> Surely, there needs to be a distinction between Welles himself and an
>actor (Vincent D'Onofrio) playing Welles in an ideological perspective in
>a film where very little discrimination is made between a director who
>undoubtedly made bad films and one with talent who was ruined by the
>system in Hollywood.
> In this sense ED WOOD is an ideal conservative postmodernist film, a
>drooling homage by a director who sees little difference between Welles
>and Wood - a real questionable equivalence.
> Tony Williams
I don't see how "Ed Wood" can be construed as a "drooling homage." It's
more of a fond pastiche. As for the difference between Welles and Wood,
surely the great man's appearance in Wood's life at that moment-a brush
with greatness- would have been just the sort of "sign from God" to push
the wingnut Wood to further flights of folly. Welles would have been
ignorant of Wood and so oblvious to the potential cinematic sin his words
might have inspired. This is perhaps where Tim Burton takes the greatest
liberty with realism: Welles would probably have told Wood to piss off.
>To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
>in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]
To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]