I don't really know what you mean by your statement that "our points are different." I just disagree with you.
You think the film successfully points to contemporary parallels and I do not. The fact that it's a "period piece" is not what I'm complaining about. It's lack of depth in the story and characterizations.
In what way do you think FFH makes points about contemporary racism, sexism, homophobia etc.?
Also, if there is any validity to your point that the film deals "successfully" with racism and the experience of black men in America, then the film IS about the "worst things" of the 50s. If you acknowledge the complexity of the societal position of the Raymond character in FFH, you have to acknowledge that Connecticut was Little Rock, but worse, because even a middle-class striver like Raymond, who owned his own business, lived the experience of racism and de facto segregation every day.
In fact, at the end of the film, he has to leave town to avoid the hatred and violence spawned by his friendship with the Moore character. And where does he choose to go? Back down South, where boundaries were both more defined in some ways, yet less rigid in others.
The film is about racism, sexism and homophobia, both varieties "contemporary" and old fashioned. You complain that it lacks depth storywise, Far From Heaven is virtualy a remake of All That Heaven Allows, the scripts are almost identical in terms of story and structure. As for characterization, the characters are as deep as any as Sirk came up with.
Todd Haynes has the gall to make films about the things we hold personal and "proprietary" The Carpenters, Glam Rock, Douglas Sirk etc. and try to make something new out of them. Shame on him.
|
You think the film successfully points to contemporary parallels and I do not. The fact that it's a "period piece" is not what I'm complaining about. It's lack of depth in the story and characterizations.
In what way do you think FFH makes points about contemporary racism, sexism, homophobia etc.?
Also, if there is any validity to your point that the film deals "successfully" with racism and the experience of black men in America, then the film IS about the "worst things" of the 50s. If you acknowledge the complexity of the societal position of the Raymond character in FFH, you have to acknowledge that Connecticut was Little Rock, but worse, because even a middle-class striver like Raymond, who owned his own business, lived the experience of racism and de facto segregation every day.
In fact, at the end of the film, he has to leave town to avoid the hatred and violence spawned by his friendship with the Moore character. And where does he choose to go? Back down South, where boundaries were both more defined in some ways, yet less rigid in others.
- bunny 3-05-2003 3:56 am
The film is about racism, sexism and homophobia, both varieties "contemporary" and old fashioned. You complain that it lacks depth storywise, Far From Heaven is virtualy a remake of All That Heaven Allows, the scripts are almost identical in terms of story and structure. As for characterization, the characters are as deep as any as Sirk came up with.
Todd Haynes has the gall to make films about the things we hold personal and "proprietary" The Carpenters, Glam Rock, Douglas Sirk etc. and try to make something new out of them. Shame on him.
- steve 3-05-2003 6:22 pm [1 comment]