At 01:46 PM 27/10/2007, Kevin wrote, re Sin City: So perfect
for the fourteen year olds that make up the so much of the
movie-going audience.
Thanks Kevin. I haven't been called a 14 year old for 44
years.
No prob. But to enjoy SIN CITY -- or a lot of what passes for
movies these days, you really do have to gear down.
The irony is that SIN CITY gets labeled "for mature (or
adult) audiences only" and yet it's geared directly to the
14-year old in all of us. There's nothing particularly adult
or mature in it. It may be visually a little more
sophisticated than your average THREE'S COMPANY episode, but
it's still popcorn, pure and simple.
Not that there's anything inherently wrong with that,
providing you can shift back into adult mode
eventually.
I don't know... SIN CITY looked cool, but to me it was just a
pretentious comic book (OOOH, black ink!) turned into a
pretentious cartoon, PULP FICTION meets Bugs Bunny, but
without the wit of either. Would either the graphic novel or
the film of SIN CITY have survived as a straight prose story,
without the visuals?
Isn't that sort of the point? I took the movie to be the new
millennium's equivalent of what was once called "camp," a
sort of surreal self parody. I loved watching Mickey Rourke
play a role that appeared to me to be an ideal of his own
public image, drawn to the extreme and illogical end. My
impression is that the movie did the same to the hardboil
genre itself. Sort of a slap in the face to fans like us that
this is what we enjoy and take seriously, to which our only
logical response must be to laugh and ask, "Is that all you
got?"
Unfortunately, a parody isn't necessarily the thing itself.
If I'm going to fork over my movie money for parodies and
spoofs, I prefer them to be a little less broad; a little
more nuanced. A little less hit over the head and slapped in
the face and a little more nudge nudge wink wink.
I enjoyed BRICK and KISS KISS BANG BANG, for example. But
that might also be because their affection for the genre was
obvious whereas SIN CITY actually didn't seem particularly
affectionate about anything, much less the genre it's
supposedly parodying. Hell, it didn't even seem all that
knowledgeable about it.
It did, however, seem in love with the worst and most obvious
excesses of it, what Chandler in a particular moment of
self-hatred likened to "Tarzan on a motor scooter." As Nathan
insightfully pointed out, "(SIN CITY is) almost a parody of
Spillane, whose work already comes close to being a
parody.... I mean, when someone does a half-assed genre
attempt, like Sin City, or they're looking to parody PI's for
a sitcom episode or something similar, Spillane's style is
often what gets used as source material. Did his work seem
fresh when it originally came out?"
Only for those who'd never read RACE WILLIAMS, Spillane's
obvious
(and acknowledged) inspiration.
And 300 was much the same, all fat and precious little meat.
Except it added the gay element. So homophobic 14-year olds
could look at naked sweaty, well-built men and not have to
wait for football season. It's got to be about the gayest
straight movie ever made.
Well, there's an insight. Funny, too. I wonder if as many of
my fellow 14 year olds are sweating over their sexual
identities after seeing 300 as hardboil fans are sweating
over the revelations to come about what it might mean to
enjoy Chandler.
We'll know if Miller's Marlowe spends most of the film going
down those mean streets displaying his oiled, buff bod and
parading around in a leather thong.
Don't even ask where he hangs his fedora.
Kevin Burton Smith The Thrilling Detective Web Site
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 29 Oct 2007 EDT