Comments on: Three-point review of Across the Universe and Julie Taymor in general http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/ Just another WordPress weblog Sun, 12 Feb 2012 18:12:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha by: Michael Bérubé http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-461360 Wed, 24 Oct 2007 13:22:41 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-461360 <i>It’s okay, Berube, you’re on a tear, and brooking no dissent. </i> It's just the way I am! I'm a college professor on The Left, after all, and you know what that means. Thanks for respecting that. Seriously, it occurs to me if I were really brookin' no dissent, I would've taken issue with Cara in 24 -- specifically, with her claim that "Beatles projects usually rely so heavily on their earlier and less-intelligent/inventive work." This is wrong on two counts: one, the official Beatles canon is weighted very heavily toward their work from 1967-69, as here, even when their musical brilliance is actually dulled by hallucinogens (I mean, c'mon, even "Blue Jay Way" and "Flying" appear in this movie); and two, the earlier work is by no means less intelligent or inventive than the trippy stuff. Remember, these clever young men were writing songs like "Please Please Me" and "This Boy" from the get-go -- both of which are just ridiculously complex by pop standards. (And don't make me drag out the chord progressions in "I Wanna Hold Your Hand," which were actually a completely new thing for rocnrol.) One of the remarkable things about the early Beatles is that they were experimenting with new sounds and instruments and stuff <i>from the outset</i>. I mean, c'mon, 1964 is insanely early for something like "I Feel Fine." It's a shame that so many people think of pre-Pepper Beatles as just a bunch of lovable moptops. Anyway, thanks for the reply. I respect your misgivings about the script. It’s okay, Berube, you’re on a tear, and brooking no dissent.

It’s just the way I am! I’m a college professor on The Left, after all, and you know what that means. Thanks for respecting that.

Seriously, it occurs to me if I were really brookin’ no dissent, I would’ve taken issue with Cara in 24 — specifically, with her claim that “Beatles projects usually rely so heavily on their earlier and less-intelligent/inventive work.” This is wrong on two counts: one, the official Beatles canon is weighted very heavily toward their work from 1967-69, as here, even when their musical brilliance is actually dulled by hallucinogens (I mean, c’mon, even “Blue Jay Way” and “Flying” appear in this movie); and two, the earlier work is by no means less intelligent or inventive than the trippy stuff. Remember, these clever young men were writing songs like “Please Please Me” and “This Boy” from the get-go — both of which are just ridiculously complex by pop standards. (And don’t make me drag out the chord progressions in “I Wanna Hold Your Hand,” which were actually a completely new thing for rocnrol.) One of the remarkable things about the early Beatles is that they were experimenting with new sounds and instruments and stuff from the outset. I mean, c’mon, 1964 is insanely early for something like “I Feel Fine.” It’s a shame that so many people think of pre-Pepper Beatles as just a bunch of lovable moptops.

Anyway, thanks for the reply. I respect your misgivings about the script.

]]> by: weboy http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-461290 Wed, 24 Oct 2007 11:38:59 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-461290 It's okay, Berube, you're on a tear, and brooking no dissent. I respect that. I thought Across the Universe, <a href="http://nycweboy.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/10/let-me-take-you.html" rel="nofollow"> was interesting</a>, but unnecessary exercise in visualizing the Beatles material in light of the era. I happen to like Hair, and it's music, and it's general hopefulness a lot. That's me. I do think that the Beatles lyrics - which can be quite opaque - were not helped by the stagings in Across the Universe, especially stuff like "For the Benefit of Mr. Kits" and "I am The Walrus" which also suffer from their pseychedelica roots. (And don't get me wrong, even though I'm not the biggest Beatles fan, I think the music in Across the Universe was actually one of its best assets). The film's weakest point, it struck me, was that script - often banal, often little more than stringing together song titles and sixties era platitudes to get us to the nest number - which is not, depsite yoour dismissal of the musical as a form, what most musicals do - West Side Story happens to be well written, witha great score, and yes, exceptional dancing on top of all that. Across The Universe is more likely to be an interesting curiosity than a lasting testament. Taymor has done better, and I expect willl again. I don't argue with the woman being a genius, just with the film. It’s okay, Berube, you’re on a tear, and brooking no dissent. I respect that. I thought Across the Universe, was interesting, but unnecessary exercise in visualizing the Beatles material in light of the era. I happen to like Hair, and it’s music, and it’s general hopefulness a lot. That’s me. I do think that the Beatles lyrics - which can be quite opaque - were not helped by the stagings in Across the Universe, especially stuff like “For the Benefit of Mr. Kits” and “I am The Walrus” which also suffer from their pseychedelica roots. (And don’t get me wrong, even though I’m not the biggest Beatles fan, I think the music in Across the Universe was actually one of its best assets). The film’s weakest point, it struck me, was that script - often banal, often little more than stringing together song titles and sixties era platitudes to get us to the nest number - which is not, depsite yoour dismissal of the musical as a form, what most musicals do - West Side Story happens to be well written, witha great score, and yes, exceptional dancing on top of all that. Across The Universe is more likely to be an interesting curiosity than a lasting testament. Taymor has done better, and I expect willl again. I don’t argue with the woman being a genius, just with the film.

]]> by: Michael Bérubé http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-461221 Wed, 24 Oct 2007 07:24:16 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-461221 Thanks, Christopher! Point taken, though I don't think "exploitative" is the right word. But what would count as "taking the struggle and the trauma of that era seriously," in your terms? Because I'd suggest that from Dr. King's antiwar position to the evolution of SDS, the movie was entirely serious about the struggle and the trauma of that era -- much more so than <i>Hair</i>, btw. Now, if you'd made that comment about <i>Forrest Gump</i>, I'd agree with you. Thanks, Christopher! Point taken, though I don’t think “exploitative” is the right word. But what would count as “taking the struggle and the trauma of that era seriously,” in your terms? Because I’d suggest that from Dr. King’s antiwar position to the evolution of SDS, the movie was entirely serious about the struggle and the trauma of that era — much more so than Hair, btw. Now, if you’d made that comment about Forrest Gump, I’d agree with you.

]]> by: Christopher M http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-461211 Wed, 24 Oct 2007 03:38:06 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-461211 I swear to the Disco Ball that I came back &amp; explained what I meant by exploitative, but somehow or another the comment isn't here. But briefly: the "Let it Be" scene, for example. It was powerful when the boy was singing, but to show him laid out in a coffin...it was too much for me. I think if you're going to evoke emotion by using pictures of dead black kids being mourned in church after being shot dead in a riot, you really ought to be taking the struggle and the trauma of that era seriously. And (whatever Taymor's intentions) I don't think the film really did. That said, I've been listening to the soundtrack and it's great. I knew "I Want to Hold Your Hand" was catchy, but I didn't know it was <i>beautiful</i>. I swear to the Disco Ball that I came back & explained what I meant by exploitative, but somehow or another the comment isn’t here.

But briefly: the “Let it Be” scene, for example. It was powerful when the boy was singing, but to show him laid out in a coffin…it was too much for me. I think if you’re going to evoke emotion by using pictures of dead black kids being mourned in church after being shot dead in a riot, you really ought to be taking the struggle and the trauma of that era seriously. And (whatever Taymor’s intentions) I don’t think the film really did.

That said, I’ve been listening to the soundtrack and it’s great. I knew “I Want to Hold Your Hand” was catchy, but I didn’t know it was beautiful.

]]> by: Jeff Fecke http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-461200 Wed, 24 Oct 2007 00:58:10 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-461200 <i>Also, you remember the music from Hair? It sucked. Just sayin’.</i> You didn't like lyrics like: "Gimme a head with hair!/Long, beautiful hair! Shining, gleaming/Streaming, waxen, flaxen"? Or: "Gliddy glub gloopy/Nibby nabby noopy/La la la lo lo/Sabba sibby sabba/Nooby abba nabba/Le le lo lo"? I mean, "Good Morning Starshine" is the most painfully bad song in history (or at least it was until the release of "My Humps"), but does that mean that all the music from <i>Hair</i> was terrible? I say yes. It was. Also, you remember the music from Hair? It sucked. Just sayin’.

You didn’t like lyrics like:

“Gimme a head with hair!/Long, beautiful hair! Shining, gleaming/Streaming, waxen, flaxen”?

Or:

“Gliddy glub gloopy/Nibby nabby noopy/La la la lo lo/Sabba sibby sabba/Nooby abba nabba/Le le lo lo”?

I mean, “Good Morning Starshine” is the most painfully bad song in history (or at least it was until the release of “My Humps”), but does that mean that all the music from Hair was terrible?

I say yes. It was.

]]> by: Michael Bérubé http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-461193 Wed, 24 Oct 2007 00:09:24 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-461193 weboy: 1. Have you seen <i>Hair</i> recently? If not, please see it again, and try to tell me with a straight face that it attempts anything like what Taymor does here. Also, you remember the music from <i>Hair</i>? It sucked. Just sayin'. 2. "Overthought" how and "underwritten" how? (And how can a film be both at the same time?) It's a musical. Remember <i>West Side Story</i>? The plot was way predictable -- and even kind of derivative, I'm told. But the choreography was the shit, and that's the point. 3. If you think <i>Across the Universe</i> promotes the myth that the boomers ended the war, you are, like, <i>so</i> tripping. Though I'm still curious to hear how the film was exploitative. Christopher M hasn't come back, but I was kinda hoping that someone would complain that the movie was completely unfair to the well-meaning, innocent members of Weatherman. weboy:

1. Have you seen Hair recently? If not, please see it again, and try to tell me with a straight face that it attempts anything like what Taymor does here.

Also, you remember the music from Hair? It sucked. Just sayin’.

2. “Overthought” how and “underwritten” how? (And how can a film be both at the same time?) It’s a musical. Remember West Side Story? The plot was way predictable — and even kind of derivative, I’m told. But the choreography was the shit, and that’s the point.

3. If you think Across the Universe promotes the myth that the boomers ended the war, you are, like, so tripping.

Though I’m still curious to hear how the film was exploitative. Christopher M hasn’t come back, but I was kinda hoping that someone would complain that the movie was completely unfair to the well-meaning, innocent members of Weatherman.

]]> by: weboy http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-461188 Tue, 23 Oct 2007 23:25:51 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-461188 1. Yes, she is, which is why I would think she could do better than a pale imitation of <i>Hair</i>. 2. She certainly does, which is why much of Across The Universe seems overthought and underwritten. 3. Were she a man, people might feel even more free to point out the self satisfied notion (still) of baby boomers who continue to present the story of the War they ended that... well, they didn't. 1. Yes, she is, which is why I would think she could do better than a pale imitation of Hair.

2. She certainly does, which is why much of Across The Universe seems overthought and underwritten.

3. Were she a man, people might feel even more free to point out the self satisfied notion (still) of baby boomers who continue to present the story of the War they ended that… well, they didn’t.

]]> by: ferrarimanf355 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-461187 Tue, 23 Oct 2007 23:20:30 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-461187 Michael, I don't know what to say, but dude, the TRAILER to that movie turned me off to the whole thing, because it frankly made no sense. I don't know how you can defend something like this, especially considering how overrated the director is. Anyways, back to Transformers for me... Michael, I don’t know what to say, but dude, the TRAILER to that movie turned me off to the whole thing, because it frankly made no sense. I don’t know how you can defend something like this, especially considering how overrated the director is.

Anyways, back to Transformers for me…

]]> by: Keith http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-460942 Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:23:00 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-460942 Plots to musicals are simple by necessity. Imagine the convoluted mess you'd have on your hands with a musical version of, say, <i>Syriana</i>. It'd be a non stop nightmare of gibbering nonsense. And do we really want to watch Matt Damon and Alexander Sidig sing a duet about the boy who drowned in the pool/international oil politics? Plots to musicals are simple by necessity. Imagine the convoluted mess you’d have on your hands with a musical version of, say, Syriana. It’d be a non stop nightmare of gibbering nonsense. And do we really want to watch Matt Damon and Alexander Sidig sing a duet about the boy who drowned in the pool/international oil politics?

]]> by: Michael Bérubé http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-460916 Tue, 23 Oct 2007 08:36:06 +0100 http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/10/21/three-point-review-of-across-the-universe-and-julie-taymor-in-general/#comment-460916 <i>Did you see the movie with Jamie, the ultimate Beatles fan?</i> Oh, yes indeed -- once on Saturday, once on Sunday. Jamie was thrilled. And even though I'll put my Beatles purism up against any Beatles purist's Beatles purism, I thought many of the arrangements were amazing. "Why Don't We Do It in the Road" and "Helter Skelter" really do respond well when they're covered with a hard shell finish, and it was a masterstroke to bring out the gospel affiliations of "Let It Be" for the Detroit riots. "I Wanna Hold Your Hand" as a slow, wistful lament from a gay Asian cheerleader? Go ahead, all you Prudence-deriders, tell me you saw that one coming all the way from Ohio; I'll believe you, I promise. And the Joe Cocker cameo was a nice touch, too. As for the shortcomings of the plot: WTF? People go to see a musical fantasia and they're worried about the <i>plot?</i> Did you see the movie with Jamie, the ultimate Beatles fan?

Oh, yes indeed — once on Saturday, once on Sunday. Jamie was thrilled. And even though I’ll put my Beatles purism up against any Beatles purist’s Beatles purism, I thought many of the arrangements were amazing. “Why Don’t We Do It in the Road” and “Helter Skelter” really do respond well when they’re covered with a hard shell finish, and it was a masterstroke to bring out the gospel affiliations of “Let It Be” for the Detroit riots. “I Wanna Hold Your Hand” as a slow, wistful lament from a gay Asian cheerleader? Go ahead, all you Prudence-deriders, tell me you saw that one coming all the way from Ohio; I’ll believe you, I promise. And the Joe Cocker cameo was a nice touch, too.

As for the shortcomings of the plot: WTF? People go to see a musical fantasia and they’re worried about the plot?

]]>