Deliver Us From De Palma
The Siren hasn’t seen Brian De Palma’s Redacted yet. Have you? No? Well, don’t feel bad. Neither have Debbie Schlussel, Roger Simon, Confederate Yankee, Victor Davis Hanson, Michelle Malkin or the guys at Libertas. But they want you to know it’s wicked, evil, designed to make our boys look bad and the Iraqis look like ordinary people instead of the spittle-flecked self-flagellating headscarf-wearing head-chopping ululating monsters we all know them to be. No–wait–is it that they will all turn into spittle-flecked etc. if we leave Iraq? The Siren gets a bit foggy after reading all these virtual poobahs in rapid succession. Trying to follow the narrative as the Iraqis shift from suffering innocents we must protect, to ravening Mohammedan hordes bent on beating us into dhimmitude, gives the Siren motion sickness. She would rather talk cinema, a subject absent from the all the garment-rending sight-unseen analysis of Redacted. Alas, it seems the Siren must go back to basics.
Moviemakers select their own subjects. We do not select those subjects for them. Ernst Lubitsch did not make Westerns; Alfred Hitchcock did not make musicals. Bleating that De Palma could have made a movie about the heroism of our troops is silly. When has simple heroism ever been a favored subject of De Palma? Cynicism, moral ambiguity, that’s his bailiwick. He could have filmed Han Solo vs. Osama or The Passion of the Christ 2: This Time, It’s Personal, but he did not. You are supposed to look at the film the guy actually made.
And when you do, you are supposed to carry with you certain genre principles. To wit–Serious war movies have something to say about ALL WARS. They Were Expendable celebrates World War II heroism, but even the title also asks us to look at war’s costs. Paths of Glory trashes the World War I French command, but also alleges that wars are planned and executed in secluded comfort by men who never see the gut-wrenching agony of combat. MASH is not just about Korea, nor is it merely a sideswipe at Vietnam. It is also about two men trying to live through horror, and how they are justifiably suspicious of those who don’t seem to register that horror. When De Palma made Casualties of War he wasn’t merely condemning Vietnam, as so many of these Defenders of the Cineplex assert. The movie asks us to look at the suffering of the other side in war–to see that isn’t All About Us All the Time. That many Americans still resist that notion–witness the reaction to Oliver Stone’s latest project–does a great deal to prove the point.
De Palma baldly states that he made the film to influence the debate on Iraq. Movie people say a lot of things. Pressed to discuss his art, John Ford was likely to snap that “we were making a cowboy picture.” Hitchcock denied he was an auteur. Charlton Heston denied there was any homosexual subtext to Ben-Hur. What the Siren is getting at here is that while De Palma is probably telling the truth about why he made the movie, the mere assertion of intent tells us nothing about what the film actually accomplishes. You think maybe it is saying all our troops are immoral monsters? You say it must be a glorified recruitment ad for al Qaeda? Sorry folks, if you want to push that line, you have to see the movie. Otherwise, shrieking about how it trashes the troops–especially when it is based on a real incident–is so much hot air.
The Defenders of the Cineplex express faith that we Americans will reject De Palma’s movie, but worry about the Muslims who see it. Evidently, Muslims do not have a grip on the image vs. reality thing. They are literal-minded. They have but a faint grasp of other cultures. And of course, they have little tradition of cinema themselves. This sort of stuff is liable to make them dislike us–an allegation the Siren would find weightier if the same people did not assure her daily that Muslims already hate our guts. But how on earth are the Iraqis supposed to stand up so we can stand down, if they can’t even be trusted to make critical judgments at the movies?
Also, if you want to pose as someone defending the grand traditions of American moviemaking, getting all catty about De Palma’s recent fortunes doesn’t suggest you are steeped in film history. Yes, it has been a while since he had a critical success. Anyone who thinks a fallow period means a director’s great work is behind him needs to get re-acquainted with the filmographies of Samuel Fuller, Robert Altman and Luis Bunuel, to name just three. And anyone who thinks that reworking a prior plot must equal hackdom needs to review the career of Howard Hawks. As James Wolcott noted when dealing with a similar to-do over Oliver Stone making a World Trade Center movie, “Every movie is another chance.”
Aha, you say, but see here, Siren. Just a few short weeks ago you posted a piece about your own refusal to see Hostel Part II. True. The Siren explained that her interest in the movie was low, and she had read nothing to convince her that seeing the movie was worth overcoming her general distaste for the genre. She did not, however, lard her piece with pronouncements about director Eli Roth’s career motivations, his psychological state, his feelings about Americans, his feelings about 14-year-old girls, his role in bringing America under the heel of the Caliphate or whether his movie fits the definition of certain crimes. The Siren also notes that Mr. Roth, whatever greatness may lie in his future, has so far made nothing to rival Carrie, Dressed to Kill, Carlito’s Way or even Scarface. Brian De Palma has earned the right to be loathed on the big screen.
The Siren did, however, get a kick out of Debbie Schlussel, a blogger whose head swivels 360 degrees every time she hears the word “Muslim.” She claims producer Mark Cuban makes “sympathize-with-the-Islamic-terrorists propaganda” and exhorts her readers to boycott his NBA team, the Dallas Mavericks…
then updates her headline to let us all know that she is pitching him a story idea.
Brilliant. A brand new approach to getting one’s high-heeled pump in the studio door. Would the Newcritics readers care to proofread the Siren’s cover letter?
Dear Eli,
By way of introduction, permit me to link you to this piece I wrote about your sequel to Hostel. In sum, I dismiss most of the genre as disposable crap. I end by saying that as a filmmaker, Jean-Pierre Melville kicks your ass.
Enclosed please find my story outline…
Add New Comment
Viewing 10 Comments
Thanks. Your comment is awaiting approval by a moderator.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Add New Comment
Trackbacks
(Trackback URL)
October 14, 2007 at 6:14 pm
[...] Update 3 (October 14): I see that the Self-Styled Siren wrote about this topic over a month ago. Sheez, ...
October 19, 2007 at 2:05 am
[...] Below the Fold: Springsteen's Magic Number: The music is pure pop for yesterday’s people... Also: Listening to our ...