The Quiet American is a decent sort of film as well. I will be
interested to know what US Americans think of it, and Vietnamese and
French. I liked it very much, terrific photography and restrained
performance from Sir Michael.
I assume it is still being released in the USA. It comes out in
Australia mid January. I believe it was a struggle to achieve its
release in the US, that it may have thought to be 'anti-American'. Is
Greene's book also on the hit list, I wonder?
Cheers,
Jill
On Tuesday, December 10, 2002, at 08:48 AM, paul murphy wrote:
> well, I also think that society is a bit more advanced than it was in
> Tudor times, ie advanced enough to engender the hypocrisy you speak
> of. Maintaining freedom of speech, or the illusion of freedom, is
> also a money making operation, some call it a parallel scheme, a slush
> fund. As a PS has anyone seen The Tresspasser (Brazil), The Dancer
> Upstairs (US) or The Quiet American (US)? I thought The Dancer
> Upstairs to be a decent film, although the depiction of good, honest
> law enforcers chasing funny old Profs who turn out to be leaders of
> Maoist sects seems a bit of a whitewash to say the least. No mention
> of corrupted law enforcers taking backhanders left, right and centre,
> while allowing their associates in the paramilitary organisations and
> death squads to do the business on their opponents. No mention of
> quite a lot of things about LA really? PM
>
>
>
> >From: Mark Weiss
>
> >Reply-To: Poetryetc provides a venue for a dialogue relating to
> poetry and poetics
>
> >To: [log in to unmask]
>
> >Subject: Re: forrest gump!
>
> >Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 13:29:50 -0800
>
> >
>
> >Apropos Hollywood, not Shakespeare:
>
> >
>
> >Those in power in the US are, unlike Tudor monarchs, so secure in
>
> >their
>
> >power that they regularly fund the production of films in which the
>
> >powerful are portrayed as unrelentingly evil. The conspiratorial
>
> >politician
>
> >or billionaire have become cliches to the extent that they function
>
> >as
>
> >demons ex machina. And the real life plutocrats pocket the resultant
>
> >profits and fund the politicians, laughing all the way to the bank.
>
> >
>
> >Mark
>
> >
>
> >At 07:50 AM 12/10/2002 +1000, you wrote:
>
> >>>At 6:58 PM +0000 12/9/02, paul murphy wrote:
>
> >>> If he was paid to write the things that the powerful wanted to
>
> >>>hear, what has really changed? The powerful are still so
>
> >>>conceited
>
> >>>to pay the artist for a flattering depiction, and equally
>
> >>>intolerant
>
> >>>of that which fails to flatter, pathetic really, and maybe it will
>
> >>>always be thus...
>
> >>
>
> >>Jan Kott, the brilliant Polish theatre critic, has some very
>
> >>interesting things to say about Shakespeare's portrayal of power in
>
> >>the history plays in "Shakespeare for Our Time" (and other works).
>
> >>If Shakespeare were simply a flatterer of the powerful, he would
>
> >>not
>
> >>have been so enthusiastically used as part of the samizdat theatre
>
> >>movement in Poland.
>
> >>
>
> >>Best
>
> >>
>
> >>Alison
>
> >>--
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>Alison Croggon
>
> >>Home page
>
> >>http://www.users.bigpond.com/acroggon/
>
> >>
>
> >>Masthead Online
>
> >>http://au.geocities.com/masthead_2/
>
>
<image.tiff>
>
> MSN 8 helps ELIMINATE E-MAIL VIRUSES. Get 2 months FREE*.
_______________________________________________________
Jill Jones
http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~jpjones
Latest book: Screens Jets Heaven. Available now from Salt Publishing
http://www.saltpublishing.com
|