Dec. 6th, 2009

tomorrow: (Default)
(Hate) Machine - According to the official website this film is classified as a satire, which clears up the debate on whether this is meant to be a documentary or not.

The film demonstrates how the media likes to take sound bites completely out of context and recombine them to present a whole new picture that the original speaker never intended. This is such a despicable and disreputable practice and it makes me sick. This is the farthest thing possible from truth, even if this is the 'truth' the filmmaker sees. Truths may be varied and even contradictory, but they MUST be based on FACTS . If the whole statement is "I hate Arabs who blow themselves up and kill other people" but the media decides to skewer it and report that "I hate Arabs" then I think there's a special place in hell for them. For Michael Moore and all those other filmmakers who think that they can present truth by twisting documented reality, think twice. If you want to offer up an interpretation of a series of events and you are able to convincingly back up your version with FACTUAL evidence, that's great. What was presented in (Hate) Machine may have been true in a filmmaker's mind, and an actual reality that does exist for some people, but what was presented was not true reality.

As for news being truly objective, I don't think it's possible, because even by choosing to report certain things indicates bias, no matter how carefully everything is worded. So stfu and stop bashing on Fox News, because you know what? Every. Other. News. Agency. out there is a cesspool of liberalism but they won't admit it. Can everyone just come out of the 'objective' closet and admit that OMG THEY HAVE OPINIONS? If you want don't want a conservative opinion, go watch some other station.

A Girl Like Me
- I take back my statement that I wished that this film had expanded the range of socioeconomic individuals interviewed. I think this film suffered the most in not restricting its topic as much as it could have, because there were actually two different yet closely related topics in this film. A) How young black women feel the urge to conform to white standards of beauty and B) how black children feel that whites are better, as demonstrated by the doll experiment. They're not quite the same - A is a subtopic of B. I think that leaving out the doll experiment would help narrow the topic some more, especially if it's only a seven minute film. The doll experiment almost felt like it was there for shock value (even BABIES think this way! gasp!) and the format of the experiment clashed with the interview format established previously - there wasn't enough time for both formats. The film might have worked better if the experiment was presented first, and they focused on a clip of a child saying how the white doll was more beautiful and went into the interviews from there. It would have also been nice to have seen more actual instances of black women making themselves more white, as shown in the credits with the girl getting her hair straightened, because that image really drove the image home for me. To see that girl ironing her hair, with the steam coming off of it, all I could think of was that she was really burning herself and causing pain in order to measure up to some imagined idealization of beauty.

Profile

tomorrow: (Default)
tamar the great

December 2009

S M T W T F S
  123 45
678910 1112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags