Very clever of Hugo Weaving to get away from his face's being typecast as "Mr. Smith" by doing his next role entirely behind a mask.
I overall liked the movie although I thought it tried to do a bit too much. That is, I felt covered with a lot of loose ends afterward. And I didn't like the ending - I understand that they had to do something for the entertainment of all those people who showed up (as
And of course there were plot holes large enough to drive tube cars through, but that's typical of the genre.
I am suspicious of action movies that purport to contain political messages, because I think watching an action movie is cathartic and bleeds off anger, and so doesn't reinforce the urge a person might have to actually take political action. So despite all the political trappings of this movie, I have to recommend it as entertainment only.
Oh yeah - as far as I recall, it doesn't pass the Bechdel Ginger Benchmark. [sigh]
Re: Bechdel Ginger Benchmark
Date: 24 Mar 2006 08:32 pm (UTC)"one, it has to have at least two women in it, who
two, talk to each other about,
three, something besides a man."
Re: Bechdel Ginger Benchmark
Date: 24 Mar 2006 09:23 pm (UTC)Re: Bechdel Ginger Benchmark
Date: 25 Mar 2006 03:17 am (UTC)1. It's from an era in which none of the eventually recurring characters was around.
2. She just looks wrong: body type, face, mannerisms; none says Ginger to me. Bechdel's style has changed over time, but early characters still look like later ones to me.
3. Parsimoniously, I think the blog post I linked would say so if she were. It just says "not Mo" instead of "that's Ginger, you dork."
Re: Bechdel Ginger Benchmark
Date: 25 Mar 2006 04:29 am (UTC)Hmph. Now what am I going to call it?
Re: Bechdel Ginger Benchmark
Date: 25 Mar 2006 05:47 pm (UTC)Re: Bechdel Ginger Benchmark
Date: 26 Mar 2006 04:19 pm (UTC)