Re: OFF: Strange Days (was Re: Catch up! (Part II))
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1998

J. Stephen Riley Silber wrote:

> Oh boy...

Whee! Are we having fun yet?

> Yeah, Cameron co-wrote the screenplay for "Point Break" (actually
> inspired me to go sky diving, which I would recommend to everyone).

Yikes! But do you look like Patrick Swayze as you do it?

> Yeah, I thought "Strange Days" didn't have much to say. It was the
> power with which it said what little it had to say that did it to me. I
> was sickened by the film's content, but appreciated the way it said it.

I'll never fault Kathryn Bigelow for her craft. It's her ideas and
attitudes that trouble me. She made a real bad impression on me in an
interview I read. A little bit of a graduate education can be a dangerous
thing for some people (and I'm One Who Knows). I was taken aback by her
pretentiousness.

> Kinda
> like "Basketball Diaries". I couldn't think straight for 3 days after
> seeing THAT one. It just affected me so.

Haven't seen or read it. Should I interpret this as a recommendation?

> Back to Cameron--I'm one of those unfortunates (I admit it) that thinks
> Cameron can do no wrong.

Okay, so have *you* seen PIRAHNA II: THE SPAWNING?

> "Aliens"? Masterful. One of only two (to my
> knowledge--correct me anyone) modern sci-fi movies wherein an
> actor/actress was nominated for an acting Academy Award. (Other was
> Jeff Bridges, "Star Man".)

Good question. No one else leaps to mind. Hmm... I hadn't realized that
Sigourney earned an Oscar nod for that one. It's certainly the best I've
ever seen her. Weird how I totally forgot about ALIENS in my earlier
Cameron musings. Maybe it's because I only saw it once back when it first
came out. Also, I kinda prefer ALIEN.

Like Hallie's Brad, I have a theory about why ALIENS is so effective.
It's a postmodern war movie in a sci-fi setting. More to the point, it
starts as a World War II film and soon segues into a Vietnam film. The
organized gung-ho attitude of the early sequences degenerates into chaos
and terror. Also, Sigourney has never been sexier. (I think I once told
the List about my seeing her at a neighboring in a cheap NYU-area
hamburger joint about a year or so back.)

> "True Lies"? My favorite Bond movie. :)

And much, much more. I think of it as Cameron's SCENES FROM A MARRIAGE
(with apologies to Ingmar Bergman). It also bears some intriguing points
of comparison to two Hitchcock depictions of the risks of marriage: the
second version of THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH (1956)--think of Doris Day
using her own womanly powers against Middle Eastern baddies--and, much
more importantly, NOTORIOUS (1946).

Remember the first time we see Cary Grant (as the spy Devlin) sitting in
front of us in silhouette (and silent judgement) as he watches the erotic
spectacle of Ingrid Bergman? It's like a male viewer sitting in front of
us watching a movie. Now think back to Schwarzenegger, also seated in
silent silhouette, watching Jamie Lee's semi-coerced exotic strip tease.
Call me nutsy, but I felt as strong an implied critique of Arnold's
character in that film as there was of Devlin in NOTORIOUS. Bergman has
to suffer to gain male approval. (Worse, she has to marry a man she
doesn't love so as to help our government. I'll never forget the charming
baddie Claude Rains confessing to his castrating mother: "Mother, I've
married an American agent." Mom calmly reaches for a smoke and hisses:
"Our only protection is the sheer enormity of your stupidity.") Cameron
extends the critique to belligerent patriarchal imperialism in general.

Is it an accident that Arnold gives Jamie the same closeup smirk at the
dinner table that he earlier gave to one of the terrorists just before
blowing him away? Aren't we supposed to question both the efficacy and
ethicality of his employing the machinery of the State to solve his
domestic problems? (Bill Clinton, take note!) I was blown away when the
objectified and manipulated Jamie Lee stood up to her voyeuristic
oppressor and attacked the one-way mirror (read: movie screen). Another
highlight is when Arnold and Jamie are re-united in a romantic clench as a
nuclear mushroom cloud blooms behind them. I think her final
transformation from a meek housewife into a sleek and effective secret
agent (and great tango dancer!) is every bit as impressive as Sara
Conner's evolution in the "Terminator" movies.

Thoughtful psychoanalytically-inclined feminist cultural critics could
have a field day analyzing TRUE LIES. Funny how few so-called progressive
academics can be bothered to grapple with pop art imaginatively rather
than dismissively. This is a partial explanation of why I ultimately
(permanently?) deferred admission into NYU's doctoral program in Cinema
Studies despite being accepted. But don't get me started....

> Titanic?
> Well, the writing sucked, but the imagery was incredible (I challenge
> anyone to deny THAT point...).

Eh.

> Hrm. I just got off the phone and my train of thought has derailed.

Wait! I'm flashing back to Hitchcock's STRANGERS ON A TRAIN! 1951!!
It's a Cinema Studies meltdown!!!

> So I guess that's my rebuttal. Your turn... ;)
>
> J. Stephen Riley Silber

Aww.... you can do better than that! I think STRANGE DAYS had a lot to
say. I just disagreed with it.

I've gotta dig up that my review if only to remind me of more reasons why
I disliked it so.

Let's be careful out there....

Kent
aka A Mr. Katimski of the List

> ====================================
> =======
>
> The two most common things in the universe are hydrogen and
> stupidity.
>
> On Tue, 29 Sep 1998, Kent G. wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 29 Sep 1998, J. Stephen Riley Silber wrote:
> >
> > > YAY! Someone else who liked "Strange Days"!!! Yippee! I'm not
> > alone!
> >
> > Uh, oh! There's another one.... Martha, quick! Where the devil are
> > my running shoes?
> >
> > First there was that odd German fella. (At least, I think he was a
> > fella. Ya never know wit dem blasted new-fangled Eur-up-peons!). Now
> > there's this nice gent with the four names. They're turnin' into a
> > movement! Head for the hills!
> >
> > I *really* disliked STRANGE DAYS. I found it despicable and
> > exploitative. Not that there's anything wrong with that....
> >
> > > Someone once asked James Cameron what his favorite movie was that
> > tanked,
> > > and he said "Strange Days". He thought it was a great movie (of
> > course,
> > > he produced it),
> >
> > He also wrote the screenplay. (Amazingly, I think I have the
> > published version somewhere in the wreakage of my library. Don't
> > ask!) I'd mercifully repressed my memories of this when I wrote my
> > earlier pro-Cameron posts. This is the one Cameron film I liked less
> > than TITANIC. I normally admire director Kathryn Bigelow's hard-edged
> > visual pizzazz (anybody remember her cool vampire flick NEAR DARK?)
> > but ...*this* (shudder!). I guess a good parent should love the slow
> > child best.
> >
> > Didn't Cameron also script or collaborate on the writing of Bigelow's
> > POINT BREAK, that aggressively absurd (but irresistable)
> > surfing/parachuting/bank-robbing flick starring Patrick Swayze and
> > Keanu Reeves? THAT I liked.
> >
> > > and was disappointed that it didn't reach as many people
> > > as he hoped. I think it did--we were just so nauseated by what we
> > saw.
> > > (Not literally, mind you--it was just a very powerful movie about a
> > very
> > > powerful subject: racism.)
> >
> > Naw, y'got it right the first time. Do you really think STRANGE DAYS
> > had something constructive or coherent to say about racism? I thought
> > of it as an apologia for the police state. As always, Angela Bassett
> > was magnificent but Ralph Fiennes had to go. We were supposed to
> > believe that *that* wimp was a veteran vice cop? I don't think so.
> >
> > My mind is still reeling from the way that film trivialized the
> > meaning of the Rodney King beating. I had a review of the film
> > published in an edition of Cinebook's annual "Motion Picture Guide" a
> > few years back. I'll see if I can dig it up and pass it on.
> >
> > To be continued?
> >
> > K
> >