniel
Comment by Daniel O'Sullivan | July 14, 2009 |
1) That was a bit long.
2) I used “then” when I meant “than.” How could I have let this happen???
Comment by Daniel O'Sullivan | July 14, 2009 |