Z
MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

BYOB 022014

byoboscarweek650

6 Responses to “BYOB 022014”

  1. EtGuild2 says:

    So I saw “Blood Brother” last night, the documentary about the regular American dude who takes care of kids with AIDS in India. There was an absolutely fascinating meta-documentary that was taking place at the same time as what I was watching on screen involving the main dude’s desire to be liked, and the American desire for charitable works overseas to come with some sort of recognition. There’s a scene where this guy speaks of the horrific, wrenching stories of all these kids, but the focus is on how it affects HIM,. We do not see ONE story of how it affects the children he is speaking of, though images of the children recounting horrors shuffle past wordlessly. To be clear, I have no doubt this guy cares for the children he has dedicated his life to serve. At the same time, I have no doubt he feels that he is committed to a heroic, noble cause, and his jesture is by all means worthy of a documentary.

    Just an unbelievable examination of American narcissism in the philanthropic realm that I felt like either flew over most critics’ heads or they chose to ignore. But it made it the second greatest doc last year for me (Act of Killing) in a year of just superb work (Call Me Kuchu, Gideon’s Army, Herman’s House, A Band Called Death, 20 Feet From Stardom, on and on).

    Anyone else who saw this please comment.

  2. PcChongor says:

    Charity in America is just the 21st century version of paying an indulgence. Gives a nice warm and gooey feeling about helping out with a symptom, while leaving the root cause completely untouched. But at least it’s tax deductible!

  3. Tuck Pendleton says:

    Saw The Spectacular Now the other night. Wonderful, I was blown away.

  4. chris says:

    Sadly, Etguild, I don’t think that phenomenon is so uncommon. Same deal with “Born Into Brothels” and that movie won an Oscar.

  5. EtGuild2 says:

    Finally got around to “The Square.” Transcendent, amazing, must-see and is on Netflix instant. I know it happens again and again in the Oscars with feel-good domestic fluff overpowering world-beating cultural iconography, but “The Act of Killing” and “The Square” are two of the best documentaries ever made. I liked “20 Feet From Stardom,” but “The Act of Killing” is transforming Thailand’s response to the genocide with actual legislation taking place as a result of this film, and “The Square,” is a desperately needed reaffirmation of hope that should be required viewing for neo-cons like John McCain and Lindsey Graham pining for Mubarak.

    A “20 Feet From Stardom” win, god bless Darlene Love and company, would be the biggest travesty this year.

  6. Hcat says:

    So I just want to get this straight about the son of god movie this weekend. It is all repurposed footage from the hugely viewed miniseries. So they worked the church circuit to get them to pay for a movie they have seen in a slightly different form on cable and on DVD? Aren’t people going to feel slightly burned when they realize they bought.a ticket to something they have on the shelf at home?

Leave a Reply

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

“To be a critic is to be a workaholic. Workaholism is socially conditioned: viewed favourably by exploiters, it’s generally ruinous to a worker’s mental health. When T.S. Eliot said criticism was as inevitable as breathing, he failed to mention that, respiratory problems notwithstanding, breathing is easy. Criticism is reflexive before reflective: to formalise/industrialise an involuntary instinct requires time, effort and discipline. The reason we seek remuneration, as opposed to the self-hatred of being a scab, is because all labour should be waged…

“Criticism, so the cliché by now goes, is dying. None of the panel discussions on its death agony, however—including those in which I’ve formally participated—come at it from the wider perspective that the problem surely needs. They defend the ways in which criticism functions in relation to the industry and to the public, but they fail to contextualise these relationships as defined by ultimately rotten and self-harming imperatives.

“Criticism was a noble profession so long as only a few could practice it for money; when the field expands, as it has with a so-called ‘democratisation’ of our practice, those few lose their political power. Competition grows and markets are undercut: publications are naturally going to start paying less. Precarity is both cause and effect of a surplus workforce: the reason you’re only as good as your last article is because there are plenty of other folks who can write the next one in your place. The daily grind is: pitch, or perish.

B”ut criticism, so a counter-cliché goes, is not dying. An irony: this is an elite sport that is no longer elite in terms of who is able to practice it, but in economic terms it’s clutching to a perverse and outmoded hierarchical structure. It’s more meritocratic than ever, now: which is to say it isn’t meritocratic at all. That’s a paradox in bad need of a resolution…”

~ Michael Pattison Manifestoes Film Criticism

“It’s easy to forget when you’re reading a critic every single week or multiple times a week, that most of us who do this job, and have been doing it for a long time, understand that this is basically a parasitic profession. I don’t mean in the sense that we’re evil bloodsucking creatures, but we couldn’t exist if we didn’t have something to analyze. And I’m always conscious of that. So whether I like or don’t like a particular thing you do, my point of view is always that of an appreciator. I just like to be in the world that you create.”
~ Matt Zoller Seitz To Sam Esmail

Z Weekend Report