![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Darth Media strikes again
Aug. 9th, 2005 08:56 pmOkay, so it hasn't been an open season bashfest as there was with TPM or AOTC, but there are still reasons to dislike our old archenemy.
First of all, Premiere magazine featured itslazy journalism list of the 100 allegedly greatest movie characters ever. Some picks were quite predictable: Don Corleone came in first, and the top ten featured the likes of Scarlett O'Hara, James Bond, and Indiana Jones. Fair enough. But there was only one SW character on that entire list, Darth Vader, and after raking in a ton of money at the box office, the arguably greatest villain/tragic hero in movies got stuck at #84. Annie Hall ranked ahead of him for God's sake. It's bad enough but to add insult to injury, the list was obviously meant to smooch up to Peter Jackson by slapping Gollum (!!!) in the top 10 and placing King Kong in a nice prominent spot. Bleah! I hate you, Premiere!
Then there's the new ish of W magazine. After asking Natalie Portman absolutely nothing about SW in its May interview with her, the glossy mag interviews Ewan McGregor. Mostly it's about The Island and his "co-star" (if you know what I mean). Actually, it's not a bad interview with Ewan...he talks about growing up a lot and giving up the boozing he was famous for some years back. But the interviewer of course has to make some sort of stupid remark about SW, where he or she (I forget) describes his role in SW as holding a place for an animatronic character. Of course, no one ever says this about Orlando Bloom or Johnny Depp or Tom Cruise or any other actor who has had to do effects-heavy films in the past few years.
Finally, I must complain about...the Insider? What? No, the Insider hasn't stooped to bashing its own bread and butter but I was a little bothered by one of the articles in the new issue. Maybe it's because I'm getting old, maybe it's because I now spend my days reviewing cases with kids spray-painting all over town. But I thought the article on "street art" (also known as "vandalism") was irresponsible. It wasn't badly written and to be honest, the people involved are pretty talented. I took a lot of art history in college and generally I'm pretty open-minded when it comes to art. I understand the tradition begun by the likes of pop artists, combining images from the popular culture, politics, and other sources to create a new idea. Okay, great. The problem is, art or no, what these guys are doing is against the law. The article does say so, but it also takes the side of the "street artists" and makes what they are doing look cool. I can imagine some youngsters, bored stupid after being out of school for almost two months, reading this article and deciding, hey, let's go make some cool SW "street art!" And the next thing, they're one of my "customers." Since the article appeared in an officially-licensed publication, not some fanzine or on a fan site, it looks like Lucasfilm is rubber-stamping vandalism so long as it's of the SW variety. Stupid! What was the editor of this mag smoking? Most people think that graffiti artists are just doing their work on old ugly buildings nobody cares about, but these guys will mark houses, schools, street signs, anything so long as people see it. It's cool so long as it's not your house, right? I guess next we'll see an article about homemade SW-themed drug paraphenalia.
First of all, Premiere magazine featured its
Then there's the new ish of W magazine. After asking Natalie Portman absolutely nothing about SW in its May interview with her, the glossy mag interviews Ewan McGregor. Mostly it's about The Island and his "co-star" (if you know what I mean). Actually, it's not a bad interview with Ewan...he talks about growing up a lot and giving up the boozing he was famous for some years back. But the interviewer of course has to make some sort of stupid remark about SW, where he or she (I forget) describes his role in SW as holding a place for an animatronic character. Of course, no one ever says this about Orlando Bloom or Johnny Depp or Tom Cruise or any other actor who has had to do effects-heavy films in the past few years.
Finally, I must complain about...the Insider? What? No, the Insider hasn't stooped to bashing its own bread and butter but I was a little bothered by one of the articles in the new issue. Maybe it's because I'm getting old, maybe it's because I now spend my days reviewing cases with kids spray-painting all over town. But I thought the article on "street art" (also known as "vandalism") was irresponsible. It wasn't badly written and to be honest, the people involved are pretty talented. I took a lot of art history in college and generally I'm pretty open-minded when it comes to art. I understand the tradition begun by the likes of pop artists, combining images from the popular culture, politics, and other sources to create a new idea. Okay, great. The problem is, art or no, what these guys are doing is against the law. The article does say so, but it also takes the side of the "street artists" and makes what they are doing look cool. I can imagine some youngsters, bored stupid after being out of school for almost two months, reading this article and deciding, hey, let's go make some cool SW "street art!" And the next thing, they're one of my "customers." Since the article appeared in an officially-licensed publication, not some fanzine or on a fan site, it looks like Lucasfilm is rubber-stamping vandalism so long as it's of the SW variety. Stupid! What was the editor of this mag smoking? Most people think that graffiti artists are just doing their work on old ugly buildings nobody cares about, but these guys will mark houses, schools, street signs, anything so long as people see it. It's cool so long as it's not your house, right? I guess next we'll see an article about homemade SW-themed drug paraphenalia.
