Takeaways: like the smack at Palin/Palinites and the “death panel” BS, thought the ruckus over illegal immigrant coverage was ridiculous, good at being clear on the major points, and I think the public option might be getting ready to exit Stage Left. This idea of a public option “kick in” might be the compromise. Also CBS should have showed more Emanuel. And Charles Boustany (R), an inspiring speaker you are not….and when you opened your mouth, I thought you were going to start singing something from “The Barber of Seville.” So, I’m out.
7:03 — There’s that oratorical baritone….
7:02 — “Markets can crash….the vulnerable can be exploited.” Exhibit A: the last year in the life of America.
7:00 — Did he mention that TR was a Republican who wanted to reform American healthcare yet? I can’t remember.
6:59 — This is a well-executed step back toward the moral side of this issue. ….no snark on this one.
6:57 — “The character of our country.” Perfect, Teddy.
6:56 — Ted Kennedy. Here’s the thing — we knew this was going to come up, but all Obama had to do was say his name and I teared up. Me. I only cry during “Gladiator.”
6:55 — “We will call you out.” Buh BAM.
6:55 — Republicans: FIND A BETTER WAY TO PROTEST THAN HOLDING UP STAPLED PACKETS. AMERICANS WATCHING AT HOME CANNOT READ THEM. Elitists.
6:53 — I would have clapped there based solely on my love of Kathleen Sebelius.
6:52 — There are so many sounds echoing around….I feel like the Republicans and Democrats are actually making sounds back and forth like they’re at a football game.
6:49 — Another fun part of presidential addresses to Congress: watching moderates try to decide if they’re going to give a standing ovation to something and half get out of their chair and then sit back down.
6:48 — “I want to speak directly to seniors for a minute.” CUT TO JOE LIEBERMAN hahahahaha. Also: everyone adjust the volume on your TV set by -10. I swear it just got louder.
6:46 — I like when politicians pull a “Yeah, man, bureaucrats blow!” kind of thing. It’s especially funny in the context of the President addressing Congress.
6:43 — Yes, thank you for reminding us that most Americans aren’t screeching maniacs running hysterical in the streets and that many are on your side about the public option (yes, drink again).
6:41 — Public option! Drink!
6:39 — Aaaand a return to Econ 101. Good move. Make it about monopolies! And choice! Americans love choice! Except…oh, well, not a minute ago.
6:38 — Serious commotion over the lack of coverage for illegal immigrants, and a mixed response over no funding for abortions…which: come on, we all knew that.
6:36 — Um…giggles? Shut up GOP. This is just making you look like you don’t want to be a serious part of this debate. …Oh, wait.
6:34 — Creepy smile, McCain! But good idea?
6:33 — You can tell Pelosi and Biden are both Catholics because they have this whole sit-stand-sit-stand thing DOWN.
6:31 — No one should go broke because they get sick: perhaps my favorite summary of the reasons reform is necessary. Simple, to the point, emphasizes how helpless you can be.
6:30 — Okay, the thing about making sure you can’t be denied coverage or be dropped for being sick — kind of a gimme. What righty is going to be photographed crossing his/her arms and shaking his/her head in a firm “NO!”…?
6:28 — Perfect application of “bickering” matched up with deepening his register and getting inspiring.
6:26 — The first shot of RAHM. Mmm.
6:24 — Early framing of the healthcare system as economically unsustainable immediately after storytime. I like the approach.
6:23 — “And no one should be treated that way in the United States of America.” The Irish in me twitched. I love this patriotic application of guilt. LOVE.
6:20 — awww, Dingell gets a standing ovation too.
6:18 — I swear, Nancy Pelosi still has traces of a Baltimore accent. Maybe it’s just wishful thinking, since I can’t seem to strike “am-bee-lance.”
Quentin Tarantino has the last laugh?
This story broke late yesterday and was all over the news today — the skull piece housed in Moscow believed to be Hitler’s and used as evidence to support the widely-accepted theory that he shot himself in a Berlin bunker was revealed as a woman’s, which brings into question, again, exactly how Hitler died.
For me, the story couldn’t have been better timed, because I thought the dumbest critical debate around Inglourious Basterds was whether or not it was legitimate to make a WWII movie that so blatantly flies in the face of established historical narrative (spoiler alert: Hitler and a passel of important Nazis are gunned down and/or burn to death inside an infernal theater).
I read an article about the film — and for the record, I did love it, though I understand it’s not everyone’s cup of tea — that discussed briefly one of the perennial problems of talking about the war, which is that war history and Holocaust history tend to become conflated in the modern mind, at least the modern American mind. They are separate, though linked, phenomena, and I don’t think it does the continuum of historical consciousness very much good to insist on making either about the other, although it does allow us to revel in a certain do-gooder status.
With this movie, I like to think that Tarantino was playing on the relationship between those two events, and messing with some of our entrenched notions about the European Theater (why else have Colonel Landa be so complicated, if still contemptible?) — and, of course, giving us gunfire and blood along the way, although there wasn’t nearly as much of that as I expected. When I read this story yesterday, I imagined QT getting a kick out of it — how all of the sudden, the ossified timeline printed in history books is made illegitimate. Or, in reality, the fluid and subjective nature of creating a singular historical storyline was laid out bare. Not that this discovery should shake the core of anyone’s beliefs about Germany, Hitler, or, god forbid, the Holocaust, but it does raise a few good questions about how younger generations should best translate the various successes and failures of their fathers and mothers into a useful narrative.
Ed: I don’t mean that Tarantino was exclusively confining himself to a discussion of WWII. There’s clearly a lot going on here, I just wanted to point out how he was using history as set and plot device in a really interesting way.
Leave a comment
Filed under Commentary
Tagged as Eli Roth, history, pop culture, Tarantino