7 responses... add one

Alright, first, I hesitate to comment, but, for some reason feel a need to do so. What can be said about this. Hmmm… how about “OMG, this is like so wrong on so many levels!” Creative, yes, but stupid, um, equally so.

That said, interesting item to put in as a post. Clearly, it does have potential to raise discussion (I’m just not sure how far that discussion will really go). Perhaps the question here would be… 1)”how many ways can we interpret the meaning of the “thing” and 2) what was the intent of the… I’m sorry, I can’t bring myself to say it, but while “producer” comes to mind… well, what was the intent of the person who made this “thing” apart from over-the-top exageration and stupid/silly satire (albeit, not “ha ha” satire)?

Actually, the person who made this appears, from his introduction, unaware of Spike Lee’s “C.S.A.,” which is also weirdly corny, but, obviously, more serious (and had a bigger budget). Or, maybe he is aware and just went stupid/silly in his work here.

For one, I think that both productions (I’d be willing to bet that Spike Lee would shiver at the thought of “C.S.A.” being put in the same category as this “thing”) raise questions about the perceptions of some about Southerners in general. Or maybe more accurately, it raises questions about Southerners who embrace the Confederacy in remembrance (clearly an unwanted generalization/stereotype).

What was the intent of both in their productions? Clearly, we can guess at Spike Lee, knowing his background and personal history; but for the person who made this, I wonder.

Something comes to mind here about this movie Kevin. Oh yes, I remember now. I saw it on a Hooters t-shirt… “Delightfully tacky, yet unrefined.”

Good questions Robert. Remember that I am not making any judgment about the content of the movie or whether it ought to lead to any discussion at all. As you know this site is a place to explore ways in which the Civil War is remembered. Thanks for taking the time to offer suggestions for further thought. As always that’s what it is all about.

Kevin, Oh no, not at all… I’m not impying that you are making a judgement. Despite the quality of the movie, you have presented something that, I believe, can lead to some valuable discussion. You are exactly right, this is what it is all about.

Tighter editing, less dialogue (way less), better sound (way better), san serif titles, different music, better transitions, use of a tripod and better scripting would have made this a much better project.

As it is the special effects, Sears and Roebuck suits, crazy beards, and wanton bloodshed, not to mention the bravura performance by so many short model Lee-Enfield .303 rifles, made this send-up of cliched and over-wrought movie trailers fairly amusing and interesting to watch.

A nice addition would have been that gravelly baritone “In a world…” -style voice over.

As student work this was really promising, I hope these kids get some direction, and a boom mic.

Mannie

I just lost 4:42 of my life that I can never get back and I hold you responsible Kevin. Reparations are in order and so I expect a free drink from you, at the very least, in New Orleans this weekend.

Mannie, — I hope this gives you some ideas for your next film.

Peter, — Give me a break. If you weren’t watching this you would be sitting on the couch watching reruns of I Love Lucy. Don’t worry, I will still buy you that drink – hell, I’ll buy you as many as you want. (LOL)

Join the Conversation