The British Guardian/Observer,
after recounting its sleazy history, declares the film has “intelligence, epic
thrust and visual grandeur.”
Sorting through Aurora’s emotional
carnage and looking for reasons and/or scapegoats, consider those deep thinkers
who elevate hyperkinetic junk into art—-the nation’s “serious” movie critics who
tell today’s generations that lowbrow comic books of half a century ago have
morphed into graphic novels of intellectually high caliber and guilty-pleasure
movies of back then are must-see cultural events.
We are a long way from the
1950s when a pop psychiatrist “attacked Bruce Wayne and Dick Grayson's menage
as a covert celebration of homosexuality. Ten years later, however, when Susan
Sontag's seminal essay Notes on Camp promoted kitsch and the idea of ‘it's good
because it's bad,’” Batman was on its way to today’s respectability.
In the post-9/11 world,
dominated by nameless dread and a desperate need to be in-the-know, there is
certainly a market for amped-up vicarious experiences of power and superiority by
anxiety-ridden audiences. Yet at what moral price?
For the latest mass murderer,
dressing up in costume to kill innocent people at a midnight showing must have
seemed like a logical extension of the Batman values being projected on the big
screen.
Hollywood has a long tradition
of scoffing message movies, which attempt to elevate audiences’ thinking and
end up boring them to death.
Shock for its own sake has always been the last refuge of the untalented in art and commerce. Assaulting the senses to grab attention is easy. Rewarding the mind is not.
Shock for its own sake has always been the last refuge of the untalented in art and commerce. Assaulting the senses to grab attention is easy. Rewarding the mind is not.
Will movie makers and critics
who slavishly take their output on its own terms give some serious thought to
what they are unthinkingly selling? The hype has higher costs than the price of
tickets and popcorn.
No comments:
Post a Comment