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…

Possibly Related Classroom Projects From DonorsChoose.org Powered by Social Actions

Information and Links

Join the fray by commenting, tracking what others have to say, or linking to it from your blog.

Information
September 7th, 2007
Comments
Feeds and Links
Comment Feed
From This Author
Del.icio.us
Digg
Technorati
Categories
Uncategorized

Other Posts
Listening To Our Ancestors
Live Blogging Mad Men: When Don Met Sal and Dean

Readers

Adverts

Liberal Prose

Featured book:


Viewing 10 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    Dearest Siren, haven't seen the movie, don't know if I will, but as usual your writing makes my remaining brain cells very happy; this is why I have you listed in my blogroll as:

    "The Very Talented Miss Self-Styled Siren".

    In some impossibly better world your by-line would be in the New York Times.

    Cheers.
    • ^
    • v
    Thank you very much, Dan.

    So, are you saying Eli might go for it? ;)
    • ^
    • v
    Damn it, why didn't Ernst Lubitsch make Westerns? Can you imagine how much fun Gunsmoke would be if Miss Kitty were played by the wavishing Kay Fwancis?

    The Hitchcock musical idea, though--not so much.
    • ^
    • v
    The closest Hitch came was having Doris Day sing Que Sera, Sera in The Man Who Knew Too Much. In one scene she sings it like a dirge. I
    • ^
    • v
    Siren, Siren — I can feel your pulse pounding way down South here. Why do you read those web sites?
    As for De Palma, your post is a nice birthday tribute to the man. He turns 67 tomorrow, and he's back in the cultural news, and winning awards at film fests. He deserves it.
    P.S. No love for "The Fury"?
    • ^
    • v
    Shamus, I don't know. One time at my workplace my colleagues staged an intervention: they took away my WSJ editorial page. 'You do not need to be reading that, hon.' Maybe I need a 12-step program.

    I do like The Fury but rarely list it because Amy Irving irritates me, for reasons I can't completely explain.
    • ^
    • v
    How the right wing and/or religious crowd never tires of bashing movies they refuse to see is beyond my comprehension. You figure they'd at least go to the theater so they could walk out indignantly halfway through the film.
    • ^
    • v
    I think DePalma should have made a semi-fictional movie about the invasion of Iran. Now that could've moved the damned needle....
    • ^
    • v
    Not sure I have much to add here, although I wrote about this same topic a few days ago.

    I think it'll be an interesting film, and the "documentary" issues are especially interesting to me.
    • ^
    • v
    I am appalled to hear that Redacted has been redacted. As if it were possible to further destroy the identities of the poor, maimed, dead Iraqis whose faces formed the background of the end titles in Brian De Palma’s film, now add the redaction of their images entirely. Are the cost benefit analysts working for the pharmaceuticals, automobile manufactures and the tobacco companies the only ones with any sense of risk or courage anymore? I prefer to think this has less to do with protecting the producers from legal action or the Iraqis from humiliation and invasion of privacy, than a monumental cowardice when it comes to confronting of the American moviegoer with a little too much reality. De Palma’s initial acquiescence to the insurers forced him to abandon the use of any actual footage in the body of the film. This has already resulted in the Right Wing warmongers accusing him of “making it all up” because he restaged rather than using the real footage. This colossal inability on their part to understand the difference between art and life is too outrageous to even deserve comment.

    What this chronic failure of nerve on the part of underwriters will do to the future of actual documentary filmmaking I leave to cynical speculation. I am convinced however that eventually the entertainment industry, corporations and the insurance pencil pushers will so lobotomize the creative spirit in this country, that the only artists left in our culture will be members of the Brittany Spears Ilk’s Club.

    If you wish to see an unrepentant, unredacted piece of filmmaking that is not afraid of lawsuits and not afraid to show the real face of war, I recommend to you a moving three minute video on YouTube called “Kindertotenlied”.

    http://youtube.com/results?search_query=kindert...

    I hope that when the producers, whose footage was stolen for use in this video, finally get around to suing the filmmaker, they will learn exactly how much blood can be squeezed from a rock (as opposed to Iraq). Abject poverty, my friends, does have its privileges.

    Peace,

    Bob Boldt

Trackbacks

blog comments powered by Disqus