SCREEN-L Archives

July 1994


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Guy Rosefelt <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 19 Jul 1994 11:10:06 U
text/plain (31 lines)
Mail*Link(r) SMTP               RE>Re[3: True Lies
>>We spend our entertainment buck to be entertained.  If we're
>>exposed to political messages (and yes, I'm familiar with the
>>argument that ALL discourse is political, though I have a problem
>>figuring out what that little Deer X-ing sign REALLY means at its
>>political core), then they're often subtle enough to be completely
>>A friend recently overheard two little old ladies describing "Thelma
>>and Louise."  Their opinion was that it was a "sweet little movie about
>>about a couple of girls who had some adventures, got into some kind
>>of trouble, and then held hands and jumped over the Grand Canyon."
>>So even the MOST political subtexts, it seems, are often missed.  I
>>just think we too often ring the alarm bells, since we're the kinds
>>of folks who make a living by looking for socio-political messages
>>on cereal boxes.  (Ever noticed the Trix rabbit is WHITE?  Just
>>imagine what that does subconciously to children of color|)
>>Denise Bryson, Language and Literature
>>[log in to unmask]
I heartily agree with you.  Movies are foremost entertainment.  Any effort to
educate or extract a response beyond enjoyment is secondary.  I posted a
similar opinion on CINEMA-L and got shot down for it too.