The Best—and the Rest

Whatever N.P. Thompson may think of the artistic merits of Gus Van Sant's new film 'Paranoid Park', to criticize Van Sant for casting a pretty boy in the lead role is at the very least unfair and hypocritical, and at worst homophobic, when his/her concerns do not similarily apply (as far as I can tell) to the male straight director's routine casting of beautiful young women in films. Thompson's double standard perpetuates the myth that most pedophiles are homosexual. Perhaps Thompson should examine his own homophobic tendencies. They certainly have no place in the WW.

Thank you Paula. Couldn't have said it better myself.

Now I'm really excited to see '4 Months'.

Is that because I expressed reservations about its quality, or simply because N.P. called it "loathsome"?

And for it's worth, I don't agree even slightly with N.P.'s evaluation of "Paranoid Park," but calling him homophobic is a lazy way of avoiding engaging him in an argument. The question at hand is whether Van Sant's movie is drooling over its underage male lead. I say that even if that element exists in the film, it doesn't harm the movie aesthetically. Certainly the "male gaze" isn't lacking in other movies, and it doesn't hurt this one. But if N.P. thinks that gaze has undermined other aims of "Paranoid Park," he has a critical duty to say so. Anybody who disagrees with him should explain why, instead of calling him names. Of course, that would require seeing the movie, which neither of you seem to have done.

To boil my take down: N.P. is wrong, but at least he has some clue what he's talking about.

Nick, I'm glad that the criticism by N.P. made you eager to see "4 Months..". It addresses the thorny issue of abortion in a way that may be shocking and morally unacceptable for many Americans. It takes courage and intellectual openness to shift our perspective. But to call the film 'loathsome' as N.P. does, is to wall off realities other than our own and the ethical dilemmas, enormous pain and powerlessness born from those realities, which are portrayed excellently by the director. I'm also taking issue with N.P's disparaging the film as amateurish. The expressive devices (sparseness, slow pace, long shots, bleached colors etc.) used by the director are certainly uncommon in mainstream cinema but what about Jim Jarmusch, Andrei Tarkovsky or Bela Tarr. "4 months..." clealr draws on an existing tradition and does so compellingly.

Of course I saw the film. I otherwise wouldn't feel qualified to comment. And, I happened to like to it. Would be happy to hear NP expand on his argument. If NP is so concerned about appearances and perception in the film, he/she should also recognize the appearance and perception of homophobia in his words, even though he/she himself/herself may not be.

Nothing like good satire to bring out humorless liberals of Ms. Amato's stripe. (Is it any wonder I've undergone a political conversion? -- chortle, chortle.) Where you're getting this stuff about pedophilia, I've no idea. Your statement, "Thompson's double standard perpetuates the myth that most pedophiles are homosexual," is a real knee-slapper. Whether the little skateboarding earth angel embodied by Gabe Nevins is either pretty or under-age holds no interest for a newly-minted law-and-order conservative such as myself. There's the rather salient item that the character commits a murder, gets away with it, takes a nice long hot shower, and writes away in a journal whatever meagre moral quandary he may have faced. Don't you find that facile, Ms. Amato?

Or how about Van Sant's choice of camera placements vis-a-vis the boy's mother, his girlfriend, and his acne-scarred literary muse? Defend _that_, if you can and will.

Nick, I encourage you endure every moment of "4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days." It is precisely the sort of film a commenter of your caliber so richly deserves.

But, seriously, folks, where's my comment from Senator John McCain welcoming me with open arms to the Grand Old Party??

Ohhh, so you just kidding. Silly me. I thought you were serious. Sorry. As for the plot, it doesn't bother me. It's a narrative after all, not a documentary, and based on a book, which I admittedly haven't read. On the bizzare camera portrayal of the boy's mother, we agree. Go Dems!

Nevins' character causes the accidental death of a man, he does not commit murder. The fact that you are unaware of the difference lowers my opinion of your brand of criticism to the "ignorant hateful prick" level. Kudos!

re: comment 9

Thanks for your input Sandra, your sentiments echo those I've read by critics I actually respect and you've only helped to further pique my interest in the film.

About the only thing worse than "4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days" that I can imagine would be an American remake of it directed by Noah Baumbach. Perhaps with Jack Black or Paul Giamatti as Mr. Bebe.

Sandra, yes, of course, abortion is a serious topic, cinematic or otherwise. But "4 Months" is neither courageous nor intellectually open. This agonizingly dreadful movie, which reminded me of one of those Pina Bausch Euro-trash extravaganzas, goes for unearned emotional effect. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the long take of the aborted fetus on the bathroom floor. We're supposed to be horrified, check? Long takes in and of themselves don't indicate the presence of thought anywhere on the director's noggin -- they're just a device, like any other, sometimes used well, sometimes not. The movie's cultivated blankness is a crutch (as it so often is in Jarmusch's work as well) because the director rightly suspects that any number of critics (such as those "actually respected" by Nick) will fall for it.

To its credit, 4M, 3W & 2D has a grand total of one well-thought-out scene: After the procedural is in place and Bebe has left the hotel room, the blonde asks her friend why she chose Bebe over other possible abortionists. The actress playing the girl who terminates her pregnancy creates a plausibly vacuous, completely careless character. But that's it. I believe that we should ask/expect more from movies than mere posturing and musty art-house techniques.

Nick, buddy, causing an accidental death and murder amount to the same thing. If not, why does the little darling skate about feeling guilty and not 'fessing up to the fuzz? As for _me_ being an ignorant hateful prick (to use your expression) all I can say is, "Commenter, heal thyself."

"Nick, buddy, causing an accidental death and murder amount to the same thing. If not, why does the little darling skate about feeling guilty and not 'fessing up to the fuzz?"

Wow. Are you being intentionally obtuse?