Weekend, 19-20 August 2000

NEWS BY THE NUMBERS

I almost drove off the 405 on Thursday night when Thin Albert went out of his way in his nomination acceptance speech at the Democratic Bar Mitzvah ("Today, I am a nominee! And uh, thanks for all the gifts.") to slam Hollywood in yet another undeniable, threatening way. First we had the Vice Presidential nominee, Joe Lieberman, who we knew had this censorship bent, talk about parents not having to compete with the media. When someone on the radio questioned whether Lieberman was suggesting that America go Amish, he was probably being sarcastic. But think about it. Those of us who would like to vote Democrat now have a Vice Presidential candidate who seems to feel that pinning responsibility for kids on the media is preferable to pinning that responsibility on the parents. In response, we had Gore supporter Alan Horn, King of Warner Bros.' movie division, saying that he wouldn't have greenlit Natural Born Killers because of its content. What the hell has gotten into these liberals?!?! Would Mr. Horn greenlight A Clockwork Orange? After all, it was an X-rated movie in its day. A bit of the old ultraviolence! But the movie is not about the violence that is in it. Of course, that's now a Kubrick classic, so that's safe. Or is it? What about Psycho? What about Carnal Knowledge? What about Bugs Bunny?

Now, I have a lot of issues with Natural Born Killers. But what is crystal clear to me is that the movie makes you think about today's culture and the violence and the media. It inspires debate, if only within one's self. But like Bonnie and Clyde, it makes murderers look pretty good. Actually, B&C makes them look better than NBK, because that romance was so Hollywood in comparison to the rough hewn pairing of Harrelson and Lewis, even if Bonnie and Clyde do get their comeuppance at the end. The idea that anyone in our government should have the remotest possibility of stopping the next film in this series, whenever it may come, makes me sick to my stomach.

Hearing Lieberman take it on displeased me, but then again, I expected it from him. It's one of the few issues where I have a severe disagreement with the man. But for Albert Gore to then mention it near the top of HIS acceptance speech, when people were still awake and not waiting for the condensed version on "Nightline"...Well, now we have something to worry about. One commentator last night said that it was all for show since the candidates knew that there was no real way of legislating this stuff. That it was all show for the people on the right who are leaning towards the candidate perceived to be closest to the glory of the current economy.

Well, I'll tell you exactly how it will effect censorship in America in the next months, even before an election. At the MPAA. Traditionally, the way the MPAA fights off censorship pushes is to start self-censoring. They'll never admit it. Jack Valenti will swoop down with a blade in his mouth, á la Tarzan, to dissuade anyone who suggest otherwise. But, that's what happens. Someone starts challenging the system and suddenly the cries of censorship from filmmakers double because the MPAA wants America to hear how tough they are. And once again, people like me end up screaming about the need for a true adult rating so that this censorship can actually go back to being a rating. If The Cell was coming out in November, I can only imagine the ugliness. And I'm sure that there was already some ugliness, even though New Line and the director haven't turned it into a public issue. (Wait for the DVD campaign.)

All I ask is that the parties be consistent on their feelings about the right to choose. I expect the Republicans to be against full freedom of speech, since they are against the right of a woman to choose how she will handle her body in response to something that came of her sexuality. So, why shouldn't I expect that the Democrats, who are all about the right to choose for women and minorities and even schools (through the voucher program) should respect Americans enough to believe that we can make choices about the media we choose to engage?

And I don't want to hear about how this is a molehill turned mountain, because with the economy as it is, driven by forces that have almost nothing to do with the government, these ARE the issues of this next election. The economy is set. Peace is almost inalterable for this nation for the time being. The Chinese military threat is the only potential non-terrorist threat and they want into the WTO, not into WWIII. We are back in the '50s without having fought a major war. Boom time. "Happy Days." And we are about to choose between Potsie and Ralph Malph for president because The Fonz has done his 8 years in office.

We have the time and the money as a nation to grow the hell up. It's time. We are free enough from worrying about the economy to actually have a bit of a social evolution. Big decisions. Big opportunity. And freedom of expression will lead the way, as it has since the beginning of time. From that first caveman who got clunked on the head by another caveman for having the audacity to draw on the wall to the Bible to Martin Luther to Shakespeare to Thomas Payne and Thomas Jefferson to, yes, Hugh Hefner and Bunuel and Tennessee Williams and Erica Jong and Dr. Ruth and Stanley Kubrick and Terry Southern and the many writers of "Hair" and Hunter S. Thompson and Mike O'Donaghue and Robert Mapplethorpe and Basquiat and Paul Thomas Anderson and David Fincher and on and on and on. These people are not all artists of equal stature. They aren't all meant to be held up against the Bible. But they are all people who made us think and reconsider the status quo. And what else is the purpose of art?

The free market is the only chance that art has. And still, there are abominations, like the failure of one major distributor to pick up The War Zone last year. And it wasn't because people didn't have a deep, serious experience when they saw that movie. Check that. It was because people had deep, serious experiences seeing that movie. That's what made it so uncomfortable for the studios. It wasn't frivolous. It wasn't safe. There were no easy answers. There were no cheap villains. It was real and it was horrifying and it hurt to watch and every single person in America should have to watch the movie if they want to understand how we inflict pain on our loved ones without real evil being present.

Would Alan Horn greenlight The War Zone? No. I have no problem, unlike some, with his studio's choice to try to make more movies like The Replacements. I like light comedy, too. But I was far more offended by the constant cutaways to tight-topped, short-skirted cheerleaders in the middle of a football drive than I was by anything I saw or should have seen (the adjustments to the orgy sequence) in Eyes Wide Shut.

"More Numberless Ranting"