Author Topic: In the New Yorker...  (Read 473465 times)

Offline southendmd

  • Town Administration
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 15,189
  • well, I won't
Re: In the New Yorker...
« Reply #1610 on: April 26, 2017, 11:31:44 am »
I particularly liked his review of "Contact":  he says of Jodie Foster's character:   "She does get laid in the film, but only by Matthew McConaughey, and that doesn't count."

Offline Jeff Wrangler

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 27,003
  • "He somebody you cowboy'd with?"
Re: In the New Yorker...
« Reply #1611 on: April 26, 2017, 01:09:00 pm »
I particularly liked his review of "Contact":  he says of Jodie Foster's character:   "She does get laid in the film, but only by Matthew McConaughey, and that doesn't count."

Well, there you have it. Amusing, but snarky. How does he know it doesn't count? Has he ever been laid by Matthew McConaughey?
"It is required of every man that the spirit within him should walk abroad among his fellow-men, and travel far and wide."--Charles Dickens.

Offline serious crayons

  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,319
Re: In the New Yorker...
« Reply #1612 on: April 27, 2017, 01:38:14 pm »
Plus, how does that not count? I'd certainly count Matthew McConaughey if he were among my conquests, even if it occurred before the McConaisssaince, as that film did.

On the other hand, Jodie Foster no doubt has different standards.



Offline Jeff Wrangler

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 27,003
  • "He somebody you cowboy'd with?"
Re: In the New Yorker...
« Reply #1613 on: April 27, 2017, 02:15:49 pm »
Plus, how does that not count? I'd certainly count Matthew McConaughey if he were among my conquests, even if it occurred before the McConaisssaince, as that film did.

On the other hand, Jodie Foster no doubt has different standards.

It just now occurred to me to wonder whether he was making a kind of veiled reference to the fact that she's lesbian, so it "doesn't count" because she got laid by a guy?
"It is required of every man that the spirit within him should walk abroad among his fellow-men, and travel far and wide."--Charles Dickens.

Offline serious crayons

  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,319
Re: In the New Yorker...
« Reply #1614 on: April 29, 2017, 02:27:36 pm »
It just now occurred to me to wonder whether he was making a kind of veiled reference to the fact that she's lesbian, so it "doesn't count" because she got laid by a guy?

Maybe, although I don't think her character in the film was necessarily identified as lesbian. I think he was just waving off Matthew McConaughey as a lightweight, which most people did back in them days.

On a related topic, since Jonathan Demme died the other day, I've read that he was slammed by "the gay community" (not that all gay people share one giant monolithic opinion, but you know what I mean) for the portrayal of the serial killer in Silence of the Lambs, whose identity was kind of vague but seemed kind of transgender or something (he was making a thing out of women's skin to wear himself) and wore makeup, I think, etc. Demme felt terrible, because he considered himself an ally. So then he made Philadelphia, in which as you'll recall Tom Hanks plays a gay man with AIDS -- and was castigated even more by the gay community for such a tame portrayal of a gay man (I guess Hanks danced with Antonio Banderas, but that was about it -- let's just say it was no Brokeback Mountain).

In fact, as years went by SotL became more embraced by "the gay community" -- Jodie Foster's character is not identified as lesbian, but could conceivably be, and for some reason I guess people liked Hannibal Lecter. But they still hated Philadelphia.

I felt bad for him, because in neither case did he intend to be insensitive. He says that in SotL he just wanted to show a guy who was extremely alienated from himself and real life or something like that. And in Philadelphia, he hoped to bring attention to an issue that was still widely ignored -- remember how Reagan notoriously didn't mention AIDS?

Do you all have any thoughts on this, or had you heard it before?


Offline Jeff Wrangler

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 27,003
  • "He somebody you cowboy'd with?"
Re: In the New Yorker...
« Reply #1615 on: April 30, 2017, 01:56:17 pm »
Maybe, although I don't think her character in the film was necessarily identified as lesbian.

I didn't mean her character in the film; I've never seen it. I meant her.

Quote
I think he was just waving off Matthew McConaughey as a lightweight, which most people did back in them days.

That's certainly plausible.

I've never seen either Silence of the Lambs or Philadelphia. Years ago some guy at my gym was pointed out to me as the person on whom Hanks' character was based.

In any case, as usual I'm weeks behind in my magazines. If anybody skipped the Margaret Attwood profile (April 17), I would recommend going back and reading it. I enjoyed it.
"It is required of every man that the spirit within him should walk abroad among his fellow-men, and travel far and wide."--Charles Dickens.

Offline Jeff Wrangler

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 27,003
  • "He somebody you cowboy'd with?"
Re: In the New Yorker...
« Reply #1616 on: May 02, 2017, 12:49:51 pm »
Today I read Kathryn Schulz's April 24 "Critic At Large" piece on the Arctic in literature. New to me that neither Peary nor Byrd actually reached the North Pole. Schulz says the actual first person to reach the North Pole was an insurance agent from Duluth in 1968.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2017, 07:14:43 pm by Jeff Wrangler »
"It is required of every man that the spirit within him should walk abroad among his fellow-men, and travel far and wide."--Charles Dickens.

Offline serious crayons

  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,319
Re: In the New Yorker...
« Reply #1617 on: May 02, 2017, 05:03:15 pm »
I didn't mean her character in the film; I've never seen it. I meant her.

OK, but that would make it an even weirder comment. It would be like saying "Heath Ledger gets laid in the film by Jake Gyllenhaal, but that doesn't count" because Heath was straight.

Characters' sexual activities in film weren't expected to reflect their actors' real-life orientation, even in them days.

I think he must have been making a snarky comment about Matthew McConaughey's lightweightness. Look who counts now, Anthony Lane!  :laugh:



Offline Jeff Wrangler

  • BetterMost Supporter!
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 27,003
  • "He somebody you cowboy'd with?"
Re: In the New Yorker...
« Reply #1618 on: May 03, 2017, 08:35:10 pm »
In the May 1 issue, everyone should read David Remnick on Trump's first one hundred days. Makes you want to break out the powder and shot and march on Washington.

The May 8 issue arrived in my mail today. I'm looking forward to what Evan Osnos has to say about how Trump could be removed from office.
"It is required of every man that the spirit within him should walk abroad among his fellow-men, and travel far and wide."--Charles Dickens.

Offline serious crayons

  • BetterMost Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,319
Re: In the New Yorker...
« Reply #1619 on: May 06, 2017, 10:27:13 am »
In the May 1 issue, everyone should read David Remnick on Trump's first one hundred days. Makes you want to break out the powder and shot and march on Washington.

Uh-oh -- after the past few days, I already want to do that! Reading the article might put me over the edge, next thing you know I'll be getting background checked at the powder-and-shot store.

My son and I were talking on the phone yesterday, and for once we agreed on something -- that when he launches his murderous rampage, the first target should be Paul Ryan. But I reneged and said, no, I'm an opponent of capital punishment, I don't really want Paul Ryan killed, though I can't say that if he died I'd shed a tear. "Shed a tear?" my son replied. "If Paul Ryan died, all of social media would be overflowing with unbridled celebration."

Then this morning, I thought, what if something one of Paul Ryan's kids, a la Jimmy Kimmel's baby, were to have a health crisis of some kind? Would Ryan have a change of heart, the way Sheryl Sandberg did when she wrote a piece after her husband died admitting that when she wrote Lean In she didn't get it, didn't fully understand how hard it could be for single mothers (and imagine, some single mothers have no full-time live-in nannies!).

But then, getting back to Paul Ryan, I thought, nah, he won't give it any more thought than he does now because he'll be mentally and physically insulated from reality -- his family is fully and I'm sure generously insured, courtesy of U.S. taxpayers.

Some people are calling for the AHCA to be named Trumpcare, to saddle Trump with the label. I disagree. Not that I absolve Trump of blame, but any Republican president would have led to the same outcome. I think Trump's involvement in structuring the plan was, as Slate put it, basically handing Paul Ryan a piece of paper with "Fix health care" scrawled on it. I think it should be called Ryancare, the way we call the McCarthy Hearings the McCarthy Hearings.

I'm hoping for an equivalent of Joseph N. Welch to step in and ask Ryan et. all, as they stood outside on the lawn after the vote and smiling and clapping to celebrate the suffering and deaths of millions of Americans, to step up and say, "Have you no sense of decency?"