catapult magazine

Yeah, I think there are plenty of films that question some of these values. Todd Solondz’ “Happiness”, for one. It calls the American pursuit of happiness dream into question but shows that people still do pursue happiness, whether it’s a national goal or not.

I think part of the reason “mainstream” type films promote or do not question these values is because such movies were made with the intent to make money or to be the most popular movie at the cineplex (instead of the nerd or outcast that nobody likes).

And I agree that condemning wealth itself as evil is not Biblical, It might be good to set this question up as a subtopic unto itself in the politics section.

so i just watched Erin Brockovich (in which everything turns out fine and dandy for the struggling single mom) after reading Nickle and Dimed (in which everything doesn’t turn out fine for the real Erin Brockovichs out there.) and it got me thinking—does anyone out there know of a movie that tells the story of a person in poverty who doesn’t make it big? and perhaps finds some satisfaction in it? or not? it doesn’t matter.

while movies like Annie and Willie Wonka (et al., i’m sure) make us feel good about the generosity of strangers, i’d like to see a movie about what happens to people when the check is for $20 instead of two million. just curious about what such a film might look like. it’s obvious why the success story has so much appeal, but is it possible to make it’s opposite “appealing” to an audience? virtue is inevitably encouraged when it’s profitable, but what about when it lands a person in the same gutter they woke up in yesterday?

You should check out:
-Midnight Cowboy: which is about a guy from Oklahoma who goes to New York to experience city life and falls on hard times. (It is one of the best films of all time.)
-Nobody’s Fool: with Paul Newman. About a man who has wasted a lot of his life in small town northeast and finds redemption not in money but in self discovery. (It is not one of the best films of all time but i love it.)
That is all I can think of now but I am sure there are lots of others.

Hmmm. I don’t know. Midnight Cowboy and Nobody’s Fool are good examples, but it seems to me that the notion that wealth is the ultimate goal is largely unquestioned in the American cinema. My students were doing presentations the last coupld of days, critiquing films and of the four presentations I saw (all of fairly mainstream offereings) the notion of wealth as an unquestioned goal ran through all of them (Happy Gilmore, Entrapment, Fast and Furious, and Gone in Sixty Seconds.) It probably isn’t the best comparison, but it seems to me that all movies involving nerd figures (Revenge of the Nerds, Bring it On, etc) seem to imply that all nerds really just want to be popular. I guess I am stunned in each case about how confident most movies seem to be that these are unquestioned goals.

moving into the issue of popularity, Angus is a movie that really affirms individuality and shows why all the popular kids should want to be dorks. it shows that we are all broken, inside and/or out, and admitting this fact gives us all something in common.

also, speaking of Bring it On, i thought someone once described this as a parody—is there any truth to that?

My students think of Bring It On as a parody, but I am not so sure. It kind of does that postmodern joking with itself thing — sort of like the scene in Waynes World where they joke about corporate sponsorships by plugging Pizza Hut, etc., but those were still paid sponsorships. It kind of takes the teeth out of the satire. Bring it On kind of does the same thing. It mocks cheerleaders, but the end I think you are really sort of meant to be on their side — expecially when the win the competition. I think students laugh at it the same way they laugh at the stupid quizzes in fashion magazines — but there is still a message getting through there, you know?

I am reading these posts and find myself wondering about all the underlying presupisitions that are out there. Wealth as a goal , poverty (or not wealth) as a goal, the right to be able to make a living wage (by whose standard?), the inherient theft in forced redistribution of wealth, of Ecclesiaties where it says that God is the giver of wealth, of what success is, of this country which gives the illusion of wealth but in fact it’s citizens are more in bondage to debt on an individual basis than in many third world countries. Who is richer someone with no debt who makes $900 dollars a year or some one who is $100,000 in debt paying 7% interest and making $70,000 dollars a year.
I have no answers I’m just not sure we’re even asking the right questions yet.
By the way, I’m new to the site hope I haven’t stuck my neck out too far on my first post.

Wim Wimbers End of Violence is a good perspective shifter movie.