The MPAA is a bully

The MPAA is being a bully. It teases us with misleading ratings and then pummels us with violence. It saps all the fun and meaning out of naughty words. It dangles interesting and important films just out of reach. And it holds a stubborn grudge when anyone thinks to complain about it.

Never have we been more irritated by the MPAA’s annoyances than recently with the upcoming documentary “Bully.”

“Bully” captures middle and high school students in their everyday social lives in an effort to point out the cruel behavior of teenage bullies that led one of its student subjects to suicide.

It was bound to be controversial, but the MPAA bestowed the film with an R-rating because it contains “some language,” effectively restricting it from the under-17 teenagers it depicts.

School field trips have been cancelled, teen advocates have generated petitions, producer Harvey Weinstein has threatened to abandon the MPAA, and critics have thrown around as many four-letter words as those used by the kids in the movie.

And after similar controversies with films like “The King’s Speech” and “Blue Valentine,” the latter of which initially received an NC-17 rating, effectively banning it from most movie theaters, it has become clear the MPAA rating scale needs rethinking. Continue reading “The MPAA is a bully”

Pictures of People: Thoughts on Biopics

How do biopics shape our memory of historical figures?

“Today, I consider myself the luckiest man on the face of the Earth.”

Lou Gehrig spoke these words and was immortalized.

But Gary Cooper spoke them too. His wonderful monologue at the end of “The Pride of the Yankees” forever shaped and dramatized the image of Gehrig. In fact, the last thing Gehrig said at the end of his speech were not those infamous words but “I may have been given a bad break, but I’ve got an awful lot to live for.”

Had it been these words Gehrig wanted to be remembered, he might not consider himself quite as lucky.

The biopic is a peculiar genre in film with the power to influence historical perception more than reality itself. If a director’s goal is typically to entertain or make a statement through a work of art, then the biopic is not often viewed as a director intended but as a recreation of a true moment in time.

How will audiences going to see “J. Edgar” this weekend react? Perhaps several generations now have no memory of J. Edgar Hoover or what people thought of him as he was alive. Their imagination of the man will be limited to Leonardo DiCaprio and the story Clint Eastwood tells. Continue reading “Pictures of People: Thoughts on Biopics”

The King’s Speech

“The King’s Speech” was made in the 1940s, I’m almost sure of it. Director Tom Hooper’s film feels so much like one, and it’s just as good as anything in that golden age of movies.

For example, a majority of the films released during that time went to promoting the war effort and used World War II as a real world back drop. “The King’s Speech” is based on the true story of King George VI, who despite a crippling fear of public speaking and a terrible speech impediment, overcame his disability to unite the country during war time while the whole world was for the first time listening on radio.

And everything about the film screams that classical quality. The screen acting is superb and charismatic. The dialogue is fast, witty and poignant. The spacious cinematography compliments the dim art direction that begs to have been shot in black and white.

“The King’s Speech” is a true throwback to the good ‘ole days, and I suspect this film that won the top prize at the Toronto Film Festival will give “The Social Network” a run for its money in the Best Picture race, becoming a battle between the values of new and old Hollywood. Continue reading “The King’s Speech”