Trackbacks & Pings

1. In Which We Suffer A Vague Paralyzing Leisure Class Malaise « This Recording on 18 Oct 2007 at 6:23 am

   […] just loves pairing women of colour up with dorky white dudes, shortly after dorky white dudes have been dumped or rejected by white […]

Comments

1. Ehav Ever wrote:

   I didn’t look like anything I would go see. I just didn’t see any point. I know more dramatic movies, when it comes to finding one’s self movies. I like movies, of that genre, where something may completely loose their way for some reason and finds it on some journey. I didn’t see this in the preview.

   Posted 30 Jul 2007 at 8:18 am ¶

2. gatamala wrote:

   I disagree w/ you on Wes :D. I think I’m the only person who liked the Life Aquatic.

   I AM tired of PoCs and their “world” being the background/prop/foil for white folk. Did he at least put Waris back in?

   It’s as if we are utterly incapable of having romance, film noir, intricate plot twists, ill humor, ensemble casts etc…. even in “indie” -esque films.

   We really need to do it ourselves.

   Posted 30 Jul 2007 at 8:20 am ¶

3. Jay Smooth wrote:

   wow couldn’t disagree more on Anderson I find his stuff hit or miss but Rushmore is an all-time favorite.

   Posted 30 Jul 2007 at 10:27 am ¶

4. Carmen Van Kerckhove wrote:

   LOL! I knew I’d get a lot of shit for talking smack about Anderson.

   Posted 30 Jul 2007 at 10:35 am ¶

5. Wendi Muse wrote:

   -life aquatic: crap…and a perfectly bad waste of good actors, but the soundtrack with seu jorge covering david bowie tracks in portuguese made my day (ahem life)
   -rushmore: awesome
   -the royal tenenbaums: own it, love it
   -never saw bottle rocket
   -the sequid & the whale (which he produced): awesome as well

   so, in a few words, i like mr. anderso’s body of work for the most part

   BUT i agree with you on the POC/land of POC backdrop for giving life new meaning. I don’t, however, think this is limited to whites. I think this is just a common theme in most movies, including people of all races, when they travel (didn’t anyone see “How Stella Got Her Groove Back”?). i mean, that’s partially the point of travel for leisure. it not only gives you an opportunity to learn something new about another culture, but in reflecting on the new knowledge, you often learn a lot about yourself. . .

   sure, sometimes it’s done in a patronizing way, but i think, for the most part, it’s a very real (and positive) aspect of traveling

   Posted 30 Jul 2007 at 10:55 am ¶

6. Adnan Y. wrote:

   “Talking smack about Anderson” may have just set much of Williamsburg’s hipster denizens up in arms!

   As for the flick in question, I do have a bit of concern that this is going to what Tunde of Tv On The Radio would call a “magic negro movie” set in South Asia, my parents’ turf.

   Why do I fear a Peter Sellers segment making its way into the film?

   Posted 30 Jul 2007 at 11:05 am ¶

7. Mag Hag wrote:

   I must admit that I too loooove Mr. Anderson and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the “White People Working Out Their Issues Against an Exotic Backdrop” setup as long as it’s not done in a racist and/or condescending way. “Darjeeling Unlimited” doesn’t immediately strike me as being either, it actually looks like it’s going to be rather cool.

   Also, Adrien Brody is a plus. Always.

   Posted 30 Jul 2007 at 11:09 am ¶

8. obw wrote:

   I’m a big fan of the R.T. so when I saw this trailer, I couldn’t help but feel drawn into the great music and humor and style that makes Anderson, well, Anderson.
   But in the midst of my feel-good-attitude, I found my blood boiling at the thought of this whole spiritual journey to India trend that has been around for so long.
   I think I’ve finally pinpointed the reason why it drives me crazy, this whole “Deepak Chopra” representation of India, and other developing countries. It’s that when it’s framed in this kind of context, India appears to be a land that was simply created for the spiritual enlightenment of white folk - apparently it has no politics, or technology, or industry of its own. I almost threw up a little when I saw one of the characters with the little child in his lap - what year is this, I keep screaming to myself?
   But, there it is eh? It’s going to be highly acclaimed, and people will continue to flock to the “Land of the Kama Sutra” in order to reconnect with family, friends, “the important things.”
   Hm…I guess I didn’t say anything too important, but maybe my short rant was enough.

   Posted 30 Jul 2007 at 12:53 pm ¶

9. Vox wrote:

   You know what’s weird is even movies that are supposedly about non-white characters finding themselves, it ends up being more about white people finding themselves. I’m thinking mainly of “To Wong Foo,” which is supposedly about two older drag queens helping John Leguizamo’s character, but ends up being about all three of them teaching a white Midwestern town to be more open-minded when it comes to gender and race. I know there are plenty of other ones, though.

   Posted 30 Jul 2007 at 1:54 pm ¶

10. Gigi wrote:

    Since the characters seem a bit ridiculous, isn’t the whole hackneyed “spriitual journey in India” theme called into question somewhat? Seems like the Wes Anderson characature of self-involved and self-obsessed neurotics who are emotionally candid to the point of non-functioning in the real world could poke fun at the types who see India that way in just the right wy.

    I can’t vouch for how the audience might interpret that though.

    And also remembering the Indian character in The Royal Tenenbaums. Hmm… Second thoughts.

    Posted 30 Jul 2007 at 2:26 pm ¶

11. Jay Smooth wrote:

    Coming back to this The thing is, its emotional substance is exactly what I love most about Rushmore, that it is so loving towards its characters.. to me it has a compassion/sincerity that is the opposite of ironically detached hipsterdom.. so this particular assessment is very surprising to me! but I will stop obsessing over it now.

    I do think he’s gone a little downhill with each one after that, and this one does look iffy on the country-as-magic-negro front.

    Posted 30 Jul 2007 at 2:40 pm ¶

12. Church of shishkaBOB wrote:

    Thanks Carmen, I thought I was the only “philistine” who couldn’t stand Wes “It’s a montage!” Anderson. All his movies are essentially a series of extended montages, interspersed w/ brief shots of the hangdog expression of the soul-searching protagonist. Not to mention that background music consisting of 60’s rock, emo/alternative and classical (harpischord only) plays through 75% of the film.

    Posted 30 Jul 2007 at 5:31 pm ¶

13. Adrianna wrote:

    Love his movies , especially Rushmore.
    let’s not exaggerate here about the whole White folks go looking for themselves in exotic places. The whole point of traveling is to experience something other than that what you have experience back home.

    As an immigrant My foreign place is America. . It’ that lore that you will experience something other than what you are used to. It’s not like lost in translation, where Japan is the silent, “exotic ” background for the “existential crisis” that Bill murray and Scarlett Johansson were experiencing.

    Posted 30 Jul 2007 at 6:57 pm ¶

14. ebog/gary wrote:

    I’m sorry to break this to you you, Carmen, but style technically IS a substance.

    Posted 31 Jul 2007 at 1:31 am ¶

15. Andi wrote:

    If you have to give one Wes Anderson film a second chance, let it be Rushmore. Even if it is kind of pretentious, it’s hilarious!

    Posted 31 Jul 2007 at 7:06 pm ¶

16. Anonymous wrote:

    I don’t get what’s with you guys at racialicious. I mean I love that you guys are against racism and equality for people of all beliefs, skin colours, hair colour, eye colour, etc. but the problem I have is that you see racism in things that are not necessarily racist. This movie? I didn’t see any culture-clash themes in the trailer. Knowing Wes Anderson it will be devoid of that type of thing. This movie is not racist. It doesn’t have a muslim dancing around with an AK47 screaming “Allahu Akbar min kulli shay” and warning everyone of the infidels while Owen Wilson looks on in disgust. Maybe it’s because I like Wes Anderson movies but he is a very equal-minded, smart man.

    Posted 01 Aug 2007 at 4:10 pm ¶

17. Leeyah wrote:

    I actually like the Life Aquatic but wasn’t too fond of Royal Tenenbaums. Am I the only one? =(

    As for the trailer, as long as they don’t have blaring inconsistencies about the culture and horrible depictions of the people, I really don’t mind.

    Posted 02 Aug 2007 at 1:49 pm ¶

18. MoiMeme wrote:

    I guess it is one perspective. The one we usually see, White (Dorky) Male. But if at least artfully done, we need not feel disgusted by it. Thoughtless? Probably. Racist - likely not.

    And do we really want media makers to be thinking of our feelings at every turn? I am sort of enjoying the death of political correctness, myself - I do not want that sort of condescension.

    As a woman of color who has dated mostly dorky/hipster white males (okay the half Jewish one felt that didn’t count but come on whatever).

    But I do agree there need to be more films that express our point of view. And that will happen when more of us begin writing and producing our own work…(I’m up for it - call me!)

    Is it wrong of me to mention, as mom to a young child, that the main place I seefair racial treatment in moving pictures these days is on the Disney Channel?

    Perhaps it seems more fair because most of their characters are caricatures and they just happen to indulge in what appears to be equal opportunity casting.

    Posted 10 Oct 2007 at 1:36 pm ¶

19. CRL wrote:

    “Is it wrong of me to mention, as mom to a young child, that the main place I seefair racial treatment in moving pictures these days is on the Disney Channel?”

    No — you speak the truth. Which depresses me, and yet gives me some hope at the same time. (Although I had some problems with “Wendy Wu Homecoming Warrior.”)

    Posted 17 Oct 2007 at 7:52 pm ¶

20. jez wrote:

    just wanted to point out, that Out of Africa is about colonialism, The Constant Gardner is about the bored/idealistic wife of a western diplomat in Africa, whereas Darjeeling Unlimited seems to be about brothers getting to know each other by travelling to the fabled Orient…so, I think the three can’t be compared.

    Posted 02 Jan 2008 at 4:35 pm ¶

21. macon d wrote:

    Yes they can, jez–they’re all about white people working out their own problems against the backdrop of undifferentiated masses of dark people, and doing so selfishly.

    Posted 25 Apr 2008 at 9:45 am ¶

Post a Comment