| Morlock Elloi on Sun, 3 Mar 2019 19:33:12 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| <nettime> The stupidity of the Americans |
[ Machine translated film review fromhttps://www.heise.de/tp/features/Die-Dummheit-der-Amerikaner-4323913.html?seite=all ]
The stupidity of the Americans March 02, 2019 Rüdiger SuchslandFrom Cheney to Trump: Adam McKay's "Vice" shows that the majority of the US is a land of morally corrupt self-righteous idiots
The films, which are once shot about Donald Trump, can be taken from a famous sentence of the Nazi Propaganda Minister: "Gentlemen, in a hundred years you will be showing a beautiful color film about the terrible days that we are going through Play the role now, so that viewers do not yell and whistle in a hundred years when they appear on the screen, "Dr. Joseph Goebbels on April 17, 1945.
The interesting thing about this sentence is that here one knows what will come, as he knows what is. It directs all its actions only on the effect, on the appearance and suitability for the aesthetic effect. And indeed: aesthetically, the Nazis have won the Second World War across the board. To this day, they determine the iconography of evil on the canvas.
Will that be like the powerful of America? One can see in the poor performance of "Vice" at this year's Academy Awards an indication of the virtues and disadvantages of this film: "Vice" is not good for the well-tempered politically correct symbolic action such as "Green Book". Adam McKay's feature film about the republican "Dark Knight" Richard Cheney was the film of this year's Academy Awards, which fiercely focused on the immorality and abyss of American politics.
He does not show harmonious coexistence and racial reconciliation. He shows a portrait of white political America. An America that is corrupt controlled by the big corporations, especially the arms and energy companies that dominate the politicians like puppets.
Director Adam McKay serves the myths of power: 9/11 - what a moment! The film shows what we can not know: the crisis center in the White House bunker, insecurity, chaos, a piercing alarm and all eyes on the boss's boss. Its round, pink-doughy face looks down expressionless. Only the corners of the mouth move, the lower jaws grind. Cheney thinks.
He is determined and only we interpret retrospectively a "dark" to it. He is a haven of peace. Work on the myth, because so much rest and cold blood you have to have first. If it was war, one wished that one had such a man on his side. He just gives his orders - a man where he belongs by nature - in the center of power - and stands behind him, a bit tender, a bit reassuring, a little bit controlling, Cheney's wife Lynn, immensely mesmerizing, brilliantly abysmal of great Amy Adams is played.
Because Amy Adams, not Christian Bale is the star of this movie. Bale, like many of his colleagues, once again confuses acting performance with external similarity approximation to the object; He eats dozens of fat cubes, can daily several sausage pelts of make-up and prostheses over the head, until he looks like a meat incarnate volleyball, and of facial expressions anyway nothing is recognizable. Adams needs a wig.
It starts with a surprise: a young man driving in 1963 in Kansas drunk car, is stopped by a police officer, for the second time. And here Lynn turns up. They are already married, but now she folds him together, makes him small, takes him apart, breaks it down into its individual parts and then rebuilds it as a new human being: What women power is also called, as an inseparable mixture of sex and violence this movie.
She makes him her avatarBecause Lynn Cheney is tough, stiff, all-American, a class leader with all one and ambitious. And because, as a woman in her sixties, you can not fulfill this political ambition in spite of all yours, she puts everything on her husband. She makes him - and that is the daring thesis of this film - her avatar.
First he fails, then she makes sure that does not happen again. The result is a power couple of two powerful people who correspond to each other, whose story the movie tells as a farce, and modern version of Shakespeare's "Macbeth", but one turned into comedic. Richard Cheney, whom we know, is Lynn's creature.
Thus, from the late sixties onwards, he happens to become a Republican, becoming a perfect second man behind Donald Rumsfeld, who appears as a happy cynic, adviser to new president Richard Nixon, precisely because he is not distracted from conviction and ideology.
"Rummie"Next to Lynn, "Rummie" (played with energy by Steve Carell) is the second man to make Cheney what he is: Dick and Don are a decade-long couple Machiavelli and Shakespeare could not have invented better. "What do we believe in?" Young Cheney asks his mentor once in a key scene of the movie. What the later Minister of Defense can hardly keep from laughing and disappears into his office. The point of the scene seems to have escaped the makers: Apparently, Cheney believes that one should believe in something.
Cheney is quiet and effective, he does his job, and so it goes up: to its own, still windowless office, to presidential adviser and White House Chief of Staff under Gerald Ford. Then Secretary of Defense under George Bush, and then his son George W. Vice President. In between jobs in the economy, reliable lobbying for arms and energy companies.
"Theory of the unified power"However, the film underlines an interesting point, probably because it appears to him as "too intellectual". Because Cheney is always interested in the "theory of the unified power", ie the pooling of as many possibilities of influence in one hand. The film shows in furious alienation effects: With knights, pharaoh masks and a hunting cat. Rumsfeld suddenly seems to have a gangster knife in his fist.
Adam McKay is not anyone. As a writer, director and producer, he worked for many years on "Saturday Night Live". Obviously McKay could not decide in the montage whether he wanted to make a comedy or a drama, a tragedy or a satire. The tone and atmosphere of his film now oscillate between a typical Michael Moore rage inability to take the political opponents seriously, political instruction and comfortable often silly clothes.
The audience is always rightMcKay is best still there, where the director makes no secret of his contempt for the vast majority of Americans. For that the American critics, above all the politically correct upper middle-class liberals hated him.
Because the audience is always right: if Trump chooses, it was a democratic decision, not the result of low instincts and manipulative enemy propaganda that falsified the election. The fact that the United States is simply a country of morally corrupt self-righteous idiots in its majority is something you can not even think about.
"Vice" is a movie about the stupidity of Americans. It's about Cheney, but even more about those who made him possible, who allowed him to become who he became. Dick Cheney is bad, ok. A heartless monster, so what?
"You finally chose me," Cheney accuses the audience in the end. Rightly so.The entertainmentification of politics, not just the American, has prepared the ground for all this.
Political comedy brings nothingBy putting his humor in the void, "Vice" proves a fundamental, far beyond himself weakness of this kind of political comedy. Political comedy is just as popular as ever. But she brings nothing.
While comedy and talk shows are better informed than sobriety-based news, they are depopulating the electorate, reinforcing the impression that politics is really just a big entertainment show.
The shift to the right is global. Corruption is worse than ever. Transforming democracies into authoritarian regimes - governments that are majority-empowered by governments are quite subtle in concrete practice.
What have the political comedies changed? Done against it? Nothing. You promoted the process.
"Vice" fails where it tries to capture the human Cheney. The only scenes that attempt to portray a humane Cheney appear as alibi moments: the man's obvious love for his family, the surprising tolerance of his lesbian daughter Mary, in whose favor Cheney even waives a presidential nomination.
What are his goals? Cheney is not an idiot. He has motives. Maybe only private. Maybe money and power. But here he remains caricature, here the film remains extremely naive, because his makers can obviously not imagine that such a person also has convictions. Instead, everything seems somehow absurd, and the film exposes at best a - alleged - gloomy, macabre comedy of a system.
The director does not want to humanize Cheney, but he barely gets around it. So we do not realize that, he dehumanizes America.
There are people who are immediately more personable than Richard Cheney. McKay shows Cheney as a gray bureaucrat, a chameleon of power, and a demonic puppeteer behind the scenes. A flattering portrait, because overall this is indeed a disturbing monument, but just a monument.
We are witnessing a man who orchestrated the Iraq war, signed death sentences legitimizing torture, exposing agents to punish displaced relatives, creating billion-dollar deals with the oil industry, killing hundreds of thousands - not counting disinformation, false news, and undermining democracy. Maybe comedy is the wrong form for something like that?
This idolization is consequently a trivialization. You might ask after this movie: Is not Richard Cheney worse than Trump? And after the answer "Yes" then conclude: Trump is not so bad.
Or does this film have almost a liberal nostalgia for those times when right-wing politicians were perhaps right-wing but rationalized when they had a certain taste, were not vulgar, and a few values they believed in?
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected] # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: