I'm doing about 44 things right now, can't comment in detail

I will say this:

a) Its not very good at all. Its not even as good as 'Posse' as far as funky
funnish historical western-style films. Made me wince at times, but mostly
utterly forgettable and yawn-worthy. Not worthy much of a review, because
honestly, the director didn't care very much about what was in this film.


b) Its not very good because its not very good, not because
QT doesn't understand race or is a closet racist or because
Foxx is an uncle Tom or because of bad Macguffins. Its
not good because its not very good. I don't even care to comment
on how QT's personality or views or politics made it bad. I honestly
don't. I just think it was a junky, janky, clanky story that no serious
professional with any sense of self-reflection can/should ever make.


c) The movie will get tons of awards and accolades because there are
too many risks to people not liking it-

- if black artists/hipsters don't like it, they'll never see that awesome
context (slavery revenge) in a high profile piece of art again. QT definitely did
us a huge favor by making this film. It just happens to be a trite, silly movie. That
it sucks doesn't change the fact that people who would love to write cool stories
about the black experience have a LOT to gain from this.

- if hipsters don't like it, it'll serve as a referendum against white
people's freedom to have fun with non-white stories; cosigning this
movie extends this license. This is VERY valuable to white people,
especially in the Obama-era where we'll see fewer black artists in
general (diversity programs and initiatives are in decline; people don't
feel the need to give black people a chance to make black art like
they did in the 1980s).

For these reasons, and many others, this film absolutely must do well
and must make money. And I honestly hope it does.

Thankfully, there are LOTS of ways to like this movie. Or rather, ways
to invent reasons to like this movie:

-for people who don't like the story (think people like Guinness and Zootown),
they'll say "it was entertaining and fun." Of course, so was 'Man with the Iron
Fist'. Difference is, nobody loses if MWTIF is panned by critics. Lots of people
lose (including people with great intentions) lose if DU is panned.

- for people who don't understand anything about movies (i.e. The Professional
cat in this post), they'll overanalyze the virulent macguffins. This is the easiest
group to please, because they decided the were going to like the virulent
macguffins before they saw it (that they neither understand what the word
"virulent" means nor what a macguffin is helps)

- For people who thought the story was silly, the storytelling was trite,
the humor fell flat, and that overall it was at best a good shitty movie
(i.e. most people who are honest with themselves), this film was "a
courageous effort.' "Courageous" almost always means that the movie was
bad but that we appreciate what the filmmaker was trying to do.

But yeah -- I'll comment in greater detail later...maybe.

MAYBE.

This movie is so yawn worthy and irrelevant that I barely give a shit, though.

Honestly, as shitty as Dark Knight Rises was, it definitely fired me up
enough to comment in detail. This movie doesn't even do that. I'm not
sure if that means its bettor or worse than TDKR...but that I'm so uninspired
is notable.


----------------------------

Young Broadway Star Urgently Needs a Bone Marrow Donor. Is it you? http://MatchShannon.com/







O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "