Tucker Marolf

 

Path thru Pathos: A Homoerotic Journey Through the Rants of a Weiner Kid

Punk is a State of Mind...Bitch!

Cool Hand Luke… a role model for the youth of America. So often do they claim to be rebels, but inside they are all little damn girly girls that sit down to pee. Not that it's bad to sit down to pee, but nonetheless it does work well as an insult against wannabe rebels. I mean think about it… even girls, if they were rebels, would refuse to sit down to pee just because it would be breaking the system. So I suppose the term I should disclaim is “girly girls” because, in fact, it is not a bad thing to be a girl. However, girly girls are sort of annoying because they always want you to buy them stuff and won't ever do anything cool like spend an evening perusing the merchandise at Target or people watching at The Block. But I digress… where was I… oh yes! Carrots. That is to say, the explanation of the problem of rebels today in relation to the wonderful rebel paradigm in Cool Hand Luke.

Kids today spike their hair and color it purple, pop in a Limp Bizkit CD, and figure that yelling at their parents and calling them by their names instead of Mom and Dad is rebelling. Wait a second, I dyed my hair purple twice and spike it everyday. But I certainly don't do the other things, so this obviously doesn't apply to me. Those kids don't even see what the system is let alone rebel against it. They buy into it by watching their favorite video on TRL and paying the Punky Color Corporation© for their marvelous hair dye (again this doesn't apply to me obviously because the last time I dyed my hair it was using Miss Clairol…Now that's Punk!). Kids today look at rebelling as a fashion, but if they would step outside themselves for a bit they would realize that by dressing like their friends they are conforming to the system.

Cool Hand Luke though, he's no fool. In fact he's a friggin’ genius! My favorite way that he rebelled was working so hard on coating that road in the hot summer that they caught up to the truck. The Man would never have seen that coming, and frankly even if he did he is so concerned about efficiency and profits, The Man wouldn't realize that it was actually a brilliant act of subterfuge. Rebellion is a state of mind, as is punk since punk is a synonym for rebellious folk…or at least it used to be. Now it's a moniker for people who shop at thrift stores and The Lab. Cool Hand Luke had rebellion coursing through his veins, and true rebellion takes place in your head. When he was shoveling as fast and hard as he could, he was winning his own personal war of wills in an impossible situation. He won that war in his mind, and that's all that mattered to him.

Finally, Luke loved his mother like any good son should. He didn't cuss her out, or his brother, just because she didn't give him the best situation in life. There is another important aspect of rebellion: courtesy at the appropriate times. Too often kids today turn into pukes instead of rebellious young fellows. Instead of saying “thank you” or “please,” they would much rather demand and throw fits. Luke showed respect to the bosses even when they threw him in the box just because he was smart enough to know that if he didn't, he wouldn't be able to do anything except let his mind bend completely to the wishes of the established powers. Maybe that's the key… intelligence. A good rebel has an intellect to back up his ideals. Kids without intellect are tomorrow’s fascists.

 

And then there was M.A.S.H.

Ahhh Robert Altman, is there anything he can't do? I mean, with M.A.S.H. he showed that he can take frat boys and put them in a medical facility in KO-REA. don't take that as a slam to the movie, because I really like M.A.S.H. a bunch. Though it is rather obviously segmented, sort of like Saturday Night Live sketches that are made into movies--a series of sketches and interesting situations connected via a rather thin thread. That thin thread in this movie was the loudspeaker voice of God deal in the camp. it's sort of like Animal House; in fact, I think Altman discovered a way to travel through time and steal the frat boy motif from Animal House and put it into his film. Actually, what he did was travel forward into the future to find a movie like Animal House just to watch for his own enjoyment (he was bored that weekend of 1969). While he was cruisin’ around 1978 he saw that he had made a film in 1970 called M.A.S.H., so he made haste back to his 1965 time-travelling Maytag washing machine (outfitted with a plush leather chair and a cooler duct taped to the side of it; it should also be noted that the entire apparatus had a bright red racing stripe down the middle of it to make it faster) and jumped back to 1970 in order to get his ass on the move to making this movie. Consequently, he forgot that he originally left in the year 1969 and thus to everyone around him, he simply vanished for an entire year.

Upon arriving in the year 1970, he hired a manservant to build him a more updated time machine and proceeded to walk into Fox and demand that he make this movie. Fox decided that he must be mad since he disappeared for a year and then came back demanding to direct a motion picture. Hesitantly, they agreed, but insisted that a second madman be added to the crew in order to negate the madness of the other. that's where Ingo Preminger came in.

After signing the agreement with Fox, Altman went back to his house and found his son there with a gun in his mouth. His son was so surprised to see his father after a year that he put the gun on the ground, hugged him, and showed him the lyrics to “Suicide is Painless,” which was inspired by his father’s disappearance the prior year. Taking the lyric sheet and shoving his son to the ground, Altman smiled and spat in his son’s face (this is how the Altmans do things, folks). His son smiled as Altman called Johnny Mandel to add the melody to the lyrics.

And that is how babies are made… I mean how M.A.S.H. was made. It appears I may have digressed into a little more history of the film as opposed to a critical analysis of the films elements, but after all, this is a film history class right? Well, the critical analysis can be summed up as this: I like Donald Sutherland. I like Elliot Gould. I like them interacting with each other in a medical war atmosphere while they rebel against authority. I like M.A.S.H. Especially the potatoes… no wait, I'm digressing again. I love the comedy bits, and the loose story connections can be overlooked for the comic fun that ensues. I also like the way the old man reacted to the comments on vulgarity before the film began and also how he reacted to the football scenes. Also, the large fellow with the earphones and speech impediment made me laugh by saying “Jesus Christ” rather loudly at some point within the film. Oh ya, and I was sitting next to Rachel Miller, who is quite possibly the cutest girl I have ever seen. BEST SCREENING EVER.

 

My So-Called Film School

As an impressionable youth in my senior year at Capistrano Valley High School, I received an invitation to visit Chapman in February of 1998. Film and Television? Why yes, I am interested in those subjects and have enjoyed making silly videos with my friends for various classes. Your ideas intrigue me, and I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter. After a short presentation of all the wonders that Chapman had to offer, I could see shortcomings in the New Media program (I have a New Media emphasis) as far as equipment, but one of few schools that even claimed to have such a program was Chapman University. Or as I like to call it, a 4-year obstacle between high school and my true education.

The funny thing about attending college is that I knew from the start that I would learn more as an intern than what college could offer. If you enter film school without a basic knowledge of photography, aesthetics, or general film, you are probably not interested enough in the subject to motivate yourself anywhere up the ladder in the Hollywood system. Of course, there are the people who enter film school and then realize later that they would like to tough it out in this field, but you can pick those out in the crowd based on their fervor for knowledge and energetic approach to the massive workloads involved in film school. Apart from them, the rest of the half-ass film students bug the crap out of me with their wanton lack of knowledge about anything. This is especially personal as a Lab Assistant since I consistently answer the same questions to the same people over and over again. None of them seem to learn anything as I see the same mistakes being made over and over… but this is not a rant about that.

I could easily have learned everything I needed to know about New Media as an apprentice under someone in the industry… But the system does not work that way. A degree gives me an edge over the person who is more qualified without a degree. I don't know why, but someone deems a piece of paper more important than skill in some fashion. While that bugs me, I realize it does no one any good to dwell on such a fact so I plod through this obstacle course known as film school.

The first half of this paper is so bitter, that perhaps one would get the idea that I hate film school. This is not the case at all. I am actually glad I came to this school. The companionship and helpful work ethic of film school friends is a great and essential part of a functional film school experience. Film, like no other major, allows people to use their collective efforts to make the best products they can. Many of these friendships I have made in school will evolve into business relations I will have for a long time to come, and that is invaluable.

In short, film school is both necessary out of tradition and also for various contacts in the future. It isn't necessarily needed to gain extensive technical prowess in the field. And as with any social institution the friendships earned in these 4 years are priceless additions to my life and I'll look back fondly on college. Political bullshit? Bureaucracy that could kill an IRS agent? Select members of the faculty who hold a grudge against those with true talent since they have failed in their careers? All affirmative. This will always be evident in some proportion in any film school, but in my opinion the good far outweighs the bad.

 

Garfield Says, "Easy Rider is Better Than Lasagna!"

I'll have to agree with the lovable little orange and black kitty cat on that point. Of course, I really don't like lasagna, but that is beside the point. Whether I like lasagna or not, Easy Rider is still a great movie. Every time I watch it, I feel like plunging headfirst into debt and riding cross-country on a brand new Harley with some fine pipe work and a great paint job, especially when I watch the film inebriated.

Yes sir, drinking rum and cokes before screenings of Easy Rider is always the way to watch that movie. The hippy scene is done before you know it, and by then you've got Jack Nicholson, and the movie starts to rule supremely. I bet Garfield hasn't watched the first 45 minutes to an hour of this movie drunk. Stupid cat.

Dennis Hopper must be extremely brilliant for this film to have even turned out right. After all, 9 times out of 8 he was hopped up on acid, cocaine, or whatever he could find in the trash and light on fire/place on his tounge/snort up his nose. In a contest between Ozzy Osborne and Dennis Hopper, I'd have to say that Dennis would win the intoxication contest. Although if Ozzy AND the lead singer of Motley Crue got together, Dennis would have his work cut out for him. Garfield doesn't even fit into this equation; that fool is too busy napping to be able to compete with Hopper. Though maybe he is just popping too many Quaaludes. Err .. why the hell am I talking about drugs? Like I've ever done them…

Easy Rider is the ultimate film that tells the viewer that they need to enjoy life for what it is. It isn't money, fame, or lasagna that makes life worth living--it's the experiences. that's why Garfield’s life sucks. He just sleeps in a damn box all day and then wakes up to eat and then goes back to sleep. Although, I guess he does have some interesting experiences with the kitten, Nermal. And perhaps that's his style: just torturing cute kittens makes his life worth living.

There is another aspect of Easy Rider that is equally important: don't cramp anybody else’s style. After all, when those rednecks came and bashed in Jack Nicholson’s head, they were really cramping his style, and I bet they were heartbroken and discontent afterwards. That scene should be in the movie. In addition to Peter Fonda saying “We blew it man,” there should be a scene right after the beating where the rednecks are sitting around a burning cross saying “We blew it man.” That should be the theme and recurring motif of the movie. After each poignant scene, the characters involved should look at the camera and say “We blew it.” Because America is blowing it big time lately, and frankly I'm sick of it. All it would take is a few more movies like Easy Rider with at least 50+ scenes of people saying “We blew it” in varying situations to take America back to its golden era.

PETER FONDA FOR PRESIDENT! GARFIELD FOR HIS VICE PRESIDENT!

 

The World that Spawned Today's Hollywood

Demographics. The only word in the English language that affects any sort of corporate giant… With the exception of course of Bankruptcy, Recession, or The Whores of Tijuana (that's actually a term not a word, but nonetheless it affects corporations rather profoundly). The Old Hollywood that lasted up until the late 1960’s had been set in its ways since the medium began and hadn't planned on changing. Demographics forced them to do otherwise. They were forced from hiring tired old directors and actors to getting fresh new directors influenced by the French New Wave and calling themselves filmmakers instead of just directors. The studio system changed from assembly line moviemaking to passion-filled emotional moviemaking. This same word, Demographics (not The Whores of Tijuana), influenced the medium to take another turn after the 70’s and early 80’s, which, in my opinion, was a wrong turn. 180 degrees wrong.

The baby boomer children had to grow up sooner or later, and they finally did in the late 60’s. As they came into societal awareness, they noticed that another little something had blossomed at this time: the Vietnam War. This massive generation of angst-ridden youths (later called dirty hippies, or lousy longhairs) found themselves engulfed in a situation where their comrades (they didn't call them that because of McCarthyism) were being yanked out of their lives and dropped into a conflict they really didn't understand or agree with, and many of those friends were dying. This leaves a sour taste in the mouth of youthful America, and since they were possibly the largest generation the nation had seen, Hollywood saw that they would need to change the status quo to sell movie tickets. That change would be the move from Old to New Hollywood.

Robert Altman and Sam Peckinpah were among the many young new directors in the first wave of change instated by the New Hollywood System. They made cinema into something not just for entertainment, but something that was a work of art, something that would burn like wildfire in conversations on university campuses across the United States. In short, this first wave would begin to bring what had already been happening in Europe to the shores of the USA. Altman brought in M.A.S.H., which was described as “The film that escaped from Fox,” not the film produced by Fox because it was quite a departure from their line of war films. Peckinpah brought in The Wild Bunch in 1969, which pushed the boundaries of filmmaking. Its ultra-violence had truly never been seen before, except of course with Bonnie and Clyde, directed in 1967 by Arthur Penn, which still did not compare to the violence and themes held within The Wild Bunch. The point is that violence and sex started sneaking its way into films in far greater quantities than ever before in this new system. Hollywood began to produce pictures that were riskier and more character-driven than ever before.

These films, in a way, began to mimic the demographic as a whole. With the Civil Rights movement, the draft, and general craziness going on during the rebellious decade of the 60’s, the films that reflected such conflict and civil unrest were the most successful. Take Easy Rider, for example. It personified the young generation in Peter Fonda's and Dennis Hopper’s characters, and in a way, the Jack Nicholson character could be considered as a typified open-minded adult who realizes what is possible when you remove yourself from the establishment. This trio was just trying to have a mellow and fun time on their way out to Louisiana for Mardis Gras. However, on the way, though not trying to hurt anyone and through no fault of their own, they were consistently looked down upon, forced out of town, and generally harassed just because they didn't fit the status quo. It escalated all the way until the bigoted members of the establishment killed them all, or, as I like to call them, “The Man’s henchmen”). Many young people of the baby boomer generation could easily identify with that struggle and subsequently the film was wildly successful" (I'm not sure if it would have had the same effect with Hopper’s initial 5-hour cut of the movie…).

Basically, New Hollywood emerged because Old Hollywood executives saw an enormous amount of money to be made off of the new youth demographic, but the old directors and studio system could not appeal to such a group. So younger directors were hired to make films that would consume the baby boomer generation, and when those films were successful, more of the young directors were hired. Altogether this group of filmmakers created the most profound body of work in the decade of the 70’s that the United States or the world will ever see. It is a shame that the same principle of demographics that led to this great change subsequently led to movies like Crossroads and Josie and the Pussycats, which personify the majority of movies made in the 90’s and into the 21st century so far. We can only hope that another such revolution will result in the abolishment of these horrible films and embracing of more relevant work.

Bibliography
Briskand, Peter. Easy Riders, Raging Bulls. New York: Touchstone, 1999.
Barker, Brian. The inconceivably vast knowledge of Brian Barker’s brain; To be compared only to the depth of the Marianas Trench, yet much more comprehensive in the area of film. Orange, California: Brian Barker, 2002