Letters to the Editor
-
Speaking of redacted...
...the advertisement on the right side of the screen is covering the text in the article.
-
The Podcast link is broken
Hello,
The link to the podcast, "http://salon.com/podcast/ conversations.rss" is broken because of the extra space before 'conversations.rss'. Also, even when corrected, the resulting link is still broken. That link points to:
http://feeds.salon.com/salon/podcast/conversations
Here's the report from the Feed Validator:
http://feedvalidator.org/check.cgi?url=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.salon.com%2Fsalon%2Fpodcast%2Fconversations
Sorry
This feed does not validate.
*
line 87, column 3: channel contains more than one title [help]
^
*
line 88, column 3: channel contains more than one description [help]
David Cronenberg talks about his new film, "Eastern Promises ...
^
*
line 89, column 3: Undefined channel element: enclosure [help]
-
Last question is a doozie
Stephanie asks him a convoluted question about the feminist response to "Casualties of War," and DePalma just laughs. I laughed too. What the hell?
If there was a feminist response to "Casualties of War" that rejected it because it wasn't told from the victim's point of view, it must have been in some academic journal or something. I don't recall anybody in the mainstream criticizing it for that. The reason "Casualties of War" didn't get the acclaim it richly deserved is because nobody on a fun Friday night wants to go out and see a movie about a bunch of guys raping a girl. It's just a tough sell. Nonetheless it was an excellent film -- in my book, it's a must-see, and its themes apply so directly and intensely to the Iraq war, it's really a shame the movie isn't more well-known.
You might not think a movie that pits Michael J. Fox against Sean Penn could work, but it doesn. Fox's "aw shucks" persona versus Penn's method-acting rage is an amazing thing to behold. There are fine supporting performances by John C. Reilly and John Leguizamo as well.
As for "Redacted," I will be first in line to see it, and mind you I wouldn't normally rush out to see an Iraq film (since the seem to suffer from the standard preaching-to-the-converted shortcomings). But DePalma rarely takes a standard approach, and from everything I've read, he's on top of his game here. I hope the movie does well and gets an appropriate amount of attention.
Personally I feel that DePalma is one of the great U.S. directors of our time. He's got his own (sometimes perverse) style, an astounding talent for set pieces, and a fearlessness that you don't find in a lot of other directors who work at his scale. Unfortunately that fearlessness has resulted in some overreaches, resulting in some big-time flops ("Black Dahlia" being the most recent disappointment) that make it easy for people to dismiss all of his work. His Hitchcock obsession went a little too far as well (but if you're going to obsess over an artist and emulate his style, at least DePalma picked the best).
-
Good Questions, Even Better Answers
It often seems as though Salon's interviewers are short of time, and rush through their discussions with tantalizingly interesting people. Or is us, the readers, who don't get beyond the 2 page format?
In any case, Stephanie Zacharek's line of questioning feels like it was itself redacted — as if there were a whole buildup in the middle that we missed, skipping to the end with her dense, involved question about perspective, authenticity, and documentary.
But as surprised as he was, De Palma got it and gave the answer that Zacharek deserved, rather than just what she asked for. I guess that's the sign of a good interview!
-
Wasn't DePalma called "the rape advocate feminists love"?
I'm not being sarcastic. His earlier movies practically celebrated rape and murder of women; Carrie, Phantom of the Paradise, Dressed to Kill, Blow Out and Body Double had female reviewers falling all over him with praise, at the same time commenting that "well, he is a misogynist." So he's a misogynist that's slick enough to hypnotize women who, in their right mind, would hunt him down like a rabid dog. I didn't have the political correctness to not get nauseated; I've avoided his films ever since.
Now, in the Bush years, of course DePalma gets an even greater pass for his abuse of female characters; it's only his criticism of Bush's war that gets up people's hackles. I was about to say that the rape and murder sequence in the film was DePalma's version of comedy relief. But since I haven't and never will see the film, that isn't fair; I should only remind people what this guy really likes to put on screen.
-
how many sequels are there to Gone With The Wind?
The offhand question about feminist intentions was just comic relief. Brian DePalma is a serious filmmaker, who was bearing down on his subject relentlessy throughout the interview. If I was Stephanie I would have asked him how he liked my hair?
The war in Iraq, despite the lack of media coverage, is an in your face kind of war. The current administration is about as good at propaganda as DePalma is at subtlety. That is part of the message, no doubt.
The artist (living breathing person) is about reflecting back at the source. When Speilberg makes a film about war hysteria, 1941, which devastates some comfortable notions of modern history, but can't bring the same energy to bear in 2001, you have a seriously disconnected artist from reality. DePalma is entirely current. Good for him, even if it some portions are redacted, implying that the images are the best match on reality that he can manage. The idea of being a filmmaker and being current is very important, because how many sequels are there to Gone With the Wind?
-
Irresponsible
. . .and inexcusable, to make a fictional film like this during a time of war. It is nothing but propaganda to be used against our own soldiers, who are currently in harm's way. Repulsive.
-
Oh yeah, Thingswesaid...
...the Iraqis are all lining up to see Brian de Palma's "Redacted" so they can use it as ammunition against American soldiers (all of whom are saints and don't shoot at civilians ever but are there for charity purposes. Shame on Brian for showing what really happens in war. It might wake Thingswesaid up, when all he wants is a comforting lie so he can salve his conscience).