I thought I would share this article from an internet site (that I've never heard of, therefore I'm no spokesperson for it) which I found interesting. It touches on the changing concept of the "hero" as he is incarnated in movies today and in the past, in all genres. The article's arguments hopefully will prompt some food for thought and maybe even some discussion. It's a topic, I confess, that always interests me.
http://tinyurl.com/5e3p5e
"Hollywood's Hero Deficit" - article
-
MissGoddess
- Posts: 5072
- Joined: April 17th, 2007, 10:01 am
- Contact:
"Hollywood's Hero Deficit" - article
"There's only one thing that can kill the movies, and that's education."
-- Will Rogers
-- Will Rogers
Good article Miss G!!!
I read the whole thing and find it quite on the mark. To me it's amazing that he, and so many others find it dull or boring that the real heroes (the everyman/woman), are not worth going to see. No other country had people travel for months over strange waters and through badly charted deserts to build homes and communities for others to join and live in. How can the people of the Mayflower and the pioneers not be considered lives worthy of deep scrutiny and exploration? They are all my heroes without a doubt, and oddly, maybe he has hit on the reason I love western movies! Our struggles for independence and our struggles to reach the Pacific Ocean hold untold amounts of fodder for stories, and then you add the saga of the American Indian - you wonder 'How can this be boring?' I've never cared for anti-hero plots which is what he is really describing with his 3 types. Using 3:10 to Yuma as he did (which I haven't yet seen), makes me wonder if I really want to see it. Part of the attraction of the original was Heflins' desire to do the right thing, even though at first he didn't know that's what he was doing.
A hero doesn't have to be one man who takes on a whole gang alone, he can also be a Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, or Phil Schyler Green as in Gentleman's Agreement.
I'll shut up now.
Anne
I read the whole thing and find it quite on the mark. To me it's amazing that he, and so many others find it dull or boring that the real heroes (the everyman/woman), are not worth going to see. No other country had people travel for months over strange waters and through badly charted deserts to build homes and communities for others to join and live in. How can the people of the Mayflower and the pioneers not be considered lives worthy of deep scrutiny and exploration? They are all my heroes without a doubt, and oddly, maybe he has hit on the reason I love western movies! Our struggles for independence and our struggles to reach the Pacific Ocean hold untold amounts of fodder for stories, and then you add the saga of the American Indian - you wonder 'How can this be boring?' I've never cared for anti-hero plots which is what he is really describing with his 3 types. Using 3:10 to Yuma as he did (which I haven't yet seen), makes me wonder if I really want to see it. Part of the attraction of the original was Heflins' desire to do the right thing, even though at first he didn't know that's what he was doing.
A hero doesn't have to be one man who takes on a whole gang alone, he can also be a Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, or Phil Schyler Green as in Gentleman's Agreement.
I'll shut up now.
Anne
Anne
***********************************************************************
* * * * * * * * What is past is prologue. * * * * * * * *
]***********************************************************************
***********************************************************************
* * * * * * * * What is past is prologue. * * * * * * * *
]***********************************************************************