Trust me, I've seen both films and yes, Anti-Christ is fucked up but Martyrs is something else. The problem with talking about it and its notoriety is it inevitably translates as an "I dare you" statement. Just ignore it and move on. Life's hard enough as it is.

I don’t know who you are but, between this and Bresson, we may be the same. My favorite film as well.

I’m seeing you both on the political subtext of Ford but I am on my phone commuting to work and it’s hard to reply succinctly. I’ll get back on it though because I love this film with all my heart but I’ve never read anything overtly political in it like in “The Searchers”.

Joaquin Phoenix as Joker should finally yield a Batman movie worth watching. Scheduled for release in October.

I think that's the crux of it. Its greatness has nothing to do with any potential political reading. It's certainly not a sloganeering film. If anything, I think it's as much about Henry Fonda's performance as it si Ford's direction or ideology. That slow walk he takes with Clementine to the church. The awkwardness of their kiss at the end. The look he gives Doc Holliday during the Shakespeare recital when he realises he's dying. I know Ford will be forever associated with John Wayne but I think Fonda understood what Ford was about on a human level better than anyone.

And who'd have thought Victor Mature, of all people, would have a performance like that in him?

ok this seems to have refresjed my proto-alzheimers


it’s from 5 years ago: http://sonicyouth.com/gossip/showpos...ostcount=17569

the undiscovered country part is elsewhere i will look

oh here it is

I'm amazed someone's actually made a screenshot of the exact moment when Fonda realises Doc Holliday is dying.

in 2017

so demonyo what do you mean by “idea of America”? what idea is this?

I think in essence it's the one laid out by Frederick Turner in his Frontier thesis.

Although I'd never say his films are a simple reproduction of it.

Fuckin’ LOL

I understand and I do not feel dared and I will move on.

right so when you hear “the undiscovered country” you don’t hear “death” but it’s more “code” (so to speak) for “america, in the making”, correct?

or no?

i just wanna make sure i read what you mean.

hahaha anyway seems like i enjoyed that movie but that i remember fuck all has been quite a shock

I think it does both: it indicates Doc Holliday's death (literally and more metaphorically as an icon of the 'wild' west) but also the idea of a nation in the making. It could've just as easily been recited by Ethan in The Searchers.

The building of a church in Tombstone might at 1st seem to contradict the thesis but the rowdy dance they have suggests a West that's becoming civilised, but on its own terms. And Wyatt's brother Morgan suggests a frontier logic to the law at the OK Corral, when he kills the father of the Clantons after Wyatt tells him he can live but must leave Tombstone.

Okay finally got to my computer.


I 100% agree with this and I wish Ford's legacy could be purged from Wayne. All of the best Ford films either don't have Wayne or he's counterbalanced by another lead actor(s) i.e. Fonda in Fort Apache, Stewart in Liberty Valance and Stagecoach is basically an ensemble film.

That slow walk is exemplary on why I love the film so much.

Ford's politics can be a cause for contention at times, I agree (look at Cheyenne Autumn - sheesh!). However, I always see a bleak subtext to his Americana; no one is ever satisfied or redeemed. The 'idea of America' maybe represented with 'the undiscovered country' (which is more about Doc's death than anything, imo) or the building of Tombstone or any other town in the west. But I think Ford both celebrates it and questions it by setting up the hero (the individual) who has to bring law and 'society' but gains nothing in return. What good came of Earp avenging his brother and bringing this 'law' to the lawless land? He lost another brother, a family gets murdered in revenge, Doc and Chihuahua still die, and then he has to ride off alone with what remains of his family (he doesn't even get his cattle back!) and leaving Clementine, who also lost everyone she knew in the West, alone. Ultimately, I think Ford realizes that this idea of America could be great, in theory, but ultimately will still leave the individual unredeemed.

'in the case of the searchers, to me, it's saying that in order to protect the frontier home and save the white princess from the savages you need some sort of atrocious asshole, warts and all. a bit like "a few good men" but from the other side of the fence. "everything he's done, it's worth it"'

I could just have a bias because I love his films so much, but with what I said above in mind I question if 'it's worth it'. Ethan is an asshole and isn't doing anything for society; he is doing it for himself. So this 'saving of the white princess' is the product of the passion of selfish asshole (apt metaphor for the US maybe!). Sure, the family homestead is saved but everyone is just as alone and unredeemed as when the film started. The hope for a 'civilized society' is only hope in what may never come and, if it does come, it is still questionable if it will save them.

Another of his films that describe what I mean is 'The Long Grey Line'. I don't know if any of you have seen it but basically it's a military film about West Point and the main character (the 'Fordian hero') basically lives and dies at West Point while preparing people to die as soldiers (which they do) and watches his life and everything he loves drift away (it is also hinted that he is impotent). On the surface, yes, it does celebrate that the sacrifice of the individual for 'Murica is worth it (they throw him a parade - Yay! I guess?). But there is a tragedy in the fact that he is only a mere 'spectator' in his life suffocated and pacified by routine in the American myth. America rolls on at the expense of the individual.

I recognize that Ford was very patriotic and not afraid to hide it but I always see at least a hint of questioning the patriot's ideal.

Let me know if any of that makes any sense lol

i have to hit the road tomorrow and wont be back till late so my full response will take a bit but—

the homestead is saved! civilization is restored! ethan rides into the sunset, hi-yo silver. he may be a monster, he may be a tortured fuck, but he serves a greater cause. what does it matter his motivation? he’s a soldier. soldiers sacrifice themselves. all is well!

sure there is more ambiguity throughout but the final scene leaves no doubt in my mind.

as for patriotism... ive interviewed a lot of native war veterans. things have changed a ton since the era of manifest destiny

leave you this for context but hope to catch up soon!

https://www.history.com/news/native-...ts-citizenship

I certainly agree that his attitude to the 'civilising' of the West was bitter-sweet. In Liberty Valance, the statement about the wilderness becoming a garden is undercut with a sadness at what had been lost in that process. But I'd say ultimately Ford was less interested in whether it was worth it than in the role that people who had no place in the new America would have in constructing it. Ringo in Stagecoach, Tom in Liberty Valance, Doc in Clementine, Ethan in The Searchers, etc.

The fly in the ointment that makes Ford westerns difficult to tie to a single convenient understanding is the fact that while the outlaw is pivotal in their contribution to progress, they do this by killing another outlaw. Doc helps Earp in defeating the Clantons, Tom shoots Liberty Valance, etc. So there's a 'good' outlaw, who does contribute to progress, but there's also a 'bad' irredeemable one who has to be defeated before that progress can take place. Not sure how that fits with any kind of general position on the role of the outlaw in the West, but that's not just a question for Ford's westerns but for the classical western in general. In Shane, Alan Ladd has to kill Jack Palance, and so on. Saying that, the 'good' outlaw invariably has a connection to a woman whereas the bad outlaw usually doesn't, which might be significant.

Re his army films (WW2 and cavalry), Peter Bogdanovich has argued (in an interview with Ford) that they take the position that the traditions of the army are greater than any individual. Ford refused to confirm or deny this but it seems like a fair reading.

Ended up watching The Lobster on Netflix w my aunt n uncle last night. I hadn't seen this since its theatrical run, and I gotta say I still find it to be an awfully accurate depiction of how odd human interaction, dating in particular, is. The dialogue intentionally stilted and every romantic notion broken down to its coldest, most insincere form. Even the open ended ending sorta hints at how nobody will ever figure any of this out.

Love the Lobster, hated Dogtooth.

just quickly, cuz long day— re-saw the final searchers scene on youtube, ethan arrives on horse, carries the lady to he front door, but he does not ride away gloriously, he walks instead, as the door slams behind him. yeah he does not participate of the festivities but how can he NOT be a hero. cmon. every community needs an ethan watching the wall. or was it the fence lolol.

anyway here is ethan



the more i think about it the more those 2 movies are related in my mind

what is huge is the shift in perspective over the decades—in the past, ethics were not required of him, just results. but now they are... or, both are ethical, but the value system has changed as to render the old order obsolete/unjust.

Victor Manure was an awesome actor. Watch After the Fox for the best self parody ever.

Ethan's a hero for me. Abso-fuckin-lutely! He keeps his own prejudices in check and gets the job done solely for the benefit of others.

looks like im not driving out today after all lol. so...

yes! he is absolutely a hero in that sense. a real hero isn’t in it for the prizes and medals.

at the same time, he’s a very problematic hero.

i get that the point of ethan’s racism in the movie was to actually expose it, to show the attitudes that informed the american conquest of the west.

but his ordeal and redeeming quest ends up confusingly justifying them a little bit. or a lot. depending on who reads.

this being art not propaganda it has a measure of ambiguity that allows various readings. but even propaganda can be read different by different cultural groups.

consider that in the 50s the mainstream attitude towards indians was a lot like the movie—“savages” that needed to make way for american civilization. the western genre fed clearly into that ideology. so a lot of his early audience saw nothing problematic with it. to them ethan was a straight-up eagle scout. his racism, even before the main events, highly relatable.

the other thing is even if he arrives already as a racist former confederate soldier, his hatred throughout the search could be easily justified by the destruction of his family at the hands of scar. wouldn’t you? i would...

i’m not an ideologue so i can appreciate great art regardless of human flaws, and i know enough artists to know that anyone demanding purity from them is fucking delusional. by which i mean—our times. our whole moment in history. almost maoist. i don’t intend to engage in those trials.

so, anyway, i really see two currents at once going on here, and it confuses the fuck out of me. ethan is a hero. ethan is a monster. which is how life is most times.

but like i said, i live among the indians. so i see the frontier from the other side of the fence. nothing funny about martin kicking his “wife” down a hill. and that was ford, not ethan, who set up the “comedy” moment.

maybe ethan would put a bullet in my head too haaaa haaaa haaaaa. having “gone native”.

damn...

one group’s hero is another group’s genocidal murderer. and so history proceeds. and this... i think ford got. and showed. but... lol

anyway, john ford was not ethan just like jonathan demme is not hannibal lecter or aaron sorkin is not the asshole in guantanamo.

so i can appreciate ford’s mastery of his medium, and his efforts to reveal the destructive side the american frontier... but i think he did not go far enough in this, and to an extent catered to the prejudices of his audience, and being of his own time, could not help having some himself. for which we must forgive him. he was just an artist, not an all-knowing god.

at least he’s not d.w. griffith inventing modern cinema and at the same time proselytizing for white supremacy and the fucking kkk hahaha. but that’s for another day...

Ethan's a complex hero which only makes him and the film richer. The Searchers came towards the end of the classic era but its complexity (relative to that era) helped pave the way for the revisionists (Penn, Altman, etc) to come along and start deconstructing the myths according to contemporary values and events. The politics of Ford's films inevitably feel problematic when judged according to values formed in light of Vietnam and the Civil Rights era, but then so do a lot of revisionist westerns feel problematic now, when we consider say their treatment of women in light of the feminist-movement. And so on.

I'm just waiting for someone to finally adapt Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian. Then the shit is really gonna hit the fan.

However, George Lucas IS Jar-Jar Binks

of course the complexity makes it richer, but its bias still leaves a bad taste in my mouth regardless. same way i can read quevedo and laugh and admire his incredible style but his antisemitic vitriol makes make me cringe.

anyway, just to pile it on (i have to, now) check this scene in clementine:

https://youtu.be/5UrcR_01-bM

did anyone notice?

the clip from 0:26 to 0:36 makes me puke in my mouth a little

ofc this is imperceptible to a lot of people

hahaha

i though he was jabba the hutt!

I always notice when the subservient, working-class brown man has to make way for the affluent white man without the white man even saying "excuse me." Brown people are to know their place in 'merica.....

YEEEEES MY FRIEND YEEEEEEES

these are the things that make me reach for my revolver :D

It isn't imperceptible. I just don't look for a Western to provide a true or even-handed version of history. Nor do I think Ford was remotely interested in providing one. Westerns at that time were full of lazy racial stereotypes. Fuck, Hollywood at that time was full of racial stereotypes. I don't think anyone who loves MDC in 2019 is oblivious to it. They just contextualise it in terms of the time it was made and concentrate on the things that actually made them fall in love with it in the 1st place ... which I'm sure had absolutely nothing to do with its rather cringey representation of Mexicans.

well neither do i (look for even-handed depictions), but it doesn’t mean i’m gonna be impervious to it.

like i said, im not gonna be here like a maoist tribunal to dismiss ford from film history (some people would be very willing to do that on impossible ideological purity grounds)

but at the same time it’s hard to look away and ignore that this is the way racism perpetuates itself, by naturalizing these little atrocities we can now see so clearly.

i mean, this is how the heroes here establish themselves as the alphas in the room. by pushing some mexicans around. this is not incidental or accidental, and it is very difficult to pretend it’s not there.

same as watching “manhattan” in the 2010s instead of the 1980s: it just doesn’t go down the same way.

anyway, i have similar problems with zulu, which is a movie which at one level i absolutely love, and at another level makes me think “wtf” with its depiction of brave, honorable, intelligent... faceless africans, ha haha. but such a good movie. but wtf. but such a good movie... etc.

It's Doc bloody Holliday! I don't remember him saying "excuse me" to anyone (rich, poor, brown, white, or otherwise) for the entire duration of the film.

exactly. murderer.

this is the WHOLE POINT! That white people in USA are able to live lives heedless of the sufferings and troubles of the brown people around them.



I hate watching TV shows and movies about rich white people problems. Their "problems" are ridiculous, and of little relevance to working people of any color. This is the plot of 80% of sitcoms on TV, overly wealthy white folks dealing with "problems" that are actually just inconveniences.


I remember watching Good Times and crying when James Evans Sr. keeps getting turned down for work. white folks on TV cry when their latte comes out with too little foam.

Avengers Endgame spoiler theory - You know how Dr. Strange "looked" into over 150 million possible timelines, and only saw one where Thanos loses? and then, in the end , he gave the stone to Thanos and told Iron Man that it had to be? I bet Dr. Strange went to the one universe where Thanos loses, keeps Spiderman from leaving the school bus, thereby never ending up in space, and because of this difference Thanos ends up losing to the Avengers.

i disagree. it’s easier to love when you’re oblivious to it. a lot of the fans will totally let that pass unseen or will not even register with them.

i did enjoy the movie when i saw it, and forgave its limitations, but i can’t just “pretend they’re not there”

You've conveniently forgotten that Doc Holliday only joins Wyatt Earp after the Clantons kill a 'brown' prostitute, and dies in the process.

hahaha

chihuahua is “brown” indeed— linda darnell, darkest woman west of pecos :D



lmao

she’s also doc’s girl though

this discussion is making me actually rewatch clips and remember

i wanna watch darling clementine again. and i’ll be wishing the mexicans stab doc in the gut this time around :D

but seriously good flick

—

the future will condemn our era for not being vegan. and im okay with that. fuck the future.

Wow. Is this ever something

https://twitter.com/TheJeffBridges/s...81555582996480


yippie?!!



2.3.19