From: "Sunil" ternaryadjust@hotmail.com

America's two best working filmmakers have reputations as political
conservatives: Clint Eastwood and David Lynch. Blue Velvet is a very
conservative film. One college reviewer described it as "Christian
pornography," (and meant it as a compliment, unlike those of us who
level
the
same charge against The Passion of the Christ.)

You do realize David Lynch is into Trancendental Meditation? Did he
actually
say he's conservative or are you assuming that from his films?

Sunil

He's a conservative who's into TM.

From: Wm. B. Yeats WBYeats@Ireland.com

America's two best filmmakers? Lynch? Guess Marty Scorcese doesn't
count anymore. And Clint's best films are apolitical. I thought I
referred to great films with a POV.


Seriously, when was the last time Scorsese lived up to his reputation as
America's best filmmaker? Goodfellas? Even Spielberg's become a more
consistently interesting filmmaker. Scorsese looks like someone dangerously
close to being past his peak.

A great film with a conservative POV: 25th Hour, from a director that the
right wing despises (because he's black and opinionated). Throughout the
movie, Lee emphasizes that though Norton's character is a nice guy, he's a drug
dealer, he's corrupted the environment, and he deserves to go to jail. Philip
Seymour Hoffman's character is lusting after one of his students and most
filmmakers would give the guy a pass and let him go for it, but in Lee's do the
right thing world, screwing your student is not something you do. And he ends
the movie with a vision of Americana that looks like something out of
Mellencamp or Springsteen, minus the social critique.

On 14 Apr 2004 14:17:37 GMT, nmacphe421@aol.com (Nick Macpherson)
wrote:

From: Wm. B. Yeats WBYeats@Ireland.com

America's two best filmmakers? Lynch? Guess Marty Scorcese doesn't
count anymore. And Clint's best films are apolitical. I thought I
referred to great films with a POV.


Seriously, when was the last time Scorsese lived up to his reputation as
America's best filmmaker? Goodfellas? Even Spielberg's become a more
consistently interesting filmmaker. Scorsese looks like someone dangerously
close to being past his peak.

I realize that I'm in the minority but I thought that, while flawed in
places, Gangs of NY was well-directed. I could have done without
Cameron Diaz and I question the casting of DiCaprio.

"Nick Macpherson" <nmacphe421@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040413222741.17623.00000225@mb-m20.aol.com...
From: "Sunil" ternaryadjust@hotmail.com

America's two best working filmmakers have reputations as political
conservatives: Clint Eastwood and David Lynch. Blue Velvet is a very
conservative film. One college reviewer described it as "Christian
pornography," (and meant it as a compliment, unlike those of us who
level
the
same charge against The Passion of the Christ.)

You do realize David Lynch is into Trancendental Meditation? Did he
actually
say he's conservative or are you assuming that from his films?

Sunil

He's a conservative who's into TM.


I didn't want to suggest that TMers can't be conservative, I just figured
they would have a higher correlation with liberals.

You say he's a libertarian. Libertarian is technically the most liberal
party there is, in the true sense of the word "liberal", although they are
actually a mixture of what is typically considered "liberal" and
"conservative". They hold a more extreme version of the democrat's positions
on social issues and a more extreme version of the republican's positions on
business and economic issues. I would call both of these things liberal. But
you have to admit at the very least that the party is half-liberal.

Admiring a man is a far cry from holding his beliefs.

Sunil

From: Wm. B. Yeats WBYeats@Ireland.com

A great film with a conservative POV: 25th Hour, from a director that the
right wing despises (because he's black and opinionated). Throughout the
movie, Lee emphasizes that though Norton's character is a nice guy, he's a
drug
dealer, he's corrupted the environment, and he deserves to go to jail.
Philip
Seymour Hoffman's character is lusting after one of his students and most
filmmakers would give the guy a pass and let him go for it, but in Lee's do
the
right thing world, screwing your student is not something you do. And he
ends
the movie with a vision of Americana that looks like something out of
Mellencamp or Springsteen, minus the social critique.

Doesn't sound right wing to me. More of a morality tale without
Spike's expounding on anything much but right and wrong. I'd agree
that it is an excellent film and Lee's best in a while.

From: John Harkness jhXaYrknessZ@sympatico.ca

I've noted in a couple columns in recent years that Scorsese tends to
get cut far more slack on his pure commercial exercises than someone
like Spielberg, and, conversely he's allowed to slide when his films,
how to put this politely? fail to connect with an audience than does
Lynch, who tends to get denounced as an obscurantist weirdo. (Like
Lynch has ever made anything as obscure and weird as Kundun).

Is Scorsese one of America's best filmmakers? Surely.

Is he the best living American director? That's a subject for debate.

The line on Spielberg and Scorsese used to be that Scorsese was America's best

Like Grapes of Wrath - yeah, that's a really conservative right-wing
film.

I love how Lee comes out and says all these conservative-friendly things about
how peurile black sitcoms are, how bad gangsta rap is, complaining about Sam
Jackson's use of racial slurs in Jackie Brown, how OJ was guilty, how young
blacks need to use better grammar, etc. but he never gets any praise from the
right wing. People like Bill O'Reilly go on and on and on about the same
things but O'Reilly's a racist. You can't trust waord he says. He fucks up
discussions we need to be having because of his paranoid white man hatefulness

(I mean, how many times does he need to be told Ludacris isn't meant to be
taken seriously?). So I see a difference between someone with conservative
points of view and someone towing the right wing party line. It's one thing to
be offended by what you see on TV or hear in the media--it's another thing to
scapegoat Janet Jackson and Howard Stern and want to destroy their careers and
prove Al Franken right--it's not enough for the right wing to disagree with
you, they have to punish you.

It was fascinating watching the two of them on last week's De Mille documentary
on TCM. Spielberg was full of typical Hollywood schmooze and false modesty.
You could tell that no matter how many nice things he had to say about De
Mille, he wouldn't for a second trade his own talent for De Mille's. On the
other hand, when Scorsese says something like "I could never do a shot that
good," about some scene in Ten Commandments, he has a look of mortal fear in
his eyes, like a filmmaker who thinks he's going to die without equalling Cecil
B. De Mille.

Wm. B. Yeats wrote:

But getting back to film - many great movies come to mind made by
liberals (Kane, Gentleman's Agreement, President's Men, On the Beach)
but I can't think of any great movies which makes viewers THINK and
are made by right wingers. Can you?

THE SEARCHERS (and a couple other great movies) by John Ford. IIRC,
he wasn't a liberal kind of guy--g!

C.
**

From: deering24@mindspring.com

Wm. B. Yeats wrote:

But getting back to film - many great movies come to mind made by
liberals (Kane, Gentleman's Agreement, President's Men, On the Beach)
but I can't think of any great movies which makes viewers THINK and
are made by right wingers. Can you?

THE SEARCHERS (and a couple other great movies) by John Ford. IIRC,
he wasn't a liberal kind of guy--g!

C.
**
America's two best working filmmakers have reputations as political
conservatives: Clint Eastwood and David Lynch. Blue Velvet is a very
conservative film. One college reviewer described it as "Christian
pornography," (and meant it as a compliment, unlike those of us who level the
same charge against The Passion of the Christ.)

From: John Harkness jhXaYrknessZ@sympatico.ca

I've noted in a couple columns in recent years that Scorsese tends to
get cut far more slack on his pure commercial exercises than someone
like Spielberg, and, conversely he's allowed to slide when his films,
how to put this politely? fail to connect with an audience than does
Lynch, who tends to get denounced as an obscurantist weirdo. (Like
Lynch has ever made anything as obscure and weird as Kundun).

Is Scorsese one of America's best filmmakers? Surely.

Is he the best living American director? That's a subject for debate.

The line on Spielberg and Scorsese used to be that Scorsese was America's best
serious director and Spielberg was America's most entertaining director. Who
would have thought that from Saving Private Ryan on (and definitely with AI and
Minority Report), that Spielberg would be a darker and more challenging (and
more flawed) filmmaker than Martin Scorsese?

It was fascinating watching the two of them on last week's De Mille documentary
on TCM. Spielberg was full of typical Hollywood schmooze and false modesty.
You could tell that no matter how many nice things he had to say about De
Mille, he wouldn't for a second trade his own talent for De Mille's. On the
other hand, when Scorsese says something like "I could never do a shot that
good," about some scene in Ten Commandments, he has a look of mortal fear in
his eyes, like a filmmaker who thinks he's going to die without equalling Cecil
B. De Mille.

How can liberals be rich if they are anti-capitalism?

Liberals putting politics on film
The silver screen has become an election-year battlefield.
at http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040413-121654-9058r.htm

How can liberals be rich if they are anti-capitalism?