Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Democrats, Hillary should be able to take satire

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 02:49 PM
Original message
Democrats, Hillary should be able to take satire
Fly on the Wall is reporting that Paramount pictures has asked director Jonathan Demme to go back thru his final cut of The Manchurian Candidate and excise any "Hillary like gestures" that Meryl Streep may make in this upcoming movie. I say that's hogwash--censorship to placate a powerful member of the government by squashing the statements that two artists (Demme and Streep) wanted to make. According to Fly:
Paramount Pictures is worried that Meryl Streep's edgy, chilling performance as a U.S. Senator in The Manchurian Candidate, which opens at the end of next month, is too close to the real Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, a pal inside the studio tells me...
"Meryl has the Hillary hand gestures totally down pat," my insider tells me. "I don't know whether this is something she picked up subconsciously or an idea Jonathan gave her, but she's totally dead on. You feel like you're watching Hillary Clinton conspire to take over the world. The Republican Hillary-haters should totally eat this up."


I'm sorry, but I don't think we need this kind of help from the studios. Unlike some Republicans who freak out whenever some criticizes the president and accuse them of "obstructing the war on terrorism," I would expect liberals and progressives to know that in a free society you have to protect free speech--particularly the free speech that you disagree with. Forcing artists to reshape their work to avoid hurting the feelings of government officers is positively Stalinesque.

Hillary should denounce this move on the part of Paramount.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 02:53 PM
Response to Original message
1. Placate as opposed to deliberately spreading Republican propaganda?
Edited on Mon Jun-14-04 02:54 PM by aquart
Satire is supposed to have a core of truth. Propaganda is what they want you to believe.

Be nice if people at DU, at least, could make the distinction.

On edit, and if Meryl did this, I'm ashamed of her and I never have been before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. If Jonathan Demme and Paramount do it, it's not Republican
Sorry, but what you call satire a close-minded Republican would call propaganda (or worse). When someone satirizes our side, that doesn't make it automatically unfair or propagandistic. It just makes it critical of our side. My belief is that liberals are grown up enough to handle satire without trying to censor artistic expression they disagree with.

Perhaps you feel otherwise.

But one would have to be an idiot to watch this movie and conclude that the real Hillary is plotting to take over the government. In fact, most idiots already believe that. What Demme and Streep are doing is free speech, using art and borrowing elements from a public figure's persona to create an impression of what a corporate coup would look like.

Not to overnudge an obvious point, but the movie's script depicting the coup plotters as big corporate villains is culturally a point for our side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trumad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
2. Let them eat it up
who gives a shit....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gildor Inglorion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 03:17 PM
Response to Original message
4. Remember "Primary Colors?"
I thought Emma Thompson did a fairly creditable job of imitating Hillary - nobody got hurt. What's the big deal? Meryl Streep could play a brown paper bag and it would be worth seeing
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leprechan29 Donating Member (391 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
5. DOesn't seem like a problem
I agree, they don't need to censor the scene.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrMonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Still . . .
Edited on Mon Jun-14-04 03:38 PM by Rumpole
Let's not jump to a conclusion that this is a matter of censorship. Paramount may have a legitimate (i.e., non-political) reason for making the cuts.

It seems as if Meryl Streep may have used Hillary Clinton as a study for her movie character. Could it be that Streep's performance incorporates so much of that well-known person's appearance and habitual gestures that it distracts the audience?

From the post: Paramount wants "this to be seen as a serious thriller and not something campy." That would be a good reason to make cuts.

I wouldn't get too excited about this. The only source for this story is an unnamed "insider". People have been duped by that before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leprechan29 Donating Member (391 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Agreement on both counts
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fenris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
6. The bigger issue is why the Hell Demme thought he could remake it.
The movie is brilliant as it is. Are we that bereft of ideas that to make any political statement we've got to dredge up older political statements?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dorian Gray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. Yep...
The original is great. This one looks... well... to Hollywood. Not bad. Just stylized and Hollywood.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Hi Dorian Gray!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PROGRESSIVE1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
7. John Demme's political donations:
DEMME, JONATHAN
NEW YORK,NY 10022
SELF/DIRECTOR
2/20/2004
$500
Hinchey, Maurice

DEMME, JONATHAN
NEW YORK,NY 10022
SELF-EMPLOYED/DIRECTOR
1/28/2004
$500
Victory Campaign 2004

http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.asp?NumOfThou=0&txtName=Demme%2C+J&txtState=%28all+states%29&txtZip=&txtEmploy=&txtCand=&txt2004=Y&txt2002=Y&txt2000=Y&Order=N

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loonman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
8. Why are they remaking this?
What's the point?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShaneGR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
9. Sounds to me like hopeful Republican spin...
That's what they want to see, not necessarily what is actually portrayed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
12. why should anyone believe this gossip?
Edited on Mon Jun-14-04 03:57 PM by Cheswick
I'll bet they were never asked any such thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stanwyck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
14. this is smelly
Streep is a liberal. I don't think she'd set out to discredit Hillary. This smells of spin. Rightwing freeper spin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Independent_Minded Donating Member (38 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-14-04 07:44 PM
Response to Original message
16. admirable position
especially as it is inconvenient to your political inclinations.

as someone pointed out, if Paramount is making the decision to maximize their profit or improve their product then that is their perogative. if they're bending to a political preference somewhere along the chain of command, then i agree with you fully.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 04:42 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC