As a young'un I found it quite difficult to get into films made before I was born, generally because older films weren't pieced together with quick cuts, short scenes and the general kineticism of modern movies (is kineticism even a word?). I've always loved film, but I had a habit of watching the 'classics' without really giving them the full attention they demand and deserve. They are not Terminator 2; they insist some degree of concentration from the viewer. Films had more talking, more raw emotion and less explosions. And this, I now know, is a good thing.
I'm often bowled over by how edgy films from the 70s can be. I don't think it can be a coincidence that all of the great films from the 70s were so intelligent but unrelentingly harsh and visceral: Apocalypse Now, Clockwork Orange, Exorcist, Taxi Driver, Staw Dogs ... the list goes on. I suspect this is for many reasons, not least the fall-out of the Vietnam War and the political changes at the time.
Or maybe it was that films would always be like this if the 80's hadn't happened. The 80's was the decade of excess; everyone wanted to forget about the 70's and the cold war, something which is reflected in the movies of the time, there were alot of disposable feel good rom-coms or chuck norris beating the shit out of Russians. This was also the decade of affordable VCRs, with which came straight to video movies and public outrage over 'video nastys', because films that could only previously be seen in the cinemas could now be watched at home by kids. Consequently, The prequel to my favourite film ever, 'Evil Dead 2' was branded a video nasty and only re-released uncut in 2001. Anyway, enough amateur (and probably a bit incorrect) film history.
Ironically, maybe the real reason film has changed so much since the 70s was the hypothesis at the heart of Network. As media becomes too influenced by business (especially big business), it is inevitably compromised. And the 80's was, after all, the decade of the corporation. Huge conglomerates were desperate to be involved with all areas of business, and their board of directors only cared about one thing. And for the movie studios they purchased, it wasn't artistic integrity.
Spoilers on Network from here in...
Network begins with a news anchorman being given his weeks notice due to his nightly news show having a poor audience share; he's past it and they need fresh blood. The anchor responds by announcing on the evening news that he will kill himself live on the air next week. The film follows the reporter's subsequent rehiring as the 'Mad Prophet of the Airways', when the network realise that the reporter's subsequent expletive laden outburst on the air gained them a higher audience share.
The one part of the film that is eerily prophetic is how the conservative 'just the facts' nightly news slowly changes into 'News Entertainment' program, fronted by the Mad Prophet's ramblings who now has a mantra: "I'm mad as hell, and i'm not going to take it anymore". News reports are replaced with a psychic trying to predict next week news and seeing if their previous week's predictions were correct. Time is given to a segment called 'vox populi' (Voice of the People), which presumably gives air to the opinions to the (mostly) uninformed people on the street.
Essentially, ignoring the psychic, the film invented a 'News Entertainment' format that is very similar to a lot of news programming now on the air. No where is this more apparent then the Murdoch owned Fox News (US), an incredibly right-wing news station that reports republican opinion as fact, with Glenn Beck acting as Fox New's Mad Prophet.
Coincidentally, the only reason that the Murdoch owned Sky News isn't more like its American counterpart is that Ofcom ensures news is reported impartially. It is widely accepted that a Cameron government would greatly reduce Ofcom's powers and in return the Murdoch owned newspapers (e.g. The Sun) will switch their allegiance from Labour to Conservative for the next election. As we've seen in the last few months, Murdoch's kept his part of the deal.
Network ends with producers deciding to assassinate the Mad Prophet live on air due to falling rating. Recently the presenter of a Brazilian Crime TV show was accused of ordering assassinations to boost his TV shows ratings. He was caught out because his film crew were consistently arriving at crime scenes before the police.
Network is a brilliantly written film and well worth a watch, although I've ruined the ending now. Of course, the writers of Network managed to summarise my ramble into a few sentences:
You're television incarnate, Diana: Indifferent to suffering; insensitive to joy. All of life is reduced to the common rubble of banality. War, murder, death are all the same to you as bottles of beer. And the daily business of life is a corrupt comedy. You even shatter the sensations of time and space into split seconds and instant replays. You're madness, Diana. Virulent madness. And everything you touch dies with you. But not me. Not as long as I can feel pleasure, and pain... and love.
Hello. This blog is part memory dump, part writing exercise. Enjoyment will vary. 
Posts
2 comments:
I think you think about movies too much. I'm almost tempted to say you need to see a Steven Segal movie, or something directed by John Woo. Sometimes its just fun to watch shit blow up.
However you make a good point. There are so many bad movies out there and each year more get made.
I didn't mean to sound pompous about movies with explosions in. John Woo films like Face/Off are awesome because the script and direction is good, not just because shit is blowing up. And Under Seige 1 is a classic. Can't think of any other decent Segal movies though :).
The problem is that for the amount of money spent on Transformers 2 they could of made 10 decent films but combined they still wouldn't of grossed as much. And if there's ever proof that blowing shit up for 2 hours 30 doesn't make a fun movie, it's Transformer 2. What a shitty boring movie.
Post a Comment