85 lines
2.6 KiB
Plaintext
85 lines
2.6 KiB
Plaintext
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Film:"Network"
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Michael Stutz
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Broadcast Programming
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Actually, I liked this movie much better than "Broadcast News". This
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
movie was much more direct, and even though it had those corny love subplots
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
too, they were characteristically 7O's-ish, and I could laugh at them,
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
whereas in "Breadcast News", the big story about the "love triangle" was
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
too much for me to handle, in a sense - I couldn't wait until it was over.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Also, since it was an older movie, I could easily distinguish the surface
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
clutter (such as dress, photography, etc) of the time it was made and look
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
much more closely at the central theme, whereas in "Broadcast News", which
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
was made just a few years ago, the two things were much more mixed and
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
indistinguishable because of the fact that it is a recent movie. I could
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
relate to it better, but had trouble picking out it's central meanings.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Moreover, what "Network" is trying to say, in my view, is that the
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
dangers of our increasingly networked society are great (in the 7O's, they
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
were always making movies about the dangers of things we do -- I wonder
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
what the 9O's will bring for us now that a whole decade past by without
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
us doing anything about them). The death of the talk show star at the end
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
of the movie really came as a suprise to me. When they were discussing
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
his murder in the office, I thought, "Oh, they CAN'T be serious." I'm not
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
sure if the problem of commerciality has gone THAT far, where execs in the
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Big Leagues would actually do something like that, but I realize the vast
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
economic impact the media has given to the modern (or should I say present)
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
society. I think that "Network" does a good job of getting this point
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
across. No matter how good or creative a piece of work is (not just TV,
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
but movies, music, etc), it won't even be considered by the execs of the
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
media companies. (I'm sure you know this, I'm just letting you know that I
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
know it). It's terrible that the good stuff gets dumped for trash like
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
the Cosby Show (well, it has SOME redeeming value, but it's not as good as
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
they say), New Kids on the Block, abd "Fatal Attraction". But the ratings
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
people say that we like it. Sort of like now, because February is sweeps
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
month, it's funny to see channels 5 and 3 stoop down to new lows with
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
"news reports" of date rape, strip joints, and other sexually violent
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
pseudo-journalistic hype-trash reports. Like Bob Tanak said on Wednesday,
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
such trash might get fast ratings, but they won't hold people in the
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
long run. Unfortunatley, these people don't seem to realize that.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
|