toledoblade.com -- The Blade ~ Toledo Ohio
This piece tells why he was bigger than any movie.
I hate to break it to you, Andy, but you don't have to be Rush Limbaugh to think your review of the film was the stupidest goddamned review ever for a motion picture. At least Roger Ebert tore in a few more assholes into this idiot:
Penny Chenery arouses O'Hehir's ire by being wealthy and living with her family in Colorado "in a resplendent collection of period knitwear and steel-magnolia 'tude." In other words, period clothing. But she cannot be held guilty of having money honestly earned. That money was secondary in her mind is demonstrated when she prevents both sides of her family from selling the farm, and refuses $7 million for Secretariat. O'Hehir admits that he loves the film's "wonderfully varied and dazzling approaches to Secretariat's four big races." Chenery obviously loved those races too, and literally bet the farm in order to see them.
Wait. There is yet another sinister subtext to be exposed in the film. O'Hehir mentions that Randall Wallace, who directed the film, "is one of mainstream Hollywood's few prominent Christians, and has spoken openly about his faith and his desire to make movies that appeal to 'people with middle-American values'." To which I respond: I am a person with middle-American values, and the film appealed to me. This news just in: There are probably more liberals with middle-American values than conservatives, especially if your idea of middle-American values overlaps with the Beatitudes, as mine does.
I suspect the reason O'Hehir (what the hell kind of name is THAT--"Hehir"--it's as confusing as his stupid review) wrote such a piece was to draw attention to himself by trying to paint a racehorse as some kind of Aryan symbol. He sure as hell did draw attention, and not in a good way.
Penny Chenery's son John Tweedy responded in Salon's letters:
"Secretariat" and Race
I hesitate to wade back into this conversation, but I do need to add a few comments about "Secretariat's" portrayal of Eddie Sweat, his groom. I actually found Nelsan Ellis's portrayal of Eddie's expressions, the cadence of his speech, and his deep professional skill and connection with horses one of the most accurate and moving parts of the film. I just watched an interview with Eddie, filmed just before Secretariat's last race, and the resemblance is remarkable. On the other hand, I agree that the scene of Eddie, Miss Ham, and Penny all boogieing to Motown were, shall we say, not historically accurate. But this is not for the reason Mr. O'Hehir identifies. Rather, it is anachronistic to think that my grandfather's secretary would have boogied to anything more recent than Scott Joplin, or that Penny would have gooten loose to music fresher than Sinatra. It is also not accurate to think that any of the three characters would have danced with each other at all in 1973. This is one of the movie's "feel good" moments, and O'Hehir is certainly within his rights to criticize it. But it is worth clarifying that the moment's real mischaracterization is of the white people, not the black.
O'Hehir also castigates the portrayal of Pancho Martin as "swarthy" and "vaguely terrorist." In real life, Martin was Cuban, and in real life, he did engage in some trash talk before the Derby. Bill Nack, Secretariat's biographer, recorded some of these comments at the time, and he has shared his evidence among the comments on Roger Ebert's blog. This kind of trash talking was not uncommon in sports journalism of that era, and it is more common now. The movie hams it up, but does not invent it from whole cloth. Mr. O'Hehir's choice to call a Latino actor playing a Latino character "swarthy" makes me more uncomfortable for Mr. O'Hehir than for the producers of the film.
Perhaps the broadest "stereotype" (if you want to call it that) in the movie is John Malkovich's wonderfully comedic portrayal of Lucien Laurin, who in real life was a courtly, private man not at all prone to the kind of bluster Malkovich lets loose on screen. Nevertheless I enjoy the movie portrayal of him, and I think it works well as cinema. I am not aware that Malkovich's performance was rooted in any prejudice against French Canadians. But perhaps Mr. O'Hehir could help me perceive a darker agenda.
—John Tweedy
He also wrote a great response here.
So did Bill Nack.
No comments:
Post a Comment