Before the domination of television, video games, computers and the Inter-webs, people went to the movies a lot more than they do now. People still see plenty of movies, but many of them are at home, via TV, DVDs, or streaming. Going to the movie theater has become less routine.
Part of the reason has to do with the aforementioned competition from other entertainment sources. Part of it has to do with the pricing of the theater and its refreshments. What used to be under a dollar in the fifties and sixties now has become uncomfortably expensive for a family. I'm pretty sure if it was examined, you would find that the cost of going to a movie has exceeded the cost of inflation, and certainly the lack of rise in middle class incomes over the last few decades.
So American movie goers have become more selective in what they see. Every five to seven years, one movie pulls in people who are the rare movie attendees, those who only go to a movie once or twice a decade. Why they choose the movie they do, is something that fascinates and mystifies me.
Forrest Gump some twenty years ago was such a movie. Its box office exploded beyond all expectations because of this phenomena. Why? I saw it once, and thought it was a good movie, but not a great movie. But something in it rang true to a lot of people, and caused those infrequent goers to show up. I'm not sure why. It used some unique techniques in placing Forrest into archival historical footage, and it was directed by one of my favorite directors, Robert Zemeckis (most famously of the Back to the Future movies). Tom Hanks was the top actor of the time. But I think what brought them out was that this was the premier achievement of the theme of "so innocent, ignorant and stupid that you were actually wise and smart". Dave and Being There are other examples of this type of film. Somehow, with a smart President like Clinton, with "experts" challenging some of the more common thought and tradition, the idea that someone without guile and pointy headed intellectualism, could actually connect with better and wiser results, somehow that made an impression on the once a decade crowd. This concept was smashed for all time to come by the presidency of the second President Bush.
In the past, I think Titanic and Avatar have fit into this category, of reaching out to the non-regular moviegoers. And I thought I knew for sure what the next one was going to be.
I had watched a preview for it two months before it came out. And for the first time in my life, it left me openly weeping inside the theater. It hit a chord upon the central struggle of that time, and even into this time. It was Selma, and when I got to see the whole film, it blew me away. This was, by far, the best picture of the year. This was the one worthy of attracting in the non-regular moviegoer. Yes, there was some complaining about how LBJ was portrayed, but overall, it concisely fit the tenor and struggle of the times.
And I was wrong.
On Martin Luther King Day weekend, the film about a central incident in the life of a man of peace, of non-violence resistance, one of the greatest examples of Christian love of our times, a man whose life was brutally cut short by a sniper's bullet, received only one tenth of the box office of another movie that celebrated someone who had killed from a distance more people than any other soldier, American Sniper.
Why?
I would love to say it was because Clint Eastwood made the kind of anti-war movie that he though he did. But if that is what he tried to do, he failed. I don't think that's what people saw. They saw a movie that glorified and justified the Iraq War, incorrectly connecting it to 9/11. They saw a movie that stereotyped the Iraqi people as savages, and covered up the awful murkiness and grayness of any war. They completely missed the moment of self-doubt that Bradley Cooper (playing a fictitious version of sniper Chris Kyle) had with the psychiatrist and convinced themselves that he was fully justified in everything he did, and that self-doubt was for liberals and losers. They came out fired up and ready to condemn and vilify anyone who dared question Chris Kyle or the premise of the movie. Poor Michael Moore put his foot in it, and now the right wing jihad against him is fired up again.
All our soldiers need to be respected and taken care of. They are serving this country faithfully, and following the commands of those who sent them, even when those commands are for a war that was immoral ,wrong, and most importantly, stupid. Yes, there are atrocities committed in the fog of war. But every single soldier deserves our support, both when they serve, and even more importantly, when they come home broken.
Chris Kyle, who in reality was not a very charming figure, came home broken, whether he understood that or not. He needed and deserved our support. The soldier that killed him was also broken, and also deserves the best we can give him.
But mostly what our soldiers deserve are leaders that won't send them out on stupid missions that do more harm than good. They need us not to nostalgically look back and think the war was justified. They need us not to be led by the nose again by lying leaders and big media (with Faux News leading the charge) into an unnecessary, expensive and destructive diversion.
Make the right choice, America. It's not too late. Choose to celebrate what we can achieve with non-violent resistance. Choose to understand that the voting rights so strongly fought for in the sixties, are being challenged once again. Choose to move forward with tolerance, forgiveness and love.
Choose Selma.
No comments:
Post a Comment