[to get this thread back on track
]
The Truman Show
Peter Weir, 1998
vs.
Paris is Burning
Jennie Livingston, 19901
I had never experienced
The Truman Show, though I've always wanted to - I'm not sure if I didn't because I assumed it would put the interesting idea to waste, but I was enthralled early on. What does it mean that Truman (True Man) acts authentically and everyone else in "his universe" is scripted? As Christof (nicely played by Ed Harris. are we to invoke
Christo?)) states (from IMDb): "We accept the reality of the world with which we are presented. " This, apparently, is a problem. I(/we/the audience) am(are/is) seemingly sharing the reaction with the audience of the television program,
The Truman Show, who at film's end, are portrayed as sympathizing with Truman's burden of confinement. However, they, like us, have accepted the reality of the world presented. For 30 years, the millions of viewers have been content with Truman The Guinea Pig - they/we have been complicit. This film is about how we are spoon-fed into complacency; how ideology works.
Likewise,
Paris is Burning illustrates ideological tensions. In
duder's first-round write-up he notes
Later on, there seems to be an attempt on her part to widen the canvas by placing this community in contrast with the Outside World, even drawing some parallels, but I'm not sure she's quite as successful there, or even what it is she's trying to say exactly.
but really, the entire film is nothing but a contrast in constant dialogue with "the outside world". in fact, one weakness of the film is that the narrative is so heavily constructed around reductive quotes from the family members, e.g. (again from IMDb),
In real life, you can't get a job as an executive unless you have the educational background and the opportunity. Now the fact that you are not an executive is merely because of the social standing of life... Black people have a hard time getting anywhere. And those that do, are usually straight. In a ballroom, you can be anything you want.
The film is punctuated with title pages that describe terms used. One of them, resonating with the above quote, as well as
The Truman Show, is "REALNESS". This film is utterly about how "the real world" - really, the wealthy, straight, white world - does not accept gay people. Moreso, resonating off the final sentence of the above quote, early in the film a person describes the ball culture as a place to "feel 100% right being gay...and that's not what it's like in the world". This is a common theme in the film, "the world", "society", "being
real", are all "their" attributes. Despite that, there is a place that these "outcasts" are 100% Right, and that is in drag culture, an important component of this is the "Houses". The
houses are organized around matriarchs who have proven their worth to the Ball establishment by not only being recognized performers, but as successful "mothers". These mothers, and their houses, care for the gay youth when their blood family - the "they" society - would not. Mothers give them places to stay when they are kicked out, they feed them, and advise them on navigating
that society that will likely meet them with violence. The film raises the question of which world is the more desirable
real. Wonderfully, the constant desire to belong to "their real" resonates with most every subject the film spends time with while it also makes it abundantly evident how 100%-right their "false real" really is.
So, while the film does lean heavily on a dozen or so seemingly simple statements, they are so profound and somehow Livingston has made such obvious fodder
so real. So Beautiful. Such an amazing film.
Without going much more deeply into either film, I want to emphasize that it is difficult ruling out
The Truman Show. Not knowing which other films will be ruled out by Round 2's end (and heart-breakers will certainly abound), a cautionary
case for resurrection should be made taking into account a solid set of performances by Carrey, Harris, Linney, and that
that-guy Noah Emmerich. The script is fantastic, gliding easily over the 50s-esque satire, media/advertising/pop-culture criticism, and existential themes. Though the film's tone shifts awkwardly about half-in as the reveal occurs, it leads to such a nice payoff that it is easy to overlook. Wier does an amazing job of suturing the show's audience onto "we"-audience, asking us what we are complicit in being entertained by, and whether or not we will simply jump to the next show once our attention drops from a perceived wrong.
Though it is easy to rule-in
Paris is Burning - a profoundly humane and complex film - it is still difficult to rule out
The Truman Show, though I can only muster that it is smart and a fair bit better than average (I might feel comfortable calling it Top 100 of US 90s films).
-----
1 Or 1991, as current version reflects changes made after initial festival release for '91 Sundance.