Dusting off my favorite soapbox
I don't even know where to begin! My tenacious scaling of the unwieldy Shakespearean drama called Mount Depp goes ever onward. (How's that for mixing my metaphors?!! I challenge you to mix them up better than I can and still almost make sense!)
Anyway. I cannot believe the mean shit people in Hollywood are saying now -- having to do with both the upcoming Golden Globes and the securing of Terry Rossio to start writing the script for part 5 of the Pirates of the Caribbean.
First of all, well -- two first-of-alls. Yet another "serious" online movie industry site saying that Depp doesn't "deserve" to win a Golden Globe for the Mad Hatter because it was far from his most memorable character but then the writer goes on quite reluctantly to say that Depp probably will win because all those people who went to that movie really loved him in it.
What the fuck is that supposed to mean???!! That those of us who loved him in that role are mentally deficient but that the strength of our collective mental deficiency has the power to sway the Golden Globes? (There are other things more powerful out there that sway the Golden Globes, fyi, but that's another story -- but me thinks it has something to do with the "dollar sign" [$]).
And also that strangely back-handed compliment: "far from his most memorable character." Which implies that the writer was really rooting for Depp all those other times he was nominated and didn't win (except for the one lousy year for Sweeney Todd when it wasn't televised.). Well, me thinks not!! And why do I think this? Because I know I am older than the guy who wrote that piece and I have seen this type of piece written about Johnny Depp over & over again for nearly 20 years. Oh wait -- there was that span of years here recently when he could do no wrong b/c he was making everyone rich and giving a lot of people a ton of work. Now I guess, they're making too much money, so the people who aren't making any of that money have to go back to slurring him again.
Every way you look at the article only says that the guy who wrote it has "an agenda" and that agenda, I guess, is to appear as an asshole in print. Oops! I meant to say: "And who on Earth knows what that agenda could possibly be!"
Next-of-all: all these "professional" people going ballistic b/c there could be a 5th Pirates installment.; saying the nastiest stuff.. Jesus Christ, throughout all of motion picture history there have been movies with sequels & sometimes lots of sequels. For chrissakes, there were movie serials that were enormously popular -- not just in Hollywood, but certainly in Paris, as well. "Les Vampires, " which began in 1915, is a wonderful example of that! If people (mentally deficient as we are) love watching the movie for whatever reason, why not give it to them??? And if you don't want to go see it, go see something else. I don't like The Transformers movies, but the fact that they keep getting made doesn't fill me with bile & vitriol.
As loyal readers of this lofty blog know so well, I do personally love the Thin Man movies. They made about 6. I love every single one of them, even though I know that not all of them are equally good. I don't care; I love them. They make me feel incredibly happy. What is the big deal? I don't love the Pirates sequels, but I still go see them to see if maybe they'll recapture the spirit of the original, which I do love. And if the sequels leave me a little befuddled I don't take it so personally -- it's another fucking movie. It's not depriving me of my livelihood in some way.
The "Shakespearean Drama" part I mentioned above is in regards to the "humanity" of all this; the things we can learn about human nature by keeping Depp's career under a microscope for twenty years (if you didn't have the foresight to be keeping Depp's career under a microscope for 20 years, don't worry; I did. You can copy off of my notes when the quiz comes...) What confounds or troubles human beings throughout all time is in there, laced throughout his career thus far --you know, both Hamlet's and Macbeth's famous sililoquies come to mind in all this, and they always have for me. It's all about the pageant of life; about "the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" and "the tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing," etc., etc.
It's gone on forever.
My beloved Rudolph Valentino is a case in point. If people remember him at all, they are prone to recalling him as The Sheik -- as a man in the costume of an Arab sheik from silent films. He made lots of other movies, some of which were very popular. But because of his role in The Sheik, he became a world-famous star, absolutely adored the world over. But most people living and working in Hollywood despised him. They couldn't stand him. And the more famous & successful he got, the more they loathed him. He was always either getting arrested or being sued in court. The editorials written about him nationwide were sometimes highly personal attacks and could be just vile. (When he died suddenly at age 31, a hundred thousand people in NYC rioted; they erupted in violence outside the funeral home. And then, beginning immediately after that, the studios that owned his movies began to get unbelievably rich off him. Even more so than when he'd been alive. Need I mention that the biggest moneymaker for them was the sequel to The Sheik, which he'd made just before he died???)
We're talking 1926, gang. 85 years ago. The more things change, amigos, the more they stay absolutely the same. Instead of a sheik, it's a pirate, right? On we go. What's the big deal? There's no need to get nasty about it.
(Rudy Valentino with one of his many beloved dogs; his early days in Hollywood, before The Sheik.)
Anyway. I cannot believe the mean shit people in Hollywood are saying now -- having to do with both the upcoming Golden Globes and the securing of Terry Rossio to start writing the script for part 5 of the Pirates of the Caribbean.
First of all, well -- two first-of-alls. Yet another "serious" online movie industry site saying that Depp doesn't "deserve" to win a Golden Globe for the Mad Hatter because it was far from his most memorable character but then the writer goes on quite reluctantly to say that Depp probably will win because all those people who went to that movie really loved him in it.
What the fuck is that supposed to mean???!! That those of us who loved him in that role are mentally deficient but that the strength of our collective mental deficiency has the power to sway the Golden Globes? (There are other things more powerful out there that sway the Golden Globes, fyi, but that's another story -- but me thinks it has something to do with the "dollar sign" [$]).
And also that strangely back-handed compliment: "far from his most memorable character." Which implies that the writer was really rooting for Depp all those other times he was nominated and didn't win (except for the one lousy year for Sweeney Todd when it wasn't televised.). Well, me thinks not!! And why do I think this? Because I know I am older than the guy who wrote that piece and I have seen this type of piece written about Johnny Depp over & over again for nearly 20 years. Oh wait -- there was that span of years here recently when he could do no wrong b/c he was making everyone rich and giving a lot of people a ton of work. Now I guess, they're making too much money, so the people who aren't making any of that money have to go back to slurring him again.
Every way you look at the article only says that the guy who wrote it has "an agenda" and that agenda, I guess, is to appear as an asshole in print. Oops! I meant to say: "And who on Earth knows what that agenda could possibly be!"
Next-of-all: all these "professional" people going ballistic b/c there could be a 5th Pirates installment.; saying the nastiest stuff.. Jesus Christ, throughout all of motion picture history there have been movies with sequels & sometimes lots of sequels. For chrissakes, there were movie serials that were enormously popular -- not just in Hollywood, but certainly in Paris, as well. "Les Vampires, " which began in 1915, is a wonderful example of that! If people (mentally deficient as we are) love watching the movie for whatever reason, why not give it to them??? And if you don't want to go see it, go see something else. I don't like The Transformers movies, but the fact that they keep getting made doesn't fill me with bile & vitriol.
As loyal readers of this lofty blog know so well, I do personally love the Thin Man movies. They made about 6. I love every single one of them, even though I know that not all of them are equally good. I don't care; I love them. They make me feel incredibly happy. What is the big deal? I don't love the Pirates sequels, but I still go see them to see if maybe they'll recapture the spirit of the original, which I do love. And if the sequels leave me a little befuddled I don't take it so personally -- it's another fucking movie. It's not depriving me of my livelihood in some way.
The "Shakespearean Drama" part I mentioned above is in regards to the "humanity" of all this; the things we can learn about human nature by keeping Depp's career under a microscope for twenty years (if you didn't have the foresight to be keeping Depp's career under a microscope for 20 years, don't worry; I did. You can copy off of my notes when the quiz comes...) What confounds or troubles human beings throughout all time is in there, laced throughout his career thus far --you know, both Hamlet's and Macbeth's famous sililoquies come to mind in all this, and they always have for me. It's all about the pageant of life; about "the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" and "the tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing," etc., etc.
It's gone on forever.
My beloved Rudolph Valentino is a case in point. If people remember him at all, they are prone to recalling him as The Sheik -- as a man in the costume of an Arab sheik from silent films. He made lots of other movies, some of which were very popular. But because of his role in The Sheik, he became a world-famous star, absolutely adored the world over. But most people living and working in Hollywood despised him. They couldn't stand him. And the more famous & successful he got, the more they loathed him. He was always either getting arrested or being sued in court. The editorials written about him nationwide were sometimes highly personal attacks and could be just vile. (When he died suddenly at age 31, a hundred thousand people in NYC rioted; they erupted in violence outside the funeral home. And then, beginning immediately after that, the studios that owned his movies began to get unbelievably rich off him. Even more so than when he'd been alive. Need I mention that the biggest moneymaker for them was the sequel to The Sheik, which he'd made just before he died???)
We're talking 1926, gang. 85 years ago. The more things change, amigos, the more they stay absolutely the same. Instead of a sheik, it's a pirate, right? On we go. What's the big deal? There's no need to get nasty about it.
(Rudy Valentino with one of his many beloved dogs; his early days in Hollywood, before The Sheik.)
Comments