How Would Wall?E Vote?

Posted on July 9, 2008 at 8:00 am

The chattering classes are already going after that sweet little robot Wall?E. Some on the right accused the film of being leftist propaganda because of its environmental message. As the New York Times points out:
Blogland moves at the speed of thought, however, and already the right-wing backlash to the right-wing backlash against “Wall-E” is underway.
Other conservatives are embracing the film as an exemplar of conservative values. Beliefnet’s own Crunchy Con Rod Dreher writes that Wall?E

embodies a traditionalist conservative critique of modernity, one that advocates a more or less Aristotelian view of humanity and politics. Philosophically, this is one of the most subversive movies I’ve ever seen. Crunchy cons, this movie is for us.
Of course the movie is neither conservative nor liberal. If all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. And if all you look at is partisan politics, everything you see has to be categorized as either for or against whatever position you are espousing. This is especially the case if you are on deadline — or if you would like to leverage a hugely popular movie by attempting to appropriate it for your cause.
Like all great art, “Wall?E” is far too nuanced and layered to be used as anyone’s soundbite. And the attempts to do so say far more about the speaker than they do about the message of the film and the views of the people who made it. Those who argue that the film is “leftist propaganda about the evils of mankind” are saying that it is left-wing to point out that human beings have been careless with the earth’s resources in a way that could lead to making the planet uninhabitable and that corporations do not always have the best interests of the community as their top priority. Beliefnet’s Crunchy Con argues that this critique is a fundamental misunderstanding of the true nature of conservatism.
Technology emerges as a villain here — but it’s a complicated villain, as I’ll explain. Technology allowed for the development of the consumer economy, and the creation of the fantastic spaceship that allowed humanity to escape an earth it despoiled with technology. But technology also shaped the consciousness of the humans. It led them to break with nature (Nature), and to think of technology as something that delivered them from nature. As humanity became more technologically sophisticated, the film argues, they became ever more divorced from Nature, and their own nature…Consequently, they’ve become slaves of both technology and their own base appetites, and have lost what makes them human.

(more…)

Do Movie Critics Matter?

Posted on July 6, 2008 at 8:00 am

In 2006, Time asked whether movie critics still mattered. Since then, more than 30 major national critics have retired or been laid off and there has been a lot of commentary about the pros and cons of the democratization of movie reviews. The internet has erased the boundaries between professional and amateur critics as well as the boundaries of geography and outlet. You don’t have to live in Chicago to read Roger Ebert and you don’t have to be Roger Ebert to be read.
As one of the beneficiaries of the new outlets made available on the internet (I was one of the very first critics to post online, 13 years ago this month), I have mixed feelings. I am delighted with the way that the internet has made it possible to read such a wide range of reviews. I especially love Rotten Tomatoes, the best place to read all the critics, which is now celebrating its 10th anniversary. But I am sorry that some of our wisest, most knowledgeable, most insightful, and most graceful writers are disappearing from the conversation. The bloggers who contributed to the loss of MSM critics have documented and even lamented this decimation of the ranks. thumbs down col.gif
With a bit of gallows humor, Patrick Goldstein of the L.A. Times, which covers Hollywood the way the Wall Street Journal covers stocks, calls producer Avi Lerner his favorite critic. Few professional critics would disagree with his assessment of The Love Guru: “The worst movie I’ve seen in my life. It was so stupid I wanted to cry.” And this from the producer of such classics as “Shark Attack” and Rambo. With more than a bit of glee, the producers of the execrable Norbit pointed out that it received reviews from professional critics that ranged from disgusted to horrified and managed to make more than $150 million.
But critics are about more than telling people which movies are good and which are bad. Critics who understand the medium can help audiences understand what makes them good or bad and can provide background and context and their own insight and wit. A good review of a bad movie can be a pleasure to read. When movies are good, critics are very, very good, but when they’re bad, we’re better.
Slate’s Erik Lundegaard (note, an expert on business, not movies) writes that on a per-screen basis, movies recommended by critics make more money. “Critically acclaimed films average about $2,000 more per screen than critically lambasted films…Percentagewise, the critic effect is less pronounced for the supposedly critic-proof blockbusters, but it’s still there.”
I like Lundegaard’s idea of publishing brief non-spoiler reviews the date of release and longer, more thoughtful reviews on message boards a few weeks later, inviting audiences to participate in the discussion. Slate’s “spoiler” podcast is a variation. They are separate reviews intended for people who have already seen the movie, and I really enjoy them.
But what I like best in Lundegaard’s essay is his conclusion, which fits with my sense of, well, fitness and my belief in efficient markets (over the long term) in both of my careers: “he main point of all of this is something obvious yet little-heard in our bottom-line culture: Quality matters. Yes, it even matters in the ledger books.”

My Visit to Green Gables and Prince Edward Island

Posted on July 1, 2008 at 12:00 pm

2008 Nova Scotia cruise 355.jpg As promised, here are two of my pictures from our visit to the home that inspired L.M. Montgomery to write Anne of Green Gables just 100 years ago. Ms. Montgomery never lived here but it belonged to a relative and she visited it often and loved it dearly.
2008 Nova Scotia cruise 343.jpg It is easy to see why, and it is also easy to picture a red-headed, gray-eyed girl with a large imagination sleeping in this room.

Related Tags:

Commentary

Family of the Week: Will Smith, Jada Pinkett-Smith, Jaden, and Willow

Posted on July 1, 2008 at 8:00 am

Will Smith likes to joke that he owns the 4th of July, and it is true that he starred in two of the hugest hits to open on the 4th, “Men in Black” and “Independence Day.” He’s hoping to do it again this week with “Hancock,” but he’s going up some competition in his own house. His daughter Willow co-stars in the American Girls movie, “Kit Kittredge,” also opening this week. Like her big brother Jaden, who co-starred with his dad in “The Pursuit of Happyness,” Willow has all of the grace, charm, charisma, and screen-holding naturalness of both of her parents, and a sensational smile. Smith may just have to share his big date this year.

Related Tags:

Commentary

FCC Commissioner Adelstein on Children and Media

Posted on June 19, 2008 at 10:00 am

FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein gave an important speech last week to the Media Institute titled Stuck in the Mud:
Time to Move an Agenda to Protect America’s Children.
any parents are feeling inundated by an array of media that are flooding their children’s minds with inappropriate material. Too many parents feel like they are losing control, and they’re frustrated by a seemingly relentless march of coarse material that is too violent, too sexual, too commercial or too unhealthy for their children. Messages or images their children are not ready to hear pop up in too many places for parents to easily control, from insensitively timed commercials during otherwise family-friendly programming to Internet ads and spam coming over the computer.

There is growing concern about unhealthful messages and images as well. We are all familiar, for instance, with the obesity epidemic in America, its impact on our children, and how much marketers are spending to sell unhealthful products to children. Many studies show the damaging effects of advertising on children’s food choices. Some of your companies have taken important steps, but there is far more to be done.
For parents, it’s like a game of whack-a-mole, with an increasing number of moles jumping up faster and faster. Too many parents suffer from a sense of exhaustion or futility.
He spoke of his own frustration when despite his best efforts to protect him, the Commissioner’s own son accidentally came across a television program that disturbed him because it had “lots of blood.” And he spoke of his own “whack-a-mole”-style frustration over the limits of the Commission’s authority in a multi-media world. Even within those limits, he regretted the lukewarm report issued by the Commission on the impact on children of violence in media, which failed to include adequate information about options for better parental control or adequate exploration of regulatory options. And he regrets that the Commission’s focus on indecency has failed to address other content concerns.
oday, I am calling on Chairman Martin and my fellow commissioners to launch a proceeding as soon as possible to examine comprehensively the existence and availability of advanced blocking technologies and to propose a national plan to inform U.S. households and parents about media literacy and parental controls, as proposed in the Pryor bill. We need to find ways to supplement the ongoing efforts of the broadcasting and cable industry.
He also asks for better and clearer ratings from the TV Parental Guidelines Monitoring Board.
We also need to encourage ratings of all TV content – entertainment programming, promotions and commercials alike. One of the most frequent complaints I hear from parents is about watching sports, or other family-friendly programming, and then a raunchy beer commercial or a violent or sexually suggestive promotion for more mature program comes on. Broadcasting and cable need to better address this problem through responsible standards and practices to ensure that ads don’t appear in programming watched by younger viewers than the promotions were intended for.
He also asks for better alternatives.

In order to offset the flood of inappropriate material, we should encourage more positive children’s programming like the free quality children’s programming offered by public broadcasters that require more resources to produce, and innovative commercial broadcasters that require more carriage by distributors to succeed. The Commission can help by providing broadcasters with a clearer set of guidelines to identify what constitutes “educational” content.
For more information or to provide comments or add your support to these proposals, email the Commissioner here.