EXCESS HOLLYWOOD: DEATH OF A GHOUL

EXCESS HOLLYWOOD: DEATH OF A GHOUL

I was in Southern California, surviving a heat wave, when the live footage of the police chase came to an end. The suspect got out of the car, hands held high into the air, and fell face first to the ground as cops swarmed over him. You could almost see their fingers twitching on the triggers of their guns as they waited for the guy to make One Wrong Move. If he did, twelve bullets would turn his skull into a Gallagher watermelon. The news coverage then switched back to important topics like that of Sandra Bullock’s stalker. Then I heard something that brightened my day. Jack Valenti was dead.

I never knew the man, but I knew what he did, and how it affected everything from commerce to art. His work as the head of the MPAA changed the way Americans saw film, and while his intentions were noble in his eyes, they were also very flawed, hypocritical and asinine. Was I jumping for joy when I heard the news? No, but I was glad the garbage had finally been taken to the curb.

My hatred of the movie ratings and the people who created them and keep them in place is well documented. I’ve written several pieces on it and have been involved in countless spirited debates about the necessity of the ratings. The fact that the system is still in place even while Valenti spends the rest of eternity as a memory speaks volumes to the system’s tenacity. Valenti’s death should have brought about the end of the ratings board (if there were any real justice in the world), but that isn’t the case. It lives on because far too many people think it is a good idea without fully understanding the implications or machinations of it. Valenti, always a great salesman, understood, and I think he probably considered it his crowning legacy.

Valenti, who looked a bit ghoulish in his breathing hours, is no more. He is no longer able to plead with Congress about television, and he can’t butt his nose into the art of film any longer. As Martha Stewart would say, that’s a good thing. What’s bad is that his empire remains standing, and in light of how things are going, it will only get worse. Valenti wouldn’t see it that way, but he always understood what was better for America’s children anyway, so that shouldn’t surprise anyone.

The death of a king should mean that the kingdom crumbles, but like Hollywood, nothing ever really gets old enough to die. Even Westerns make a comeback every decade or so, and that’s how it goes with movie ratings. They will change, but they will always be with us because of what one “”visionary” put into place. Thanks a lot, you stupid bastard. You may have thought you were doing the right thing, but remember what was said about the road to Hell … and let me know how it looks now that you are there.




Posted on May 16, 2007 in Blogs by
Buffer


If you liked this article then you may also like the following Film Threat articles:
Popular Stories from Around the Web
2 Comments on "EXCESS HOLLYWOOD: DEATH OF A GHOUL"

  1. Don Lewis on Wed, 16th May 2007 10:02 am 

    Yeah…someone (a human being) DYING definitely deserves celebration…especially when he was HIRED to do a JOB. Making light of a man’s death with snide comments and rude innuendo is really, really classy. I mean, especially so because he had the audacity to do his job and lobby for Hollywood and pass superfluous and lame ratings that only matter to the people who give a shit.

    Thinking people could give a shit about ratings. Thus, Valenti was just a guy doing a job. No one was tortured or died due to him. I don’t give a shit about the MPAA but the guy was still a human being and this blog is pathetic. You seem shocked that the MPAA will carry on in his absence…it was there before him you dolt…it’s going to be there after.

    I didn’t realize the ratings system hurt you so badly. I thought most writers here were over 18 and could basically see any film they wanted. I’m sorry Jack Valenti’s ratings harmed your cinematic viewing to the point where you need to jump for joy at his death and post about it.

    In the future, when you do blogs that are this lame, inspipid, insensitive and poorly written, could you please sign them with your name so they don’t look like the whole site and it’s writers decided this was planned out and O.K.ed by us all? Thanks. Then again, no thanks.


    Report Comment

  2. Dave Lawler on Wed, 16th May 2007 11:10 pm 

    I didn’t think the blog was poorly written, at least not as poorly written as the works of the Virginia Tech Dude.

    Dougie gets an opinion just like everybody else.

    It doesn’t matter who dies. Somebody else was already running the MPAA while Valenti was recovering from a stroke. He was out for a while, left the job, and found what he considered a suitable replacement and they continued to do the work.

    Filmmakers tend to be cry-babies when it comes to the MPAA or Mr. Valenti. They want the government to intercede, thus making it a State rights issue, insuring selective censorship along the lines of having to travel to Massachusetts to see a movie about homosexuals because it’s banned in every other state. They also ignore the contractual obligation to deliver R-rated films.

    You can poo-poo Valenti’s job, but you can’t ignore the impact (for either good or bad) he and his cronies had, and continue to have, on the Motion Picture Industry.

    I don’t much care. I’ll rent an NC-17 DVD and watch it in my home where the MPAA doesn’t lay down the law.

    Now let’s shake hands.


    Report Comment

Tell us what you're thinking...





Comments are governed by the Terms of Use of this Site. Click on the "Report Comment" link if you feel a comment is in violation of the Terms of Use, and the comment will be reviewed appropriately.