today we give thanks to the biopic in a way similar to how the pilgrims thanked the injuns.
some people have dreams of hanging out in heaven with ray charles, buddy holly, and the rest of the famous dead people gang. surfing on clouds or just talking about how it sucks that chris klein won't be making through the golden gates anymore, whatever. heaven rocks. however, when i have this dream, i'm hanging out with the "thespians" who play the famous people in their respective idiotic hollywood biopics. playing some shuffleboard with a blind heroin-shooting jamie foxx. doing some jello shots with a technicolor black-rim-spectacled gary busey. it's a fucking shitty dream.
WALK THE LINE:this holiday season, welcome joaquin phoenix and reese witherspoon to my crappy-ass dream. i came out of the theatre thinking, "that was painfully mediocre." now i am filled with bitterness, rage, the whole bit. over the past week-and-a-half, i've had time to build up enough negative feelings to finally find merit and inspiration for posting about why hollywood biopics are probably the closest relative to the devil in pop culture today. let's use this sorry excuse for art act as an example. let me think. what did i learn about johnny cash from this movie? he hated women, but he was a sweetheart. he was a pill-popper, but he was misunderstood. he couldn't really play guitar or sing, but that's cute. he had a deep contempt for the correctional institution system in our country that..oh wait, sorry, i mean, he played a wicked awesome concert at a prison once. ok ok but the movie's purpose wasn't really to inform people about the legendary johnny cash, right? it was to use his relationship with june carter to tell a unique and touching love story, right? one where the dude's a big crazy jackass but has a BEAUTIFUL MIND so he finally gets his way in the end and everyone loves him. here's the thing about that: that's a crappy patriarchal story with no redeeming value and that was NOT johnny cash's life nor was it his relationship with june carter. hate to be the bearer of bad news, but simplification is for pussies, hollywood. worried about making enough cash so you gotta make it as much of an emulation of past puketastic biopics as possible? weak. it's seemingly a surefire way to get even one-note dumbasses like joaquin an oscar nod? double weak. but really, the biggest reason why i hate this movie so much more than when i actually saw it is because i just saw this tonight---
CAPOTE: philip seymour hoffman can enter my dreams any night he wants. critics everywhere are calling this genius, so i don't really need to toot horns that have previously been tooted, but this is everything i've always wanted in a biopic but never got. ok i know united artists isn't exactly the definitive voice of "independent filmmaking," but then why can't the number of screens capote is playing on nationwide switch with the number of screens walk the line is playing on? let's tackle this question. could it have something to do with the fact that higher-ups find it easier and less work to make a movie about a famous recently deceased country musician accessible to more audiences than say, a homoerotic movie about a self-obsessed author from 50 years ago with a lack of resolution? yeah probably, but that can't be the ONLY reason, can it? i mean, people appreciate when a movie is focused, subtle and its tone is representative of its subject matter, yes? no, you say? they like polished schlock? well, capote is polished and probably will get some oscar nods too because it's accessible enough already...plus it's not schlock, which i don't think NEEDS to be a prerequisite for wide release...all you'd have to do is write this here check...no? we have to wait till february till the masses start caring about this movie? that sucks.
you know what else sucks? the future of BIOPICS:
here's some more free money random respected-director-to-be, why don't you cast that hey ya kid as some famous black guy:
and don't forget women. they can be famous and addicted to drugs too...try the steadily-becoming-uglier fake brit:
oh well, at least hollywood is starting to run out of dead people to make movies about so they have to start making ones about living celebrities (here's the kicker):
WALK THE LINE:this holiday season, welcome joaquin phoenix and reese witherspoon to my crappy-ass dream. i came out of the theatre thinking, "that was painfully mediocre." now i am filled with bitterness, rage, the whole bit. over the past week-and-a-half, i've had time to build up enough negative feelings to finally find merit and inspiration for posting about why hollywood biopics are probably the closest relative to the devil in pop culture today. let's use this sorry excuse for art act as an example. let me think. what did i learn about johnny cash from this movie? he hated women, but he was a sweetheart. he was a pill-popper, but he was misunderstood. he couldn't really play guitar or sing, but that's cute. he had a deep contempt for the correctional institution system in our country that..oh wait, sorry, i mean, he played a wicked awesome concert at a prison once. ok ok but the movie's purpose wasn't really to inform people about the legendary johnny cash, right? it was to use his relationship with june carter to tell a unique and touching love story, right? one where the dude's a big crazy jackass but has a BEAUTIFUL MIND so he finally gets his way in the end and everyone loves him. here's the thing about that: that's a crappy patriarchal story with no redeeming value and that was NOT johnny cash's life nor was it his relationship with june carter. hate to be the bearer of bad news, but simplification is for pussies, hollywood. worried about making enough cash so you gotta make it as much of an emulation of past puketastic biopics as possible? weak. it's seemingly a surefire way to get even one-note dumbasses like joaquin an oscar nod? double weak. but really, the biggest reason why i hate this movie so much more than when i actually saw it is because i just saw this tonight---
CAPOTE: philip seymour hoffman can enter my dreams any night he wants. critics everywhere are calling this genius, so i don't really need to toot horns that have previously been tooted, but this is everything i've always wanted in a biopic but never got. ok i know united artists isn't exactly the definitive voice of "independent filmmaking," but then why can't the number of screens capote is playing on nationwide switch with the number of screens walk the line is playing on? let's tackle this question. could it have something to do with the fact that higher-ups find it easier and less work to make a movie about a famous recently deceased country musician accessible to more audiences than say, a homoerotic movie about a self-obsessed author from 50 years ago with a lack of resolution? yeah probably, but that can't be the ONLY reason, can it? i mean, people appreciate when a movie is focused, subtle and its tone is representative of its subject matter, yes? no, you say? they like polished schlock? well, capote is polished and probably will get some oscar nods too because it's accessible enough already...plus it's not schlock, which i don't think NEEDS to be a prerequisite for wide release...all you'd have to do is write this here check...no? we have to wait till february till the masses start caring about this movie? that sucks.
you know what else sucks? the future of BIOPICS:
here's some more free money random respected-director-to-be, why don't you cast that hey ya kid as some famous black guy:
and don't forget women. they can be famous and addicted to drugs too...try the steadily-becoming-uglier fake brit:
oh well, at least hollywood is starting to run out of dead people to make movies about so they have to start making ones about living celebrities (here's the kicker):
This entry was posted by chris, on
Thursday, November 24, 2005.
You can leave your response.
Someone's not in a Thanksgiving kind of mood. Here's my "Walk the Line" review. Joaquin Phoenix does amazing job capturing the frailty and weaknesses of a man whom American culture associates with strength of character and a cowboy-like swagger. His all-too-human portrayl of the man also made me question the hero worship we extend to men who overcome addictions in this country by accepting God (and only because they have a stronger woman to help them...hmm, what outrageously powerful American does that remind you of, who also has daddy issues?). Reese Witherspoon should receive an academy award nomination for making me want to wear her 1960's country music clothes (which I guess should get an oscar for the costume department?) But her singing was really good too, for someone who has never sung professionally. This movie could easily been much more mediocre than it was, like if Tobey MaGuire and Kirsten Dunst had played the main roles. So there's something to be thankful for;)
I saw it Friday night. My brief review sounds a lot like yours Chris. However, Walk The Line will be called a "good movie" by critics because their jobs have been come so boring with all of the crap that has been oozing from Hollywood lately.
Creativity is dead in Hollywood.
Mark: I sat next to someone who actually anwsered their cell phone during the movie.
-Adam
They already did a Jimi Hendrix biopic on HBO. It sucked...
As for Walk the Line, it was too streamlined on a certain period of Johnny Cash's life. Stereotypically Hollywood, they chose to highlight the youthful (see: teeange audience with money in pocket) era of his life, rather than the more harrowing latter part of his life.
-Chaney
leave a response