Recently, at a playdate, the other mommies and I were discussing good movies we'd seen on DVD lately. (Being mommies, we don't get out to actual movie theaters much.) I mentioned that I'd really enjoyed Inglourious Basterds and The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo.
The silence was deafening. Even the shrieks of the children playing in the background seemed to subside. Five pairs of grown-up eyes glared at me. Finally, someone said: "Aren't those really . . . violent?"
That pause was telling. If I'd said I'd liked Iron Man 2 (machine guns, electrified whips, missiles, car crashes, torture, murderous robots, suicide bombing...I could go on) or the latest Twilight movie (vampires, werewolves, decapitation, dismemberment), no one would have batted an eyelash. But because my two picks were not only violent but realistically so, I was instantly perceived as some kind of depraved adrenaline junkie--by a bunch of sanctimonious stroller jockeys who hadn't actually seen either film.
Don't get me wrong; I did like Iron Man 2, and I'm a fan of the Twilight saga. But when it comes to violent content, I found those PG-13 popcorn movies to be far more disturbing than the critically acclaimed, R-rated Basterds and Dragon Tattoo, precisely because violence should be disturbing--not painless, bloodless, computer-generated, slow-mo, and set to rock music.
The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo graphically depicts rape, incest, torture, mutilation, and murder, most of it directed at women. It's not fun to watch, but it's realistic, as opposed to the violence in Iron Man 2, which was totally unrealistic and, not coincidentally, a lot of fun to watch. Though it was about a serial killer, Dragon Tattoo's body count was far lower than Iron Man's. It's a testament to the filmmakers' skill and sensitivity that I'd advise anyone who has been the victim of domestic or sexual violence to stay far away from Dragon Tattoo. But I wouldn't have hesitated to recommend it to anyone else--until today, that is.
Yeah, Inglourious Basterds was violent, often gratuitously so. But wouldn't it be difficult--not to mention irresponsible--to make a World War II movie without showing violence? When characters get shot, they don't simply clutch their chests and fall down like the nameless evil henchmen and innocent bystanders in Iron Man 2. They bleed, writhe in pain, and beg for mercy. Just like in real life.
There's another reason why I found those rampaging robots and amorous vamps so troubling. Inglourious Basterds and The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo weren't marketed to kids; under-17s couldn't even see them without a parent, and I suspect the subtitles and heavy subject matter would have been a turn-off in any case. There were no action figures, video games, or fast-food tie-ins, all of which Iron Man 2 had. The Twilight saga is ostensibly for teens, but there are Twilight Barbie dolls marketed to girls ages 6 and up. At that age, I was still having nightmares from reading Bunnicula.
I know plenty of moms who think it's harmless to watch (or let their children watch) violent movies as long as it's "comic book" or "fantasy" violence. Personally, I don't think death and destruction on a larger-than-life scale should be the stuff of comedy or fantasy, for audiences of any age. Why do I get the feeling that if I brought that up at the next playdate, I'd be the one on the end of the glares again?
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Think Globally, Sleep Locally
I'm not quite sure what possessed The Roc to demand footsie jammies in the middle of July, but I'm inclined to blame this guy:
As temperatures climbed into the 90s and we finished reading Where The Wild Things Are for the three hundredth time, The Roc flatly refused to don his brand-new crustacean-themed T-shirt-and-shorts sleepwear set. I finally managed to coax him into bed by promising to buy him some footsie jammies the next day.
What was I thinking? Buying footsie jammies in July is akin to buying a Halloween costume in October, which is to say impossible. Luckily, a quick lap around the mall turned up one sale rack with some of the dregs left over from winter, marked down to $4.99. Upon closer inspection, I realized that they were all girl jammies: pink with blue bunnies, lavender with yellow ducks, pale blue with stars and rainbows, and white with an eco-conscious melange of green turtles, frogs, leaves, peace signs, and polka dots that, upon even closer inspection, turned out to be inexpert renderings of the planet Earth. But I'm all for saving the environment, and I was not about to quibble with $4.99 footsie jammies in July.
As temperatures climbed into the 90s and we finished reading Where The Wild Things Are for the three hundredth time, The Roc flatly refused to don his brand-new crustacean-themed T-shirt-and-shorts sleepwear set. I finally managed to coax him into bed by promising to buy him some footsie jammies the next day.
What was I thinking? Buying footsie jammies in July is akin to buying a Halloween costume in October, which is to say impossible. Luckily, a quick lap around the mall turned up one sale rack with some of the dregs left over from winter, marked down to $4.99. Upon closer inspection, I realized that they were all girl jammies: pink with blue bunnies, lavender with yellow ducks, pale blue with stars and rainbows, and white with an eco-conscious melange of green turtles, frogs, leaves, peace signs, and polka dots that, upon even closer inspection, turned out to be inexpert renderings of the planet Earth. But I'm all for saving the environment, and I was not about to quibble with $4.99 footsie jammies in July.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Technology According to The Roc
For a three-year-old, The Roc is pretty adept with technology. In fact, he is much better at using the many high-tech gadgets in our house than he is at pronouncing their names. For example, the "comprinter" is where Mommy and Daddy check their "e-mellow," when they're not checking it on their "cellophones."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
