My initial reaction to the initial 15 second "erotica, pronked from porn" scene was to hum the Joe Cocker song.
I am not a fan boy but I recalled in the back of my mind that these 2
stars were once married and that Tom made Nicole wear flat shoes as he
was "shortish".
so bim bam [yet to be pronked in 1999] 10 seconds into movie Nicole
drops the lot and stands there looking fabulous in RED HIGH HEELS.
that scene told me about 16 other things but sticking to "short man
complex" every single woman Stanley trots out to stand BESIDE our Tom is
taller than him and wears high heels. Check the TWO models on heat who
try to cart him off - BOTH taller, and meaning business.
as SouthPark would say "I think we learnt/learned a few things about Stanley today"
Thursday, April 4, 2013
Wednesday, April 3, 2013
Eve Syndrome
Eve Syndrome is simply what the church calls "original sin" and that it
was thunk up by Eve [ie not Adam], and moreso that there was no SENSE in
it as there was plenty of fruit on other trees, and even moreso
[moresoest?] that it would DESTROY the whole "security/enjoyment" of
what they HAD.
-- all of this for an illusion of the NEED of POWER, when in fact woman has always had the power over men, and smart women simply KNOW that and live their "Life of Riley" along with all their fantasies [and REALS], quite happy to let their Bill THINK he is control.
we see in movie that Alice says she was prepared to give up Bill, her life of luxury, AND her child for ONE day of her desire. In other words she was totally conscious of the fact the implementation of her desire [or rather the discovery of such] would end up in excrement for ALL.
so yes that is what Laura Miller concludes when looking back in 1999 over the RESULTS of The Female Eunuch
“The Female Eunuch” is a fitful, passionate, scattered text, not cohesive enough to qualify as a manifesto. It’s all over the place, impulsive and fatally naive — which is to say it is the quintessential product of its time."
Hence she goes on to describe how Greer herself did a 180 degree flip [even became a self confessed pedophile after that time as she explained when talking about her new book The Boy], but the irony is that millions of women around the world say they were "saved" by what they THOUGHT they changed in their lives after reading The Female Eunuch back in 1970, when the truth in most cases was the sadder but wiser icon that Greer was to become herself once she found she WANTED a child but had ruined her sacred body parts from all her abortions.
so the real irony is Stanley parodies that by having Alice "do a Catherine" but using the RULES from Greer. The final resolution is that somehow, just like Catherine, a relationship in which TRUST has been broken can somehow be restored by "fucking their way out", but those of us [like Jules] who have "been there, done that, didn't even get the T-shirt" KNOW can only end in disaster, as per the ending for Catherine and Jim, ie murder/suicide in legal terms but in Eve terms simply the Queen Bee "rationalizing her hive".
-- all of this for an illusion of the NEED of POWER, when in fact woman has always had the power over men, and smart women simply KNOW that and live their "Life of Riley" along with all their fantasies [and REALS], quite happy to let their Bill THINK he is control.
we see in movie that Alice says she was prepared to give up Bill, her life of luxury, AND her child for ONE day of her desire. In other words she was totally conscious of the fact the implementation of her desire [or rather the discovery of such] would end up in excrement for ALL.
so yes that is what Laura Miller concludes when looking back in 1999 over the RESULTS of The Female Eunuch
“The Female Eunuch” is a fitful, passionate, scattered text, not cohesive enough to qualify as a manifesto. It’s all over the place, impulsive and fatally naive — which is to say it is the quintessential product of its time."
Hence she goes on to describe how Greer herself did a 180 degree flip [even became a self confessed pedophile after that time as she explained when talking about her new book The Boy], but the irony is that millions of women around the world say they were "saved" by what they THOUGHT they changed in their lives after reading The Female Eunuch back in 1970, when the truth in most cases was the sadder but wiser icon that Greer was to become herself once she found she WANTED a child but had ruined her sacred body parts from all her abortions.
so the real irony is Stanley parodies that by having Alice "do a Catherine" but using the RULES from Greer. The final resolution is that somehow, just like Catherine, a relationship in which TRUST has been broken can somehow be restored by "fucking their way out", but those of us [like Jules] who have "been there, done that, didn't even get the T-shirt" KNOW can only end in disaster, as per the ending for Catherine and Jim, ie murder/suicide in legal terms but in Eve terms simply the Queen Bee "rationalizing her hive".
The Argument
The Argument between Alice and Bill is about Eve Syndrome and as the Bette Davis character in All About Eve keeps saying it's about women [commonly termed "secret wimmins business" after the famous Hindmarsh court case] and you men could not possibly understand [because women themselves hardly do]. It is simply about the orig Eve had it all but she HAD to stuff it up.
But simply doing a replay of Eve Syndrome is beneath the "art" of Stanley so he does it in a clever one-time-removed way by a parody of Germaine Greer's "mantra" in The Female Eunuch, the book that totally changed the [Western] world as we knew it pre 1970. Here is Wiki on the book:
The Female Eunuch hit the bookstands in London in October 1970. By March 1971, it had nearly sold out its second printing and had been translated into 11 languages. The main thesis of The Female Eunuch is that the "traditional" suburban, consumerist, nuclear family represses women sexually, and that this devitalizes them, rendering them eunuchs. It is a "fitful, passionate, scattered text, not cohesive enough to qualify as a manifesto," writes Laura Miller. "It's all over the place, impulsive, and fatally naive -- which is to say it is the quintessential product of its time."
Here is Greer explaining her mantra basis, and for a better understanding of the Full Tragedy of Greer please read the full account from Laura Miller at salon dot com:
“When François Truffaut's Jules et Jim was released in 1962, it was an instant hit with girls like me, francophile, penniless and non-monogamous. In those days, when contraception was available if you were sufficiently guileful, there were a fair few sex adventuresses about, though nowhere near as many as there are now. Enough of us took Jeanne Moreau's Catherine as a role model to establish a fashion for heavy black eye-liner, pale lips, sloppy jumpers and flappy skirts. Some even went so far as to try the Jackie Coogan cap worn by Catherine when she is masquerading as Thomas. We could all whistle "Le Tourbillon de la Vie". Catherine seemed a woman after our own hearts, who followed her desires rather than the rules.”
Problem was Greer was the total opposite of the Catherine "Queen Bee" character BUT she based her whole mantra ON Catherine. The truth was we young men back in the 1960s called her "Genetically Queer" because of her looks and her desire for manage a trois sex [even though Catherine herself did not resort to "three-at-a-time sex" but simply "managed her hive as a Queen Bee should"], and a sort of "pact" was made that we would only screw her if she put a plain brown paper bag over her head. Thus the "Hell has no fury like a woman scorned" mantra took over via her book [following on from her Article "Lady Love your Cunt"] and by 1999 we HAD the American Beauty, ie the death of the Nuclear Family.
What Kubrick has done so cleverly is to take a Catherine "Queen Bee" type in Alice BUT have her act as Greer and not as Catherine herself, so this is perfect satire, as only Kubrick knows how, on the cover image of the book whereby Alice is wearing the same little number, kinda like the swimsuits Jules and Jim wear but with arms and legs cut out, and oh those Germaine "love handles" folks. It is vintage Kubick in that his fan base always look for complex interpretations while he sticks to the Dr Lecter simplicity [to stop those lambs screaming].
Here is the book, and notice that Stanley even pulls in the rung in the "eunuch closet" [soonafter to be called the Ellen Degenerate (sic) closet] via the sash of the window behind Alice.
The main satirical tilt is that in the "Real World" by 1999 Greer herself did a 180 degree turn [see Laura Miller above] and became a self confessed pedophile shortly after with her obsession for pre-pubescent boys.
And Stanley seems to greatly dislike famous box-office Hollywood "stars" and loves to manipulate them in his movies. In EWS he obviously goes out of his way to cast Nicole as Alice, the all-Australian girl that will get her gear off "for art" - same as Greer did in 1970s.
For example the initial 15 second scene has no real purpose other than lots of footage of her ass [most for his private collection of course] almost to "test" her agreement to "do as I command" in rest of film.
But she KEEPS her high heeled shoes ON and there are several more pairs of shoes in background, and all the women wear high heeled shoes and are taller than Tom.
I am not a fan boy but I have read that she only ever wore flat shoes when married to him because of his "short man" complex, so Stanley rubs this in for the entire movie.
So in a way it IS "a non fiction account" but only in a clever "look closer" manner - another reason I think he and Mendes compared notes in these 2 "fin de siècle" movies from 1999, based ON a fin de siècle book from 1899.
To "quoth it lively" [apologies to John Lennon] from Wiki:
"Fin de siècle is French for end of the century. The term typically encompasses not only the meaning of the similar English idiom turn of the century, but also both the closing and onset of an era, as the end of the 19th century was felt to be a period of degeneration, but at the same time a period of hope for a new beginning. The "spirit" of fin de siècle often refers to the cultural hallmarks that were recognized as prominent in the 1880s and 1890s, including boredom, cynicism, pessimism, and a widespread belief that civilization leads to decadence.
The term "fin de siècle" is commonly applied to French art and artists as the traits of the culture first appeared there, but the movement affected many European countries. The term becomes applicable to the sentiments and traits associated with the culture as opposed to focusing solely on the movement’s initial recognition in France. The ideas and concerns developed by fin de siècle artists like Charles Baudelaire provided the impetus for movements like symbolism and modernism."
Seems that Kubrick was showing in EWS that the same "widespread belief that civilization leads to decadence" applied ALSO to the fin de 20th Century, specifically in New York, almost as if he KNEW the 9/11 gig was soon to be pulled there to make a mockery of any "period of hope for a new beginning".
But simply doing a replay of Eve Syndrome is beneath the "art" of Stanley so he does it in a clever one-time-removed way by a parody of Germaine Greer's "mantra" in The Female Eunuch, the book that totally changed the [Western] world as we knew it pre 1970. Here is Wiki on the book:
The Female Eunuch hit the bookstands in London in October 1970. By March 1971, it had nearly sold out its second printing and had been translated into 11 languages. The main thesis of The Female Eunuch is that the "traditional" suburban, consumerist, nuclear family represses women sexually, and that this devitalizes them, rendering them eunuchs. It is a "fitful, passionate, scattered text, not cohesive enough to qualify as a manifesto," writes Laura Miller. "It's all over the place, impulsive, and fatally naive -- which is to say it is the quintessential product of its time."
Here is Greer explaining her mantra basis, and for a better understanding of the Full Tragedy of Greer please read the full account from Laura Miller at salon dot com:
“When François Truffaut's Jules et Jim was released in 1962, it was an instant hit with girls like me, francophile, penniless and non-monogamous. In those days, when contraception was available if you were sufficiently guileful, there were a fair few sex adventuresses about, though nowhere near as many as there are now. Enough of us took Jeanne Moreau's Catherine as a role model to establish a fashion for heavy black eye-liner, pale lips, sloppy jumpers and flappy skirts. Some even went so far as to try the Jackie Coogan cap worn by Catherine when she is masquerading as Thomas. We could all whistle "Le Tourbillon de la Vie". Catherine seemed a woman after our own hearts, who followed her desires rather than the rules.”
Problem was Greer was the total opposite of the Catherine "Queen Bee" character BUT she based her whole mantra ON Catherine. The truth was we young men back in the 1960s called her "Genetically Queer" because of her looks and her desire for manage a trois sex [even though Catherine herself did not resort to "three-at-a-time sex" but simply "managed her hive as a Queen Bee should"], and a sort of "pact" was made that we would only screw her if she put a plain brown paper bag over her head. Thus the "Hell has no fury like a woman scorned" mantra took over via her book [following on from her Article "Lady Love your Cunt"] and by 1999 we HAD the American Beauty, ie the death of the Nuclear Family.
What Kubrick has done so cleverly is to take a Catherine "Queen Bee" type in Alice BUT have her act as Greer and not as Catherine herself, so this is perfect satire, as only Kubrick knows how, on the cover image of the book whereby Alice is wearing the same little number, kinda like the swimsuits Jules and Jim wear but with arms and legs cut out, and oh those Germaine "love handles" folks. It is vintage Kubick in that his fan base always look for complex interpretations while he sticks to the Dr Lecter simplicity [to stop those lambs screaming].
Here is the book, and notice that Stanley even pulls in the rung in the "eunuch closet" [soonafter to be called the Ellen Degenerate (sic) closet] via the sash of the window behind Alice.
The main satirical tilt is that in the "Real World" by 1999 Greer herself did a 180 degree turn [see Laura Miller above] and became a self confessed pedophile shortly after with her obsession for pre-pubescent boys.
And Stanley seems to greatly dislike famous box-office Hollywood "stars" and loves to manipulate them in his movies. In EWS he obviously goes out of his way to cast Nicole as Alice, the all-Australian girl that will get her gear off "for art" - same as Greer did in 1970s.
For example the initial 15 second scene has no real purpose other than lots of footage of her ass [most for his private collection of course] almost to "test" her agreement to "do as I command" in rest of film.
But she KEEPS her high heeled shoes ON and there are several more pairs of shoes in background, and all the women wear high heeled shoes and are taller than Tom.
I am not a fan boy but I have read that she only ever wore flat shoes when married to him because of his "short man" complex, so Stanley rubs this in for the entire movie.
So in a way it IS "a non fiction account" but only in a clever "look closer" manner - another reason I think he and Mendes compared notes in these 2 "fin de siècle" movies from 1999, based ON a fin de siècle book from 1899.
To "quoth it lively" [apologies to John Lennon] from Wiki:
"Fin de siècle is French for end of the century. The term typically encompasses not only the meaning of the similar English idiom turn of the century, but also both the closing and onset of an era, as the end of the 19th century was felt to be a period of degeneration, but at the same time a period of hope for a new beginning. The "spirit" of fin de siècle often refers to the cultural hallmarks that were recognized as prominent in the 1880s and 1890s, including boredom, cynicism, pessimism, and a widespread belief that civilization leads to decadence.
The term "fin de siècle" is commonly applied to French art and artists as the traits of the culture first appeared there, but the movement affected many European countries. The term becomes applicable to the sentiments and traits associated with the culture as opposed to focusing solely on the movement’s initial recognition in France. The ideas and concerns developed by fin de siècle artists like Charles Baudelaire provided the impetus for movements like symbolism and modernism."
Seems that Kubrick was showing in EWS that the same "widespread belief that civilization leads to decadence" applied ALSO to the fin de 20th Century, specifically in New York, almost as if he KNEW the 9/11 gig was soon to be pulled there to make a mockery of any "period of hope for a new beginning".
Sunday, March 31, 2013
Theme
you are very brave to ask the question as the "Kubrick Fan Club" says you are not allowed to.
KFC puts Stan up on a pedestal and prays to him and finds all manner of wondrous things in his movies that Stan himself never intended.
basically Stan was a very down to earth person who FLED the American Beauty in order to be able to observe it from afar and do "social comment" ON it.
in this movie he went a bit too far [via scenes deleted] and got bumped off for daring to expose the BIG P [and that is the REAL P and not the one you are TOLD is P via the Lolita Redux character]
so he grabs a book called DreamStory and very loosely uses it as a vehicle to tell his story. He uses a married couple scenario to produce "revenge", to GET Tom to the ultimate orgy of the Untouchables which was his point of the movie, but NOT for consenting adults as seen in movie.
we will never know the content of the scenes deleted but can simply assume there were "more things to see" when Tom was "looking around".
it ends with the loving couple as you say f|cking their way back to joy.
that is the basic structure but there are lots of Stanlyisms on the way as there always are.
I would need more posts to explain
KFC puts Stan up on a pedestal and prays to him and finds all manner of wondrous things in his movies that Stan himself never intended.
basically Stan was a very down to earth person who FLED the American Beauty in order to be able to observe it from afar and do "social comment" ON it.
in this movie he went a bit too far [via scenes deleted] and got bumped off for daring to expose the BIG P [and that is the REAL P and not the one you are TOLD is P via the Lolita Redux character]
so he grabs a book called DreamStory and very loosely uses it as a vehicle to tell his story. He uses a married couple scenario to produce "revenge", to GET Tom to the ultimate orgy of the Untouchables which was his point of the movie, but NOT for consenting adults as seen in movie.
we will never know the content of the scenes deleted but can simply assume there were "more things to see" when Tom was "looking around".
it ends with the loving couple as you say f|cking their way back to joy.
that is the basic structure but there are lots of Stanlyisms on the way as there always are.
I would need more posts to explain
Friday, March 29, 2013
Stanley's Chastity Belt
Without trying to be mean to FemiMen like our harry at IMDB, that is what
Kubrick WAS doing with his "Big Brother/Female Eunuch" depiction of "The
Argument" [to use Night's terminology in The Happening].
He cast a "picture perfect" Hollywood couple for the argument with an actual MARRIED couple, then he "plays with the rules [from Jules and Jim]" to get the left over testosterone of those like harry up to fever pitch, with Germaine Greer leading Sargent Pepper's Lonely Heart's Club Band.
So one of the clever little devices he uses is whenever Alice is with "the bad guy" ie her husband, she wears the little number that has no possible entry points during foreplay [if any], thus putting poor old Bill at a decided disadvantage for starters.
But we see in Bill's vision of Col Fitts doing combat that not only is there no chastity belt but Alice is whipping off the strides herself.
But such foreplay for the bad guy Bill in HIS fantasies is made dead easy [npi] so the femimen can do the tut tut bit, even though Bill never WAS unfaithful - but in "Secret Wimmin's Business" THAT does not matter.
a very clever chap was our Stanley, but maybe TOO clever for his own safety.
He cast a "picture perfect" Hollywood couple for the argument with an actual MARRIED couple, then he "plays with the rules [from Jules and Jim]" to get the left over testosterone of those like harry up to fever pitch, with Germaine Greer leading Sargent Pepper's Lonely Heart's Club Band.
So one of the clever little devices he uses is whenever Alice is with "the bad guy" ie her husband, she wears the little number that has no possible entry points during foreplay [if any], thus putting poor old Bill at a decided disadvantage for starters.
But we see in Bill's vision of Col Fitts doing combat that not only is there no chastity belt but Alice is whipping off the strides herself.
But such foreplay for the bad guy Bill in HIS fantasies is made dead easy [npi] so the femimen can do the tut tut bit, even though Bill never WAS unfaithful - but in "Secret Wimmin's Business" THAT does not matter.
a very clever chap was our Stanley, but maybe TOO clever for his own safety.
Thursday, March 28, 2013
Summary
In this movie Kubrick uses the vehicle of the greatest mystery of all, ie Eve Syndrome, to start an ARGUMENT between a married couple.
We then track the REACTION of the husband which takes us to matters that [SHOULD BE] of National Importance, hidden within a candy wrapping of the Porn vs Erotica issue.
Nobody actually GOT the real issue but Kubrick got killed on suspicion.
Now read on.
We then track the REACTION of the husband which takes us to matters that [SHOULD BE] of National Importance, hidden within a candy wrapping of the Porn vs Erotica issue.
Nobody actually GOT the real issue but Kubrick got killed on suspicion.
Now read on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)