Similarly, Ron Swanson’s arguments on Parks & Recreation are frequently convincing, but he’s a self-proclaimed libertarian. Conservative Jack Donaghy was often the voice of reason on 30 Rock-but though Jack certainly was pro-capitalism, he was hardly a paragon of conservative virtue.
Imagine trying to convince a conservative parent, circa 1984, that a movie-which features foul language, Bill Murray attempting to seduce a coed, and scenes of demonic possession-is somehow evidence Hollywood is finally getting it. That’s fine if you are libertarian, but not quite good enough if you’re a values voter. Last year, the Washington Examiner’s Philip Klein argued that Ghostbusters was the most libertarian movie ever made.
In many of these cases, “libertarian” would probably be a more correct description. And there’s also this: One could argue that the fact we are going out of our way to suggest that films such as Selma and The Hunger Games are technically conservative suggests that we have already lost the culture war. But, in many cases, it would probably be more accurate to simply describe them as not liberal. That’s not to say the “conservative” films don’t contain conservative themes. But the fact that Selma is considered by the group to be a conservative film demonstrates how arbitrary terms can be-and how difficult it is to create a truly objective standard for quantifying ideology in movies (then again, the film does make LBJ look bad, so there’s that).
If being conservative requires me to watch Jennifer Lawrence kick butt, then so be it. Meanwhile, movies deemed liberal included Boyhood, Maleficent, Nymphomaniac, and The Imitation Game. Make no mistake, the movies killing it at the box office aren’t generally wholesome tales about places like Mayberry, don’t hearken back to the Leave it to Beaver era, nor are they explicitly Christian (like Left Behind) or overtly political (like Atlas Shrugged, which was a box office disaster).Īs defined above, many of these are movies with strong “patriotic and/or capitalist content.” As such, movies considered “conservative” include The Hunger Games: Mockingjay, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, The Lego Movie, and Godzilla. How funny, then, that in the future, it may well be the last remaining healthy form of film - saving the medium that has for too long treated it like a monster.But what really qualifies as a conservative movie? This, I think, deserves some attention. It’s the dirty little secret, which the studios keep on returning to as it has the greatest mark up on the smallest budget, like instant coffee in a cafe.īecause it seems audiences can’t get enough of the ultimate rollercoaster cinema. Barely any broadsheets bother to write about it, while at the Oscars, horror films have only ever accounted for best picture once Silence of the Lambs in a weak year. There are plenty of benefits in watching Manchester by the Sea on your iPad on the train, but a horror is significantly less effective out of the noose of a loud screening room and, like you don’t see a comedy and not want to laugh, nobody who goes to horror doesn’t want their senses overwhelmed.Īnd yet, the genre remains snootily dismissed. It’s the immersion the darkness the lack of distraction.
Horror is the one genre that is inarguably better in a cinema, where people can’t escape. Jennifer Kent, the director of cult frightener The Babadook, says she shot her film thinking of “hands around an audience’s neck, getting tighter until they couldn’t breathe” and that is a good thing. Horror is addictive, and reaches similar primal parts of the brain as the ultimate pleasure. “For me,” says Alan Jones, curator of London’s FrightFest, “it’s on a par with an orgasm.” Too far? Not for many. But why? What is it about horror that's works where so much at the moment fails?
0 kommentar(er)
