Dear Ms. Dunst,
First of all, let me introduce myself. I am a blogger on this site. Okay, introductions aside. In conversations recent and not so recent with my male contemporaries, it has occurred to me that many of them find you unattractive - if not really unattractive. It then occurred to me that these colleagues of mine are not so dissimilar from the average guy. Therefore, I feel that it must be fairly difficult for you to get a date. I think that is really a shame. To be a movie star who has appeared in many different films, you must feel alone in the world, no one to share in your triumphs and joys as well as your crestfallen moments. I am different. Unlike my counterparts, I do find you attractive. So, you don't have to feel so alone anymore. (yay me!). As you read this I'm sure you're thinking, sure, whatever, I've read these letters before. And you know what, maybe you have. But I'm asking you to take a chance with someone you've never met, and who must appear pretty crazy. But you know what? Maybe it's crazy to think that two kids can make it in this world, but it's a chance I'm willing to take. The only question then, is, are you willing to take a chance?
If I don't hear back from you in three days, I'll just have to think that you've read the letter and have decided not to act.
-cjfer-
Saturday, May 31, 2008
Friday, May 30, 2008
The art of my generation
I'm really interested in what kind of Art my generation produces, especially the films. My generation, those say 20-28 (a generation they say is 25 years, but I don't feel I have much in common with 1 year olds), I feel are a sort of bi-polar generation. On the one hand I see a generation of young people committed to public service and generally committed to the saving the world (that's the east coast part of me) and then I see a generation as equally self involved, under-educated and under-responsible (the west coast).
In a way I think it's easy to draw parallels between these times and the times of the late 1970s. We have oil issues that don't seem to be getting solved, we have crises in the middle east that we're helpless to change and the body politic seems to be growing restless, cynical, and we feel like there's nothing we can do about it. These feelings aren't unique, and they don't speak for everyone - I'm sure some people don't quite care what's going on - but insofar as these feelings are new to us, they are important.
Whereas the film climate in the mid 1970s, before Jaws and Star Wars came out - was one of cynicism, politicking, and feminism. Those two films came out and changed the film culture forever, the blockbuster was born. When I look at the climate of films today, it seems as if we're not quite in the same world. While we have a growing concern for the way the world is going, (far more nebulous than any time in history as there is no more real enemy and the real enemy is hard to find - you can't put a face on global warming) our films don't seem to reflect that. Our films are still fairly big popcorn movies, a hold over from the late '70s and early 80's. We'll have to wait until the fall to get into the more political things. But is important to know that we can't just make fun movies that will capture people's imaginations in the same way that those first blockbusters did because those types movies are being made today. But we can't necessarily make the scathing political films we might want to because those films are also being made to some extent as well.
So then the question begs itself, what kinds of films will we make, given the opportunity? Well, first of all, our parents generation will have to retire or quit or something to give us a chance. While the kings of that generation aren't hurting for money, it's going to be hard for them to slow down. Nonetheless, in 10 years we'll be in our primes and they will be that much older. So what?
While I see the general climate of my generation as being politically moderate to apathetic, there is another section that is quite politically active. The problem is that we've come up in a time when the most political members of our generation are split in their political ideologies quite fervently.
My fear is that our films will be polarized. I see our artists, in many cases, either being too far on the left, or being too apathetic to make a statement, whatever it might be. Therefore, I can't predict what we might do. Will we continue to muddle in the current state of Hollywood affairs, will we be political partisans, or will we find a new and original relationship to cinema, storytelling, and the interpretations of our times. If nothing else, we continue to make films because they serve as documents of our own times. I hope our films about Vietnam are made with an observational tone (if not an emotional one) but I hope that we should be able to see more clearly and accurately the events of the 20th century, because we weren't blinded by the politics of the time. Oliver Stone, therefore, has no place here (which is not to say that his films aren't important or valuable). Will we even go back and examine history, or will be preach about the Iraq war and oil prices?
Our challenge is going to be in finding honesty and peace in our films and our decisions as artists and filmmakers. We must not be blinded by desire to create propaganda, right or left wing, but instead be driven to be moved and compelled by the facts, and dare I say it, truth, whatever that means. Let us not give in to the maudlin, or the over-intellectualized preaching that comes with standing completely apart from history. Let us be moved and understand the times, and then, if we are actually artists we might be able to interpret events for the benefit of a society as a whole. Then again, we might not actually be artists, we might have chosen to do this because it seemed fun. Hopefully not.
-cjfer-
In a way I think it's easy to draw parallels between these times and the times of the late 1970s. We have oil issues that don't seem to be getting solved, we have crises in the middle east that we're helpless to change and the body politic seems to be growing restless, cynical, and we feel like there's nothing we can do about it. These feelings aren't unique, and they don't speak for everyone - I'm sure some people don't quite care what's going on - but insofar as these feelings are new to us, they are important.
Whereas the film climate in the mid 1970s, before Jaws and Star Wars came out - was one of cynicism, politicking, and feminism. Those two films came out and changed the film culture forever, the blockbuster was born. When I look at the climate of films today, it seems as if we're not quite in the same world. While we have a growing concern for the way the world is going, (far more nebulous than any time in history as there is no more real enemy and the real enemy is hard to find - you can't put a face on global warming) our films don't seem to reflect that. Our films are still fairly big popcorn movies, a hold over from the late '70s and early 80's. We'll have to wait until the fall to get into the more political things. But is important to know that we can't just make fun movies that will capture people's imaginations in the same way that those first blockbusters did because those types movies are being made today. But we can't necessarily make the scathing political films we might want to because those films are also being made to some extent as well.
So then the question begs itself, what kinds of films will we make, given the opportunity? Well, first of all, our parents generation will have to retire or quit or something to give us a chance. While the kings of that generation aren't hurting for money, it's going to be hard for them to slow down. Nonetheless, in 10 years we'll be in our primes and they will be that much older. So what?
While I see the general climate of my generation as being politically moderate to apathetic, there is another section that is quite politically active. The problem is that we've come up in a time when the most political members of our generation are split in their political ideologies quite fervently.
My fear is that our films will be polarized. I see our artists, in many cases, either being too far on the left, or being too apathetic to make a statement, whatever it might be. Therefore, I can't predict what we might do. Will we continue to muddle in the current state of Hollywood affairs, will we be political partisans, or will we find a new and original relationship to cinema, storytelling, and the interpretations of our times. If nothing else, we continue to make films because they serve as documents of our own times. I hope our films about Vietnam are made with an observational tone (if not an emotional one) but I hope that we should be able to see more clearly and accurately the events of the 20th century, because we weren't blinded by the politics of the time. Oliver Stone, therefore, has no place here (which is not to say that his films aren't important or valuable). Will we even go back and examine history, or will be preach about the Iraq war and oil prices?
Our challenge is going to be in finding honesty and peace in our films and our decisions as artists and filmmakers. We must not be blinded by desire to create propaganda, right or left wing, but instead be driven to be moved and compelled by the facts, and dare I say it, truth, whatever that means. Let us not give in to the maudlin, or the over-intellectualized preaching that comes with standing completely apart from history. Let us be moved and understand the times, and then, if we are actually artists we might be able to interpret events for the benefit of a society as a whole. Then again, we might not actually be artists, we might have chosen to do this because it seemed fun. Hopefully not.
-cjfer-
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Time to Get a Move On
With a witty title like that, you would think I would be talking about MoveOn.org or something, but no, I'm not that witty or topical. It's 2009 people. We've got to wake up. Is it going to be Barackalacka ding dong or HillRodimus Prime doing the political mumbo jumbo in Noverbercon?
Honestly, I think neither. Hear me out.
So picture this: you've got two wolves circling each other in the wild. They're hungry, and there is nothing to eat but each other. They each go for a tasty bite, and then another, and pretty soon they've devoured each other. Now, imagine that the candidates are doing this. They R doing this...in fact so much so that I didn't even feel I needed to write the word "are". Now, imagine a third wolf shows up and just stands there, like an idiot.
This is where Howard Dean comes in. No, seriously. The guy got the shaft last election, and now he's the head of the party. He's biding his time, people. He's making all sorts of claims about how "the results won't matter" and how "the candidate needs to be electable". Let me ask you this. If I make the rules to a game, and you're playing my game, won't I change the rules so that I can win? I mean, this guy could declare himself the high overlord of Democratania if he wanted to. Now, I'm sure there are things like "delegates" and "representatives" to deal with, and some sort of "convention", but don't you think the best candidate will find a way around these things?
After all, the Dems need to beat the Republicans at their own game...
Electoral Politics.
And Handball.
Honestly, I think neither. Hear me out.
So picture this: you've got two wolves circling each other in the wild. They're hungry, and there is nothing to eat but each other. They each go for a tasty bite, and then another, and pretty soon they've devoured each other. Now, imagine that the candidates are doing this. They R doing this...in fact so much so that I didn't even feel I needed to write the word "are". Now, imagine a third wolf shows up and just stands there, like an idiot.
This is where Howard Dean comes in. No, seriously. The guy got the shaft last election, and now he's the head of the party. He's biding his time, people. He's making all sorts of claims about how "the results won't matter" and how "the candidate needs to be electable". Let me ask you this. If I make the rules to a game, and you're playing my game, won't I change the rules so that I can win? I mean, this guy could declare himself the high overlord of Democratania if he wanted to. Now, I'm sure there are things like "delegates" and "representatives" to deal with, and some sort of "convention", but don't you think the best candidate will find a way around these things?
After all, the Dems need to beat the Republicans at their own game...
Electoral Politics.
And Handball.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)