tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post1429552898849700526..comments2024-03-24T13:26:57.317-07:00Comments on Sergio Leone and the Infield Fly Rule: THE SLIFR MOVIE TREE HOUSE v.2011 #11: REVOLUTION AND SHOW BUSINESSDennis Cozzaliohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01954848938471883431noreply@blogger.comBlogger24125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-73217150747112102192012-01-24T18:01:15.730-08:002012-01-24T18:01:15.730-08:00Richard - I don't buy Malick's belief that...Richard - I don't buy Malick's belief that nature is benign. I understand your explanation of Malick's stance in those moments, but I, personally, don't buy the philosophy. It's always been my beef with Malick. Or, not "beef", but just something I notice, as in: "Oh yeah, theres that thing that he believes that I don't believe."<br /><br />And human beings are human beings, Anglo-European or Native American. In that context, Dan Callahan's comment is completely a propos, and that's why I loved it. I am with him entirely. <br /><br />Again, none of this impacted my enjoyment of the films or Malick's mastery of imagery, which is a total feast for the spirit. He's one of my favorite directors. But the "dino challenge" from Jim Emerson was a specific request, and that was my response to that particular moment.Sheila O'Malleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05859697259996394827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-12425622105619685382012-01-24T17:39:57.278-08:002012-01-24T17:39:57.278-08:00I don't get your response, Sheila.
What's...I don't get your response, Sheila.<br /><br />What's not to buy?<br /><br />You posited that Malick is saying a) nature is benign and b) Native Americans were innocent creatures without conflict. You said you didn't buy <i>that</i>, but that it was a philosophical difference.<br /><br />I commented that that was simply <i>not</i> what Malick is saying, or even showing. (I even suggested that Smith perhaps saw the Native Americans that way, which was meant to hint that ascribing notions to a director that properly belong to a character is less than ideal.) And you say you don't buy it, it's a philosophical difference. Buy what? It's not clear to me how you've even responded to my comment.<br /><br />Callahan's remarks are totally irrelevant precisely because Henry James novels on Anglo-American high society have literally no bearing on societies completely alien from them.Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08014014605639738887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-16285884674989572362012-01-24T14:17:27.425-08:002012-01-24T14:17:27.425-08:00Jason - really good point about Denzel! I agree: ...Jason - really good point about Denzel! I agree: he's another one of those "essence" guys.Sheila O'Malleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05859697259996394827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-90199049105813364252012-01-24T14:16:46.584-08:002012-01-24T14:16:46.584-08:00Joel - I did think that This Is Not a Film would b...Joel - I did think that This Is Not a Film would be getting some kind of release but now I'm not sure. And I just looked on IMDB and it says "DVD release" in Canada come end of January. So I am not sure what that means. I saw it at the NYFF.Sheila O'Malleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05859697259996394827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-27106334166410543552012-01-24T14:14:31.405-08:002012-01-24T14:14:31.405-08:00Richard - Yeah, I just don't buy it. Your com...Richard - Yeah, I just don't buy it. Your comments make sense, but I don't buy it. Like I said, it's a philosophical difference. I loved the movie, and think I articulated my thought process pretty clearly through the sequence. And I thought Dan Callahan's comment was perfect!Sheila O'Malleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05859697259996394827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-51993875502893921692012-01-24T11:39:15.687-08:002012-01-24T11:39:15.687-08:00The comments about The Tree of Life trouble me som...The comments about <i>The Tree of Life</i> trouble me some. Malick isn’t saying that nature is benign, only that <i>grace exists in nature</i>. That raptor is perfectly capable of eating, or simply destroying, the other dinosaur, and perhaps another time it would, but there’s no need right then, so off it goes.<br /><br />In the <i>New World</i>, I don’t see the film as depicting the Native Americans as “saintly and blithely innocent”—though for sure John Smith sees them that way, which is an important difference. They are, though, innocent of European notions of property, which is absolutely, fundamentally crucial. In any event, of course they would have had conflict prior to the advent of the Europeans, but there’s so reason to think those conflicts would play according to how Europeans viewed things (and how we do, by extension). Which is why Dan Callahan’s remark about Henry James is simply irrelevant.Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08014014605639738887noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-84362041046234501532012-01-24T09:03:41.237-08:002012-01-24T09:03:41.237-08:00Jason B: I've been living in a Jason-heavy uni...Jason B: I've been living in a Jason-heavy universe since the 2nd grade when there were 3 Jason's in my class on up through today when there are 3 Jason's in my building at work. Wherever I go, there will be others.<br /><br />I'd have to add Denzel Washington to the conversation as well. I think part of the "essence acting" aura is that you feel like you've seen more of someone's movies than you have. Denzel's been in movies for 30 years, but looking at his IMDB I only see 7-8 titles I've actually seen, which I can hardly believe; if you asked me without looking I would've guessed I'd seen twice as many.Jason McGensyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06642280227698493182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-73836942926381119002012-01-24T08:34:45.548-08:002012-01-24T08:34:45.548-08:00Sheila/Ed, is there a way to see This is Not a Fil...Sheila/Ed, is there a way to see This is Not a Film other than torrents (which I can't access right now?). There seemed to be only clips available via You Tube. I haven't done a deep Google video search yet, so it could be out there - but I see it's not on Netflix or Amazon either.Joel Bockohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-44962433518101356702012-01-24T05:23:20.940-08:002012-01-24T05:23:20.940-08:00Jason B. - your comment about Roberts always "...Jason B. - your comment about Roberts always "playing herself" is really what I meant when I referred to "persona acting" or "essence acting" - when a star's force of individual personality is THE REASON they become famous. This is what the studio system used to be so good at managing and nurturing. You have John Wayne. Katharine Hepburn. James Cagney. These people were always recognizably "themselves" - of course getting a lot of nuance into it - but that kind of acting is out of style now. Now what is praised is versatility and transformation. Put on a funny nose and limp and win an Oscar!! (exaggeration). <br /><br />But those who become famous for "playing themselves" often engender a greater love in fans - because they'll show up to see what that person does, regardless of the material. <br /><br />And Roberts doesn't have a "studio system" behind her - but she has picked projects pretty well, I think - playing to her strengths, and not nervously trying to ugly herself up, or play bleak depressive characters - which would be out of her wheelhouse. <br /><br />Angelina Jolie is another "essence actor", although her persona is more intimidating and less lovable than Roberts'. I'm speaking in generalities now. <br /><br />If you have a "self" that is strong enough of an entity that audiences want to see that - (and you can count on only one or two hands the people for whom that is true, especially today) - then I think there is no shame in going for it. Of course it can easily tip over into self-parody (like the Valentine's Day moment you mention). It can totally be a trap. But so far with Roberts - the majority of her fans have not tired of her "self" and Pretty Woman was 20 years ago. That's insane!!<br /><br />She should be put under glass and studied.Sheila O'Malleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05859697259996394827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-69425089435037174122012-01-24T04:16:35.636-08:002012-01-24T04:16:35.636-08:00...Marion Cotillard seems to elevate everything sh...<em>...Marion Cotillard seems to elevate everything she's in, even things I don't really like...</em><br /><br />Ed, funny you mention her, because she popped into my head, too. And I thought: I don't think she really has the body of work yet to support it, but in my gut I have a feeling she could be one of those special ones. (Of course, <em>La Vie En Rose</em> is still brutal; that doesn't help.)Jason Bellamyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18150199580478147196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-54138106153513439252012-01-24T03:46:22.278-08:002012-01-24T03:46:22.278-08:00Ed - I am so excited for you to see This Is Not a ...Ed - I am so excited for you to see This Is Not a Film. I won't give it away, but the credits at the end ... and then the dedication that fills the screen in the final moment ... It is, hands down, the most powerful couple of seconds I have had in a movie theatre in a long long time.Sheila O'Malleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05859697259996394827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-48999261082573601062012-01-24T03:41:45.925-08:002012-01-24T03:41:45.925-08:00Joel - When Inglourious Basterds came out, I saw a...Joel - When Inglourious Basterds came out, I saw a really great interview with Pitt. He said that early on in his career he would "stack up" projects, so that he would be booked a couple of years out. That makes sense for a younger man, successful, but wanting to keep himself in the game. He no longer "stacks up" projects. He leaves himself open to whatever might come along. That is a VERY relaxed position for a movie star to take - and it really shows in his work. <br /><br />He also seems HAPPY. He seems to get a KICK out of acting. I find that to be one of the most attractive qualities of any movie star. Take it seriously - but not TOO seriously. If you're talented, relax with it ... <br /><br />That relaxation was evident way back in the day with THELMA AND LOUISE. I was blown away by his performance in TREE OF LIFE, and also by MONEYBALL. Two in one year? Two totally different characters? <br /><br />It's a tremendous career and it just keeps going!Sheila O'Malleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05859697259996394827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-20861509914659319702012-01-23T20:48:31.071-08:002012-01-23T20:48:31.071-08:00Fantastic stuff here, Sheila and everyone else. I&...Fantastic stuff here, Sheila and everyone else. I've been reading along with the Tree House and been too overwhelmed to comment - not to mention that I'm so out of touch with current movies - but it's been a great conversation, maybe even better than last year's. Sheila, your words about Iran and Panahi are always inspiring, and now I really want to see <i>This Is Not a Film</i>, which sounds amazing, equally depressing and empowering. <br /><br />Re: actors today who will have timeless legacies, I'd say that Clooney (especially) and Pitt are the obvious locks, they're some of our only modern actors who really recall the classic Hollywood stars. As Jason says, the Clooney/Grant comparison is very convincing, and as with Grant, I can watch Clooney in just about anything and always enjoy him. I like the mention of Kate Winslet, too, a really interesting actress who blew me away in Todd Haynes' <i>Mildred Pierce</i>. I hope you're right about Streep leading the way for women to continue getting good parts as they age, because I really want to see Winslet doing great stuff for years to come.<br /><br />I go back and forth on whether I think DiCaprio is great or not, but I'm sure he will be remembered, if only because he's had such a run of big, interesting, not-always-successful movies in recent years.<br /><br />Maybe she's just on my mind because I recently finally saw <i>Midnight In Paris</i>, but Marion Cotillard seems to elevate everything she's in, even things I don't really like, like <i>Inception</i>, just with the sheer force of her presence, and that to me suggests an actress who will be remembered. And when she's in something good, oh boy.<br /><br />Oh, and I couldn't agree more with this: "I realized very early on in writing about movies that I have no 'guilty' pleasures." Yes! That's such an aggravating term, a way of admitting that one likes something while still trying to seem "above" it. <i>Mean Girls</i> is just great, why feel guilty about admitting it?Ed Howardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18014222247676090467noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-84682934401399738162012-01-23T19:54:20.915-08:002012-01-23T19:54:20.915-08:00Pitt has made some really, really good choices. Mo...Pitt has made some really, really good choices. More than any other star that immediately comes to mind, he's consistently appeared in movies that will be widely remembered. I suppose it's a matter of choosing the right directors, but then there's also the case of Assassination of Jesse James, whose director had only made one previous film (seven years before). So I guess he has a nose for good material.Joel Bockohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-19000535662998327142012-01-23T17:47:03.658-08:002012-01-23T17:47:03.658-08:00Of course ... four people having a conversation an...Of course ... four people having a conversation and there are two Jasons. So ...<br /><br />Jason: In terms of a career we'll appreciate even more when the star is gone, Tom Hanks is a <em>great</em> choice. He was "The Man" there for a stretch, but now we take him for granted, I think, maybe because he's never had that Clooney/Grant sex appeal that screams STAR! But his body of work? Incredible.<br /><br />Sheila: Oh, I think <em>Groundhog Day</em> is the best comedy made in my lifetime. ("Too early for flapjacks?")<br /><br />As for actresses ... I'm a big Winslet fan, but I didn't include her because her performances seem much more daring and wide-ranging than Roberts, who, again, really just keeps playing "herself" -- sometimes literally in whichever <em>Ocean's</em> movie that was, and sometimes just a hair beyond, such as in the awful <em>Valentine's Day</em>, which includes a bloopers reel at the end in which she recites dialogue from <em>Pretty Woman</em> as if to confirm that to us she's always just "Julia."Jason Bellamyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18150199580478147196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-29182971471092636462012-01-23T16:47:56.763-08:002012-01-23T16:47:56.763-08:00Great addition here, Sheila. Good for Spielberg an...Great addition here, Sheila. Good for Spielberg and Weinstein - although the cynic in me notes that it's apparently easier to get a foreign dictatorship to change its rules than the Academy itself...Joel Bockohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-27012146883795091062012-01-23T16:32:23.456-08:002012-01-23T16:32:23.456-08:00Jason - Well, Casablanca wasn't seen as an &qu...Jason - Well, Casablanca wasn't seen as an "important" movie at the time. It was just another Warner Brothers production, with two big stars, of course - but it was just one of many.<br /><br />and yes, Tom Hanks was in some pretty important pictures - but Sleepless in Seattle will probably last the longest. <br /><br />And it is my belief that Groundhog Day will outlast them all. That film is a classic.Sheila O'Malleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05859697259996394827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-17166069947777877972012-01-23T14:30:47.243-08:002012-01-23T14:30:47.243-08:00He's a bit earlier, but I think Harrison Ford ...He's a bit earlier, but I think Harrison Ford is another one. I have a feeling his career is going to start to look even more mythic once he has left this earth. Currently, it's like he's fallen off the radar - like he's no longer "relevant" - but I think all of that will pass away in the future. It was a giant career. Very important.Sheila O'Malleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05859697259996394827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-1489105401942235842012-01-23T13:03:45.363-08:002012-01-23T13:03:45.363-08:00At least for people from my generation (I'm 27...At least for people from my generation (I'm 27) I think Tom Hanks is a lock to be looked back on as a legend from this era (well, moreso the 90s than the current era), he clearly plays a version of the "Tom Hanks" persona regularly and his movies are diverse and ingrained in our <a href="http://www.davidbordwell.net/blog/2007/11/17/the-adolescent-window/%22" rel="nofollow">"adolescent window"</a> (to borrow David Bordwell's concept). Forrest Gump, Saving Private Ryan, Sleepless in Seattle, Apollo 13, Cast Away... Not all GREAT or IMPORTANT movies, but then neither is Arsenic and Old Lace.<br />My friends regularly quote That Thing You Do and A League of Their Own, 15-20 years later. <br /><br />I can see his work being remembered as defining the 1990s zeitgeist (whatever that means).Jason McGensyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06642280227698493182noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-88499874868704324062012-01-23T12:51:51.292-08:002012-01-23T12:51:51.292-08:00Jason - I actually do love Erin Brockovich, but I...Jason - I actually do love Erin Brockovich, but I do see your point. Roberts - a rarity among actresses - was anointed to her fame by the FANS. Tom Cruise was, too. (Brad Pitt, too, come to think of it). These people are different from the ones either anointed by the industry or who have a good run because their agents get them good salaries that then up their worth. Actresses dream of generating a worldwide response of WE LOVE YOU like Roberts did with Pretty Women. But maybe you're right - maybe after her death (morbid to even discuss it!) her work will seem LESS. Who knows.<br /><br />It'll be interesting to see what happens as she gets older. (And her career is already getting more interesting). Same with Kate Winslet, who is another one I think might have a body of work that withstands the test of time. Winslet is just getting interesting the older she gets - and now with Meryl Streep as the pioneer: women can obviously do leading lady parts well past their prime. Joan Crawford and Bette Davis were doing horror movies and TV movies at the end (always interestingly - but they were no longer opening pictures on the strength of their names - the way Streep is now). Like I wrote in my piece on Iron Lady (which is not a particularly good movie - but it's Streep's best performance, along with Death Becomes Her) - Streep is in uncharted territory right now. She is having the kind of career that stage actresses in the 19th century had, playing Ophelia and Viola well into their 50s, their star power carrying them. <br /><br />But movie actresses have a hard time. The public is unforgiving towards women's looks anyway. So the Streep Thing is changing the game entirely. Opening doors and possibilities for female actresses. Not just as awesome supporting parts but still as Leading Ladies. <br /><br />And Clooney. Yeah.Sheila O'Malleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05859697259996394827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-26440463246581291112012-01-23T12:38:52.208-08:002012-01-23T12:38:52.208-08:00Joel - I've been loving reading your comments ...Joel - I've been loving reading your comments on our different posts here. It's been a huge contribution - so thank you!<br /><br />Oh, the Two Dollar Theatre. I moved to NYC in the mid-90s, a broke grad school student, and the Two Dollar Theatre allowed me to go to the movies as often as I wanted to. I am lucky now in that I get to see most current releases in press screenings (which are free, obviously) - but no WAY could I see as much as I do on my freelance salary. That Two Dollar Theatre was a godsend. I still have some hilarious memories of that place. People shouting at the screen when ENGLISH PATIENT was playing, totally engrossed (I did not like the movie - but boy, the crowd there was into it). My earliest memories of movie-going are of drive-ins, and it's a similar really good-feeling to me. Art as a popular art form. <br /><br />My favorite movies were made in the 1930s and 40s, when the gap between popular and "arty" was not so wide. <br /><br />I mentioned the three actors I did as potentially having a longer legacy than their life spans because I feel that the three of them have indelible personae - things that say, "This is Brad Pitt", "This is Julia Roberts" - in the way the old-school studio stars did. For some reason, the impact of that work continues to grow. I say "for some reason" - that's not quite true. I have my theories on it - what I call "essence acting" or "persona acting" - acting that comes from a strong cinematic-magic persona - it is something that cannot be recreated, replicated, bought, sold, or predicted. <br /><br />The FANS chose Julia Roberts as the next big star and she is the only actress of her generation that can say that. So again, time will tell. <br /><br />and thank you so much for your thoughts on Iran. <br /><br />I am thrilled that A Separation and Certified Copy are actually getting Oscar buzz - not that Oscars indicate WORTH - but more often than not, Iranian films are banned in their own countries and never get screened there - which then disqualifies them from Oscar consideration. (There are great stories of Spielberg - speaking of which - and Harvey Weinstein and others - writing desperate letters to the Culture of the Interior in Iran, begging them to screen such and such a film for at lEAST a week so that it could be considered for an Oscar. Of course those letters never work - but it just goes to show you: when the pressure is on, when the spotlight shines on the situation - from a globally important place such as Hollywood - it is NOT a good situation for Iran.) And so these two films getting so much attention - during the very same year that Panahi was imprisoned - is fanTASTIC. FANTASTIC. <br /><br />I have no idea if it will make a difference. But I know it is putting the pressure on the mullahs (hence, the roundups, and all of that). Dangerous times. I don't have rose-colored glasses. But still: there is hope, as long as tyranny does not get to express itself with total impunity. <br /><br />And lastly, to your comments about being sneered at/dismissed due to your taste: I realized very early on in writing about movies that I have no "guilty" pleasures. It is common to get embarrassed about a popular movie one likes, and dismiss it as, "well, I love to pop in Mean Girls - it's a guilty pleasure ..."<br /><br />To me, pleasure is pleasure. I don't feel guilty about thinking Rob Corddry is brilliant in Hot Tub Time Machine, and I don't feel guilty about thinking Blue Crush is a legitimately fantastic movie with all kinds of interesting things to say about class, race, and gender, the culture clash in Hawaii, the second-class citizen status of many female athletes, etc. Serious stuff, sure, but it's still a movie featuring hot girls in bikinis and hot guys on boogie boards. I love the damn thing and I don't feel guilty about it!<br /><br />Thanks again for all your comments!Sheila O'Malleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05859697259996394827noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-70837763478795071512012-01-23T08:16:46.918-08:002012-01-23T08:16:46.918-08:00Jesus Christ, if the Two Dollar Theatre still exis...Jesus Christ, if the Two Dollar Theatre still existed, I don't think I'd go frequently, I think I'd squat there. That's exactly my vision of what "the movies" should be. I love the internet for that - the one problem is that it isn't public enough (it's public in one way, certainly moreso than home viewing of video on a TV, but not in other obvious ones).<br /><br />I sympathize completely on your point. In the past few months, I've been sneered at for "going to see BORING seven-hour movies just because they were 'ART'" (I think the person was referring to Love Exposure, which is 4 hours and about the un-stuffiest movie you can imagine) and simultaneously by others for defending Spielberg, not without reservations, as an artist not merely some corporate hack. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Death to all snobs and reverse-snobs...<br /><br />As for the part of your post dealing with Iran, it's tremendous, one of the best things I've read on the subject. Sadly, I realize my disengagement from the contemporary scene, while sparing my brain cells for a lot of time- and money-wasting fluff has also severed me from the important things that are going on too. Catching up with the past, I've missed out on some of what's going on with the present.<br /><br />Your point #2 in your comment is essential and inspiring. Obviously, terrible situations foster this kind of investment and attention but it strikes me that what we need is more of that attitude across the board (hopefully without the same drastic causes as in Iran). Films which speak to people's experience, and which people in turn respond to. This doesn't at need to mean neorealism or documentaries, although it can. Hollywood fantasies, the examples of the "show business" you mention again, did this in the past though personally I believe such mass myths will have to arise from somewhere other than the mainstream film industry in the near future.Joel Bockohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11238338958380683893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-70505472335080662232012-01-22T17:59:52.626-08:002012-01-22T17:59:52.626-08:00I would love to hear people's responses to my ...<em>I would love to hear people's responses to my speculation about which actors today may go on to have a timeless legacy, in which their work starts to GAIN importance following their deaths. I could go into why I chose the three I did - but would love to hear what others might have to say.</em><br /><br />It's a good question. I think DiCaprio and Pitt are both very good guesses. Clooney comes to mind, of course, because he's our modern day Grant: always looks good in a suit, usually kinda-sorta plays himself (not without range, but not a character actor either), selects his roles very carefully and, like Grant, doesn't over-promote. Oh, and handsome and oozing charm; did I mention those?<br /><br />I'm not sure about Roberts. With the exception of <em>Pretty Woman</em> and <em>My Best Friend's Wedding</em>, and, to a lesser degree, maybe <em>Notting Hill</em>, I never hear people say they love Roberts' <em>movies</em>, even though most everyone loves Julia Roberts (off the screen if not always on it). Perfect example: No one has ever said to me, "Oh, <em>Erin Brockovich</em>; love that movie!" Going back to what you wrote in your post, I agree that Roberts is smart with her roles, but, as for the question in your comment, I'm not sure I see her work gaining in importance after her death (no more than it seems to happen on average, that is). So you might have to convince me on that one. And yet, I'm not sure I can think of a better example on the female side, so maybe you're exactly right.Jason Bellamyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18150199580478147196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8795280.post-79257581808291272022012-01-22T07:46:26.908-08:002012-01-22T07:46:26.908-08:00I would like to add two things:
1. I would love ...I would like to add two things:<br /><br />1. I would love to hear people's responses to my speculation about which actors today may go on to have a timeless legacy, in which their work starts to GAIN importance following their deaths. I could go into why I chose the three I did - but would love to hear what others might have to say.<br /><br />2. When I said that "Iranian film fans" are aware of the fact that Panahi's plight is well-known the world over - that was too narrow a term. I should have said "Iranian citizens". It is an important distinction: films and serious commentary about films can often exist in a bell jar in more privileged societies, where cinephiles and serious critics talk to one another about movies, and the "masses" don't really pay attention. This is not the case in Iran - where their film industry is something that makes ALL Iranian citizens proud. On the ground in Iran, everyone knows that we all "out here" are aware of what is happening. While the fight is still theirs, it matters a great deal that the world is AWARE of the situation and that a groundswell of support and protest exists. This doesn't just matter to "film fans" in Iran. Everyone has a sense of ownership and pride in the artists of their country.Sheila O'Malleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05859697259996394827noreply@blogger.com