I think post-#MeToo, the media is finally saying that we need to expect more from privileged white men, and that it isn't enough that they're ostensibly political allies of the progressive left if their private actions leave a lot to be desired (see the likes of Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey, whose respective actions are admittedly far worse than Ted Kennedy's sole, but deadly, act of cowardice, and onetime icons of the political left like Bill Clinton)
Let's unpack this:
a. Interesting you attempt to turn this into a Me Too issue even though it's 50 years before Me Too existed, extremely flawed movement though it is.
b. Bill Clinton one of the "icons of the political left"--you reveal your own politics with this one pretty bluntly.
c. Weinstein and Spacey's actions are "far worse"? I mean wouldn't death be considered worse than alleged harassment? Not sure what the moral compass is here.
c. You point out the Me Too movement targets privileged (meaning successful) white (doesn't Cosby or R. Kelly count?) men
of the "progressive left". I see this so-called movement as something the likes of Rose MacGowan, Asia Argento, and Tamika Mallory twisted into a destructive corrosive force that throws out the baby with the bathwater and ends up being allied with Louis Farrakhan.
d. All this is off course of what this should be about: does the movie have it's own political agenda or not. I say yes, everyone else here says no.
e. Finally, what is the artistic merit of this film? Does it have redeeming value in that respect? Well it wasn't nominated for anything, so I think we all agree on this one. And yes I did see the film--well most of it...I didn't bother seeing it all the way through. As a movie, regardless of politics I found it mediocre to poor in quality.
f. I could actually see a movie about this being well done and in an unbiased way. This was not that film.
reply
share
[deleted]
6 years ago
Ah, so you're a tribal Democrat, as opposed to a genuine progressive liberal.
If you were a genuine progressive liberal you'd take the Me Too movement seriously rather than demonising the women who have called out bad behaviour (to put it mildly) and conflating white male privilege with 'success'. And yes, Cosby and R. Kelly do count. I didn't specifically mention them because as far as I'm aware neither of them was as closely associated with the Democratic Party/liberal politics as Weinstein and Spacey had been, and my whole point was about how some parts of the 'left' (i.e. your part) has turned a blind eye to serious sexual misconduct and the like for too long out of convenience and a willingness to cover for 'political allies'.
It would be easy for me, as a political progressive, to say 'keep it up and continue excusing bad behaviour within the left' and thus choose to indulge in my own share of abhorrent behaviour knowing people like you would always be there to cover for me, but unlike the men I have listed, I am no deviant and moreover, if I were, I'd deserve to be hung out to dry, just as any man who exploits and abuses women should be.
As for Bill Clinton, it was a moot point. I am no particular fan of the man either, but I do find it curious that you go to bat for the equally (personally and politically) compromised Kennedys yet not for him.
With respect to the film, it's good if not great. At times I felt it treated Mary Jo Kopechne's death a little too glibly, especially in the scenes involving Bob McNamara and the rest of the Kennedy 'brain trust' seeking to whitewash the entire incident; then again, perhaps it would have been hard for the film to do anything else, seeing that glibly is exactly the way the men involved, save for Ted Kennedy's cousin, Joe Gargan, treated the whole tragedy.
Unfortunately you admit you didn't even watch it all the way through, and that the absence of any major awards nominations somehow renders it worthless.
reply
share