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 »

“There are critics who see their job as to be on the side of the artist, or in a state of imaginative sympathy or alliance with the artist. I think it’s important for a critic to be populist in the sense that we’re on the side of the public. I think one of the reasons is, frankly, capitalism. Whether you’re talking about restaurants or you’re talking about movies, you’re talking about large-scale commercial enterprises that are trying to sell themselves and market themselves and publicize themselves. A critic is, in a way, offering consumer advice. I think it’s very, very important in a time where everything is commercialized, commodified, and branded, where advertising is constantly bleeding into other forms of discourse, for there to be an independent voice kind of speaking to—and to some extent on behalf of—the public.”
~ A. O. Scott On One Role Of The Critic

“Every night, we’d sit and talk for a long, long time and talk about the process and I knew he was very, very intrigued about what could be happening. Then of course, one of the fascinating things he told me about was how he had readers who were reading for him that never knew it was Stanley Kubrick. So if he heard of a novel, he would send it out to people. I think he did it through newspaper ads at the time. And he would send it out to people and ask for a kind of synopsis or a critique of the novel. And he would read those. And it was done anonymously. But he said there were housewives and there were barristers and all sorts of people doing that. And I thought, yeah, that’s a really good way to open up the possibilities. Because otherwise, you’re randomly looking, walking through a bookstore or an airport. I said, “How many people are doing this?” It was about 30 people.”
~ George Miller’s Conversations With Kubrick