In the wake of this historic (and very unusual) 4th
of July holiday weekend, news outlets have been vying with one another to
publish articles that are relevant to the story of the United States. This past
Sunday, film critics at the Los Angeles Times joined together to produce
a feature titled “10 Must-Watch Movies That Capture America in Times of
Profound Change.” Here are their topic choices: (In every category there are
also a few alternate suggestions.)
(1) THE
GREAT DEPRESSION: The Grapes of Wrath (1940)
( (2) POSTWAR
OPTIMISM: The Best Years of Our Lives (1946)
( (3) CAPITALISM,
UNCHECKED: There Will Be Blood (2007)
(( (4) POST-VIETNAM/WATERGATE
CYNICISM: Nashville (1975)
(( (5) MEDIA
DOMINATION: Network (1976)
(6 (6) GENTRIFICATION
AND RACIAL TENSIIONS: Do the Right Thing (1989)
(7 (7) RISE OF THE YUPPIES: They Live (1988)
( ) (8) ‘80s
WOMEN IN THE WORKPLACE: Working Girl (1988)
(9 (9) DIGITAL
ALIENATION: The Social Network (2010)
(1 (10) POST-9/11 ANXIETIES: Team America: World
Police (2004)
To me this is, for the most part, an excellent list. I would
certainly put The Grapes of Wrath, The Best Years of Our Lives, Network,
and Do The Right Thing on any
best-film list I was compiling. By the same token, I wonder about the criteria
at work here. Why is the 19th century (especially the Civil War) so
completely ignored? Why does this list contain not a single work made in the
turbulent 1960s? I am particularly passionate about a seminal film year, 1967,
which captured for a mass audience the tensions both between races and between
generations. (Here are four of the five Oscar Best Picture Nominees for that
year in film: Bonnie and Clyde, Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner, In the Heat of the Night,
The Graduate). Every one of these very distinctive films, screened in a
turbulent year, has something vitally important to say about the differences
that keep Americans apart.
I also don’t see on the critics’ list any representation of
films shot in the 1990s. That was a period
that balanced social optimism with the belated acknowledgment of the
scourge of HIV, especially as it applied to the nation’s gay community.
Remarkably, it was America’s favorite Everyman, Tom Hanks, who starred in a
mainstream Hollywood movie that finally
looked with compassion on the plight of a gay man dying of AIDS. Hanks’
willingness to take on this role, especially after other leading men had turned
it down, marked a new era for audiences and for the motion picture community,
which honored Hanks with his first Oscar for this acting challenge. (Just one
year later, he won again, for the very different Forrest Gump, which
contained—in many people’s eyes—its own much more subtle AIDS reference.)
Another film I think should be noted was also made in the
Nineties, and also starred Tom Hanks, who seems to have a special talent for
representing what’s on the minds of his fellow Americans. The 1995 film Apollo
13 (perhaps the seminal achievement of director Ron Howard) is a
celebration both of American technological excellence and of the brave
astronauts who are vaulting us into the world of the future. Apollo 13 was
made, with the full cooperation of NASA, to showcase the story of a near
outer-space disaster that, happily, turned into a human triumph. It’s
surprising indeed to me that the L.A. Times critics seem to have nothing
to say about American technological mastery. Social media (as shown in such
listed films as The Social Network) has certainly changed all of our
lives, but our relationship to our planet has also certainly evolved, right?
No comments:
Post a Comment