Chicago movie review
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 12:18:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: "EricO"
Subject: Re: hi there
To: "Tombot"
Tom,
Your description of the intellegentsia seems to me to
be how Girard would describe those who are caught in
the scapegoat mechanism.
I recently went to see the best picture of the year,
Chicago. I hated it on the level of one who seeks the
good and recognizes evil would shun the evil.
In the movie, the world is divided into two groups,
murderers (in this case murderesses), and patsies. In
this world, those with the will to conquer do the
vilest things, in this case to reach stardom and fame.
And, like the adoring, naive husband of the
murderess, the public is looking to be fooled by them,
to have a sensational story fed to them, to look up to
them. So, you are either a user, or you are used.
Or, as I once saw written on a chalkboard in a
drug-house, the world is divided into pimps and
prostitutes. This house also had the chalk-inscribed-line that
"Satan is at least honest". He describes the world
accurately, cuts through the patsie's moral posturing
that might hold you back, and says, Do as thou wilt.
Use. So, this is the wisdom of the world.
How was this story framed? How did the director
choose to portray it? He poured hot-coals on the
audience's head. He taunted and ridiculed the
audience at the same time he entertained us with stage
productions, flashing lights, sexy bodies. A
spectacal surprisingly devoid of erotic content,
because it had no soul. He called us patsies, daring
us to see the insult he was hurling at us, instead of
the broadway show. And what if we did? We were still
slaves to it. A double dose of burning. A more
exquisite pain for the torturer to inflict upon us
(foolish Christians).
He was the philosopher, detached, claiming no
involvement in this human condition, washing his hands
of it.
Portraying the Politician (Liar,Murderer), and the
Ideologue (Pasty, Believer, he would say Christian),
in their dance of sado-masochism.
But the director did have the integrity to show the
Christian woman, wrongly accused, put to death by this
world, and so the movie did reveal the truth of the
world; it's just that the Christian didn't have any
part in the movie other than to be disposed of. No
pathos for the innocent. It is Calvary portrayed from
the point of view of Pilate.
I went to confession, and, if I may let you know,
simply because it pertains, I was asked for my penance
to pray for the conversion of Hollywood.
Right on the mark. I dream of writing something as
revelatory as Chicago, but with a heart. What good is
such a movie if it leads you down a path, but into a
dead end? It steals your soul. On a more humble
note, and perhaps in a greater calling, I am simply
asked to be a Christian, and follow the way of the
Cross. I fear my dreams of authoring the next great
American novel are the same self-involved drives that
drove the murderess to her acts of violence.
What to do in this world?
I am fond of the saying, "They also serve who only
stand and wait." But I feel I have been waiting too
long. And resting in an easy chair a good deal of the
time.
As to whether and in what way this cycle of violence
describes the war, I am not sure. Your thoughts?
Eric
From: "EricO"
Subject: Re: hi there
To: "Tombot"
Tom,
Your description of the intellegentsia seems to me to
be how Girard would describe those who are caught in
the scapegoat mechanism.
I recently went to see the best picture of the year,
Chicago. I hated it on the level of one who seeks the
good and recognizes evil would shun the evil.
In the movie, the world is divided into two groups,
murderers (in this case murderesses), and patsies. In
this world, those with the will to conquer do the
vilest things, in this case to reach stardom and fame.
And, like the adoring, naive husband of the
murderess, the public is looking to be fooled by them,
to have a sensational story fed to them, to look up to
them. So, you are either a user, or you are used.
Or, as I once saw written on a chalkboard in a
drug-house, the world is divided into pimps and
prostitutes. This house also had the chalk-inscribed-line that
"Satan is at least honest". He describes the world
accurately, cuts through the patsie's moral posturing
that might hold you back, and says, Do as thou wilt.
Use. So, this is the wisdom of the world.
How was this story framed? How did the director
choose to portray it? He poured hot-coals on the
audience's head. He taunted and ridiculed the
audience at the same time he entertained us with stage
productions, flashing lights, sexy bodies. A
spectacal surprisingly devoid of erotic content,
because it had no soul. He called us patsies, daring
us to see the insult he was hurling at us, instead of
the broadway show. And what if we did? We were still
slaves to it. A double dose of burning. A more
exquisite pain for the torturer to inflict upon us
(foolish Christians).
He was the philosopher, detached, claiming no
involvement in this human condition, washing his hands
of it.
Portraying the Politician (Liar,Murderer), and the
Ideologue (Pasty, Believer, he would say Christian),
in their dance of sado-masochism.
But the director did have the integrity to show the
Christian woman, wrongly accused, put to death by this
world, and so the movie did reveal the truth of the
world; it's just that the Christian didn't have any
part in the movie other than to be disposed of. No
pathos for the innocent. It is Calvary portrayed from
the point of view of Pilate.
I went to confession, and, if I may let you know,
simply because it pertains, I was asked for my penance
to pray for the conversion of Hollywood.
Right on the mark. I dream of writing something as
revelatory as Chicago, but with a heart. What good is
such a movie if it leads you down a path, but into a
dead end? It steals your soul. On a more humble
note, and perhaps in a greater calling, I am simply
asked to be a Christian, and follow the way of the
Cross. I fear my dreams of authoring the next great
American novel are the same self-involved drives that
drove the murderess to her acts of violence.
What to do in this world?
I am fond of the saying, "They also serve who only
stand and wait." But I feel I have been waiting too
long. And resting in an easy chair a good deal of the
time.
As to whether and in what way this cycle of violence
describes the war, I am not sure. Your thoughts?
Eric
posted by erico at 1:31 PM
1 Comments:
From: "Tombot"
To: erico
Subject: Re: hi there
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 13:37:50 -0400
Eric:
Haven't seen Chicago yet -- but given your review of the film, I'm more intrigued than I was before by what I had assumed was only a one-dimensional, "feel-good musical". I'm glad you mentioned those familiar categories of politician, ideologue, hedonist, observer (I want the total list- What are they again?) vis-a-vis the proper "strategy" or "posture" for succeeding in life. I'm reading Machiavelli's Prince this semester
and it strikes me that the Prince is (literally) the Bible for the "politician" as you have described him. It all fits together perfectly - And Machiavelli
lets the prince off the hook time and time again - don't feel guilty or regretful for things you had to do - for having to get your hands dirty in the real world - for all the compromises one must make and the various manipulations (making other people expendable) that are sometimes necessary.
The Bible of the ideologue or the detached ironic observer is more elusive - Any thoughts on that? What is the complete list again? And what about that
your screenplay in the works... Tell me more.
- Tom
Post a Comment
<< Home