intertribal (
intertribal) wrote2008-05-24 06:54 pm
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Entry tags:
turistas go home!
The title is my reaction to Indiana Jones: The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. The above is also my reaction to every Indiana Jones movie, so I guess if you like Indiana Jones, you'll like it.
Let me just say though, that as someone who watched 9 FUCKING seasons of the X-Files, this sanitized, Americanized, and abridged version in 2 1/2 hours and M&Ms packaging just feels like a smack in the fucking face.
+ : every time Indiana Jones fails at something.
- : every time Indiana Jones succeeds at something.
best character: crazy professor man + mutt
worst character: marion ravenwood + indiana jones
best impossibility: Indiana Jones gets pulled out of a sand trap by holding onto a snake that is somehow able to hold his entire weight!
worst impossibility: Indiana Jones survives a nuclear explosion by hiding in a refrigerator and doesn't die of cancer in three weeks!
Let me just say though, that as someone who watched 9 FUCKING seasons of the X-Files, this sanitized, Americanized, and abridged version in 2 1/2 hours and M&Ms packaging just feels like a smack in the fucking face.
+ : every time Indiana Jones fails at something.
- : every time Indiana Jones succeeds at something.
best character: crazy professor man + mutt
worst character: marion ravenwood + indiana jones
best impossibility: Indiana Jones gets pulled out of a sand trap by holding onto a snake that is somehow able to hold his entire weight!
worst impossibility: Indiana Jones survives a nuclear explosion by hiding in a refrigerator and doesn't die of cancer in three weeks!
no subject
I liked Indiana Jones when I was little...not so much now. *shrug*
no subject
I never liked the bastard.
no subject
I meant the movies, not the man. They were fast-paced and action-packed! With Nazis!
no subject
no subject
That and the depiction of the world outside America has always sucked. I know the pulp is part of the appeal, and yeah, look at how great we've been in foreign policy. Not that I think Indiana Jones has caused our foreign policy attitudes but that sort of "aw, it's all in good fun" makes me really freakin' tired. It's what my mother says. She's the one that dragged me to this. Except now it's Soviets, not Nazis, because there must be an enemy and it never gets old to make fun of Communists - EVEN NOW. I can't wait for Indiana Jones 5, where theyll be trying to (TRYING TO? they'll SUCCEED of course, probably with the help of zombies) outsmart Mao Zedong.
Sorry, I just hate this shit.
no subject
I'm not arguing that Indiana Jones presents an informed or balanced or good view of the world--far from it, of course. I don't think it so much influences people as plays to pre-existing attitudes and stereotypes. Like a lot of media does. Including political campaigns. Kind of the problem with anything "fast-paced" usually. To 'get' it, you have to be the audience it plays to, have to have the stereotypes it draws on. Same thing with advertising, same thing with 'racist jokes', etc., etc.
Anyway, I think when I enjoyed it, it was purely for the adventure. I had no idea who they were stereotyping or heroizing (yeah, that's a word...). I didn't get the 'romantic' parts. I just liked the puzzles and the treasure and traps and danger and running around. I suppose I like that in a lot of things, from DBZ to videogames. In that sense, yes, it is all in good fun. Unless we're talking about how fantasy numbs the masses or something.
no subject
Jesus christ. Am I accusing you of anything? No! If anything I'm venting about my mother's attitude, and I've already said that.
I think it reinforces those pre-existing attitudes and stereotypes, and a lot of those stereotypes anger me. Is it going to make everybody who sees it think people in the Amazon are moronic poison-dart throwers? No. But for some people who are already ready to accept certain stereotypes, it just makes it all the easier to keep on believing what they believe, and I don't think a country like the U.S. needs any help in that department. Conservative politicians quote 24 nowadays. They know it's going to resonate and make them look cool.
And i don't think Indiana Jones is far enough away from what looks like a modern, real world to be given the same leniency as most fantasy. And if it mocked itself - if it really actually mocked itself - then that would be a different story. But it doesn't. Even Rambo makes more fun of itself than Indiana Jones. But you know, that's the same reason I wasn't impressed with Iron Man. It was just proud of its machismo and offered no room for anyone to say, wait, I don't like this, precisely because it is so aligned with what popular culture conceives as cool. And the same with Narnia and its religious overtones - no room for criticism because to do so is to fight the basic plot of Christianity. That's what it means to be part of the hegemonic culture. Criticism becomes very difficult. I'm not saying that you in particular are making criticism difficult, I'm just noting how these movies set themselves up, through plot and styling and dialogue, so that you can't argue with them and their characters are perfect.
Of course there are parts of the movie that are entertaining and funny. It says something that the most entertaining parts of the movie were the parts where Indiana Jones wasn't perfect. The adventure bits were mostly rehashed from earlier movies and at any rate, hardly surprising. It's not good when the audience solves the riddle before the characters do.
no subject
Frankly, I'd say the same think about any politician, including Barack Obama...especially the more popular ones, I suppose. But in saying that, I'm not necessarily trying to lay blame on him--it's a problem with how our (televised) political campaigning system works, and possibly more than that.
I don't know how much it goes to reinforce them, but it certain doesn't contradict them...and what does tends to be ridiculed, marginalized, or simply not accepted.
I'm not sure what you mean about there not being room for criticism of Narnia and Indiana Jones, although I do get the thing about not mocking itself. I guess I'd say (and maybe this is my own way of saying the same thing) that it makes criticism have to come from an essentially reactive standpoint, from someone pointing a finger at it and calling it wrong. And yes, that is what it means to be part of the hegemonic culture.
But I have just as much of a problem with that sort of criticism as I do with the original prejudices. Which is what I meant to say. It sets up a system in which you have to divide yourself, you have to make an "us" (the marginalized viewpoint) and "them" (the hegemonic one) that invariably get moralized, to even be able to argue for something different. That, in my view, is what the worst part of it is. I suppose the only way for it not to be that way is to change the structure of the culture/society itself as a whole, because only then can you change what it is that's making the hegemonic viewpoint hegemonic. Not that societies are independent structures that can be separated out and counted.
I haven't seen the new movie, nor have I seen the old ones in a very long time. The rehashing seems pretty lame, though. Actually, I didn't know there was a new one till the other day when Tara pointed this out on her cereal box, and it weirded me out, 'cause Harrison Ford is like ancient now.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
I agree that criticism should ideally not be built around us vs. them language. It should be like David Broder, completely calm and level-headed. But I'm responding emotionally here.
no subject
In my view it's the worst part because it's what makes all criticism ineffectual. Thereby the criticism itself is part of the process of making itself ineffectual. It's really quite sad.
I have no idea who David Broder is, but I s'pose my opinion is similar to that. For me, though, it's not a matter so much of us vs. them language, though, as us vs. them social positions and identities. Whether the criticism is emotional or level-headed, so long as it's laying blame, or even just so long as it's creating social difference, it's doing the same work, and that difference, in a hierarchical structure, just pushes you further down.
no subject
no subject
no subject
I admit I'm taking a lot from Nietzsche and Bourdieu and Judith Butler and various other authors and Steve...so it'll probably take a lot to convince me otherwise.
no subject
no subject
i do realize i didn't represent myself very well before, as saying that's true of "all criticism" is blatantly false, and I contradicted myself, so if this is a misunderstanding, I take a good share of the blame. sorry.
no subject
I have no authors backing me, but I will admit that I come from a lot of anger, especially regarding race and wealth. Just reading what you write makes it difficult to breathe/not scream, so I'll have to stop now. Sorry, I'm an idealistic hick. But since it'll take a lot to convince you lot otherwise, I'm not going to try.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(Anonymous) - 2008-05-26 06:34 (UTC) - Expand(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject