Author Topic: Write about the last movie you watched (2006-2010)  (Read 3738649 times)

Colleen

  • Hot Fuzz
  • Godfather
  • *
  • Posts: 5907
  • Let's be careful out there!
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #18410 on: August 17, 2009, 01:43:18 PM »
first, sex, like gender, is a construct - i know people have a problem getting this but there it is.

Sorry skjerva but could you explain what you mean by this?

I don't get it either.  I learned (in gender studies type classes that included discussion of transgender etc) that sex is the biological fact of male, female or "other" (intersex, hermaphrodite (which I thought meant basically the same thing)) and gender is the social construct and values and expectations that come along with having XX or XY chromosomes.

I don't get how a biological fact is a social construct as well, unless you are going to the meta postmodern level of considering how we define a "fact" as a social construct too.  Which, while true, is sort of useless and uninteresting as a critical tool to me.  It's like the one math class we spent on non-Euclidean geometry:  I got that there were all these other possible approaches out there but Euclidean geometry actually fit the world I was living in so I was relieved to get back to it.

FroHam X

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 17792
  • “By any seeds necessary.”
    • justAtad
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #18411 on: August 17, 2009, 01:45:44 PM »
Ah I was hoping you'd pick up on my Christmas movie bit. I'm a non-practising Jew. But I also live in Western/ North American culture. I have even celebrated Christmas before. To me those movies don't need to accomodate me just because I'm different. I get what those movies are doing and what themes they are getting at. I sit through those films and take them on their own level, not mine. Just like how it's nice that Adam Sandler made a Hannukah movie, but that doesn't make it good. I guess what it comes down to is an approach to criticism and mine simply differs from others'.
"We didn't clean the hamster's cage, the hamster's cage cleaned us!"

Can't get enough FroHam? Read more of my musings at justAtad

Clovis8

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 11721
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #18412 on: August 17, 2009, 01:47:09 PM »
first, sex, like gender, is a construct - i know people have a problem getting this but there it is.

Sorry skjerva but could you explain what you mean by this?

I don't get it either.  I learned (in gender studies type classes that included discussion of transgender etc) that sex is the biological fact of male, female or "other" (intersex, hermaphrodite (which I thought meant basically the same thing)) and gender is the social construct and values and expectations that come along with having XX or XY chromosomes.

I don't get how a biological fact is a social construct as well, unless you are going to the meta postmodern level of considering how we define a "fact" as a social construct too.  Which, while true, is sort of useless and uninteresting as a critical tool to me.  It's like the one math class we spent on non-Euclidean geometry:  I got that there were all these other possible approaches out there but Euclidean geometry actually fit the world I was living in so I was relieved to get back to it.

You are correct Colleen. That is the difference between sex and gender. Saying sex is a construct is a silly argument. That is like saying gravity is a social construct.

sdedalus

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 16587
  • I have a prestigious blog, sir!
    • The End of Cinema
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #18413 on: August 17, 2009, 01:49:00 PM »
Then there are people who argue that a movie is empirically or objectively "great" or "awful" and judge it as though their personal take on the movie has some larger implication of the movie being good or bad.  These are interesting arguments but I don't buy the basic premise--each viewer brings their own baggage with them and it will affect how they see the movie.  Someone like sdedalus because he has such a breadth of film experience I will listen to and enjoy a lively discussion but I don't tend to participate in it.

I don't believe anything close to something like that.
The End of Cinema

Seattle Screen Scene

"He was some kind of a man. What does it matter what you say about people?"

FroHam X

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 17792
  • “By any seeds necessary.”
    • justAtad
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #18414 on: August 17, 2009, 01:54:21 PM »
Really all I am trying to say is that while I agreethat personal baggage is brought to the experience of any film, I feel that critiquing a film for stuff like this is unfair. Critique society, not its byproduct.
"We didn't clean the hamster's cage, the hamster's cage cleaned us!"

Can't get enough FroHam? Read more of my musings at justAtad

Colleen

  • Hot Fuzz
  • Godfather
  • *
  • Posts: 5907
  • Let's be careful out there!
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #18415 on: August 17, 2009, 02:01:09 PM »
Then there are people who argue that a movie is empirically or objectively "great" or "awful" and judge it as though their personal take on the movie has some larger implication of the movie being good or bad.  These are interesting arguments but I don't buy the basic premise--each viewer brings their own baggage with them and it will affect how they see the movie.  Someone like sdedalus because he has such a breadth of film experience I will listen to and enjoy a lively discussion but I don't tend to participate in it.

I don't believe anything close to something like that.

Sorry to mischaracterize you.  Maybe it's because I find you a bit intimidating.  :)

skjerva

  • Godfather
  • ******
  • Posts: 9448
  • I'm your audience.
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #18416 on: August 17, 2009, 02:02:21 PM »
I can't believe 500 Days of Summer is being criticized because it aligns with the norm. If anything it refuses to depict love in the normal ways our media and society does.

The only sweeping generalizations it makes is that "the one" you are meant to be isn't out there (or is he/she/it).

And no one movie can speak to all people equally. A lot of films that mean things personally to one person means absolutely nothing to another.



and as i wrote in my initial post, i applauded the film for Summer's initial take Against Love.  BUT, i am sorely disappointed that she "came around", which i feel negated her earlier position.  i haven't worked it out yet, but it seems that there is some meaningful characterization going on with Summer being the initial anti-love position, seeing the light, then buying into Love, with Hansen flopping to jaded (then getting cured with Autumn).

that being the case, this anti-love position isn't really maintained by the film, so that, along with the beginning-to-end boy+girl relationship means that the film in fact does not "refuse to depict love in normal ways our media and society does".  which brings up the passing critique of media representations of love with Hansen's greeting card tirade - it is an empty gesture in that the film is exactly what he here critiques, especially as it wraps up with two happy endings.  

as far as your disbelief goes, i'd return you to Colleen's excellent post of how seemingly inoffensive or benign to one person are understood differently by others.  

I'd like to clarify that I was responding to skjerva's review, not faceboys comment. And the reason I used the word "attack" is because I feel skjerva uses this sort of critique on a very constant basis as a way to bring down a film. Again, see the Wall-E debate.

odd that you'd characterize what i wrote as an attack.  and, i wasn't trying to "bring the film down" but sharing my wondering of how the film would settle with me considering my perception that the film is heteronormative, i think my writings on the film have been rather positive, otherwise.  it seems to me that when folks don't like what i write, my ideas are distorted and dismissed with inaccurate portrayals, i think i have done a decent job of stating where the critique i have comes from.  it is just the case that most folks on the boards don't seem to care about the social meanings that films are making, and that, of course, is fine, but it makes for my posts more easily getting swept aside as fringe nonsense :)

That said, I totally understand how something like this might rub somebody Ina different social group the wrong way. as a Jew I've often cringed at not only the portrayal of Jews in many films, but I've been generally annoyed by films and media reinforcing ideas of how Jews behave. But on the flip side, I will never critique a Christmas movie for not presenting the viewpoints of Jews or any other religious group. That is ultimately my problem with skjerva's complaints. Instead of taking a film on the level that it presents itself there seems to be a need for the movie to specifically appeal to certain personal needs.


and your take on portrayal of jews is just what i am doing.  i am not criticizing 500 for being a christmas movie and not something else, that is frankly idiotic and far too often how people dismiss my critiques, with strange misreadings that completely misrepresent what i have actually written, and believe.  as i initially wrote, my complaint is with an establishing line that "there are two kinds of people in the world" - well, that would be like saying there are two kinds of religious belief in the world - christian and islamic.  if a film were to set itself up like that, i'd imagine your jewish critique might begin to percolate.  so, my critique is utterly grounded on the level that the film presents itself, but that does not mean i think what i see is seen by everyone, thus why i post my thoughts, for discussion like this :)


If the film had contained gay characters and skjerva felt that their portrayal was unrealistic or promoted certain stereotypes then I'd have no problem, but to constantly berate films for not even presenting a certain viewpoint is a faulty argument from the start.

If the film had contained gay characters and skjerva felt that their portrayal was unrealistic or promoted certain stereotypes then I'd have no problem, but to constantly berate films for not even presenting a certain viewpoint is a faulty argument from the start.

i agree, and i hardly "berate films for not even presenting a certain viewpoint".  when i critique a film for the way it represents, i explain where my problem with it comes from, and i do think these representations are important to think about, whether or not others agree is another issue
But I wish the public could, in the midst of its pleasures, see how blatantly it is being spoon-fed, and ask for slightly better dreams. 
                        - Iris Barry from "The Public's Pleasure" (1926)

FroHam X

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 17792
  • “By any seeds necessary.”
    • justAtad
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #18417 on: August 17, 2009, 02:09:57 PM »
Yeah. I'm sorry. I saw that your take on the film was mostly positive. I got a bit carried away. Part of that comes from you having done in the past what I was railing against.

Also I don't see where the film stated that there are only two types of people. It simply only presents one point of view.
"We didn't clean the hamster's cage, the hamster's cage cleaned us!"

Can't get enough FroHam? Read more of my musings at justAtad

jbissell

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 10892
  • What's up, hot dog?
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #18418 on: August 17, 2009, 02:14:08 PM »
Also I don't see where the film stated that there are only two types of people. It simply only presents one point of view.

It's explicitly stated in the opening narration, if I remember correctly.

Junior

  • Bert Macklin, FBI
  • Global Moderator
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 28228
  • What's the rumpus?
    • Benefits of a Classical Education
Re: Write about the last movie you watched
« Reply #18419 on: August 17, 2009, 02:21:03 PM »
I Love You, Man.

Paul Rudd is hilarious. As is everybody else. I'm kind of tired of the really obvious plot that movies like this follow, but I think it was organic and believable in this one.

B+.
Check out my blog of many topics

“I’m not a quitter, Kimmy! I watched Interstellar all the way to the end!”