|
Selections
from the PopCult mail room,
as chosen by Zippy McDuff, The Invisible Intern™.
Send
us your own
letter!
(Please tell us whether to include your e-mail address.)
PRAYING
FOR A SLAUGHTER
As
hideous as the Praying
Spirit dolls are, I should point something out.
They
seem to be Pueblo Indians, and if that is the case their culture was not
decimated by invading white men who killed everyone. They struck kind
of a deal with the Spaniards, and so not only kept their culture intact,
but also got all the OTHER local Indian tribes killed off for them as
part of the deal. In exchange, they became Catholic and agreed not to
burn down Santa Fe yet again.
Anyway.
So the fact that they're sitting there praying isn't quite so upsetting
when you think of it that way.
Talia
(e-mail address withheld)
Er,
actually, now I'm even MORE upset. They switched gods just so other tribes
would be eradicated? Why, that doesn't seem very Christian-like. Or maybe
it is when considering how the Spaniards used religion to justify conquest.
–Ed.
SELF-IMPORTANT
ROCK STARS? YES!
hi
:) hilarious website. now i have another excuse for slacking at work.
anyway, i have an idea for "the bottom 5." how about male lead singers
who think they are foxy and clever but sure the hell aren't? of course,
this is just my working title :) there are tons of these guys out there.
my
one mini-example:
scott
stapp from creed. the shirtless, sweaty, ann b. davis tendrilled, self-important
fool. he's always clenching his fists and squinting heavenward -- believing
his trite, high-school poetry lyrics are speaking to the masses? you know
god can't even save his lame ass. i loathe him.
just
an idea :)
elizabeth
violetclovis@yahoo.com
Well,
male lead singers who think they're foxy and clever but aren't is actually
something of a tradition in rock 'n' roll. Why, there are hundreds if
not thousands of them. I certainly wouldn't mind skewering the Creed guy,
but the category would have to be refined a bit. How about "Pearl Jam
Imitators Who Aspire to Be Christ?" or "Rock Singers Who Really Ought
Not Think They're Songs Are Meaningful?" I'll put it on the list!
–Ed.
WAS
IT SOMETHING WE SAID?
Go
fuck yourself guys
Eric
Beaulieu
spaztaz23@hotmail.com
DEFENDING
MINORITY REPORT'S PLOT HOLES
OK–sorry,
I just read your Minority Report thingy
and have an issue.
You
can debate plot holes in crime movies, action adventure, even pseudo-sci-fi
like Star Wars. But it is my belief in true sci-fi (Blade Runner,
2001, and Minority Report as examples) plot holes are simply
things they didn't show you or haven't been explained because there's
more to the universe than what's on film. Any "hey, wait a minute" question
in a true sci-fi movie can be replied with "Well, did you think about..."
For
example... you say "the pre-cogs can't foresee sudden crimes of passion
until minutes before they occur, so how did they see Anderton's?", right?
I reply with two possibilities: First, who is committing the crime? Anderton?
Maybe, but the true crime seems more like a pre-meditated suicide (not
to mention fraud). The fact that this guy thought out his own death and
is tricking someone to commit it gives the pre-cogs time. OR maybe the
person who is committing the crime is the guy who set the event up and
knew Anderton would go through with it?
The
latter is interesting because it implies that people who commit the murder
aren't always the guilty party, or at least the most guilty. If someone
hires a hitman and is out of D.C. while the crime is prevented, who gets
the halo? I'm guessing the unlucky hit man. BUT maybe the pre-cogs can
back up to see who hired the hitman and bust the hiree as soon as he does
it. And what about programming a killing robot or setting a trap? It's
premeditated, but the criminal wouldn't be there at the time of death.
But,
in my opinion, good true sci-fi is exempt from almost any "holes" because
by the nature of the genre the writer has a get-out-of-jail-free card.
He's making it all up-not just the story, but the world that the story
takes place in. Anything he forgets or screws up, he can explain after
the fact somehow. I know it's cheating, but that's the beauty and fun
of sci-fi. Those explanations I made up, but I felt like I was involved
in expanding the screenwriter's story. They work for me.
Myself,
I was wondering how Anderton got in the temple with his old eyeballs after
the D of C police is after him. Surely a computer in this building would
have said, "THERE he is… I found him!" instead of "Hi again John,
let me open this security door for you. By the way, how's the ki... OOPS,
sorry, I keep forgetting." Of course this oversight can be explained,
I just haven't thought one up yet. :-)
I'm
not trying to convince you that you liked Minority Report better
than you admit. I just think you took off points that shouldn't be a part
of the score.
Dave
Whittle
whittle8@bellsouth.net
I
can't really dispute your take, except with this caveat:
I
think plot holes are forgivable IF they don't annoy you enough to derail
you from the movie. I've seen plenty of SF movies where I didn't even
think about plot problems until long after I had left the theater (like
The Matrix, for instance). In this movie, things were occurring
to me as I watched it (like the eyeball ID situation–don't you think
they would've shut off his security clearance first thing?). These weren't
dreadful plot holes, but they were enough to be niggling annoyances.
My
main point was that this was a well-made movie, but one that isn't really
that fresh when you look at its influences and when you consider that
its hero is actually rather uninteresting. Many reviewers stated that
Cruise is amazing, astounding, etc., but his character and performance
was no different to me than what we've seen in his Mission Impossible
heroes. Same goes for the antagonist: Who didn't know that Max von Sydow
was the real villain all along? Not much suspense there.
So:
great eye candy, fun action sequences, and some nice if familiar future
shock. All that makes for a superior summer movie… but not a classic
of all time, as a lot of critics have been declaring. I think A.I.
is not nearly as bad as most critics said, and Minority Report
is not nearly as perfect as the same critics have claimed. I think people
are just getting carried away because everybody's simultaneously happy
to see Spielberg doing action movies again and relieved that it didn't
suck.
–Ed.
|
