Did you have any sense that one of these characters was more evil than the other? Neither of these characters could have wielded the power that he did without the backdrop of a hungry-for-gossip, mean-spirited public. Do you think more attention should have been given to that aspect of the story, or is it proper to just treat it as a given?
Monday, March 26, 2007
The lesser evil?
Did you have any sense that one of these characters was more evil than the other? Neither of these characters could have wielded the power that he did without the backdrop of a hungry-for-gossip, mean-spirited public. Do you think more attention should have been given to that aspect of the story, or is it proper to just treat it as a given?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
“Sixty million readers.”
In the hands of a less confident movie maker there would have been several shots interweaved of “the masses” sucking up the sleaze and tittering in their “shock” at such sordid undertakings. To not put too fine a point on it, such scenes suck. We know what J.J.’s readership is, we see him on his TV set, we see his imperial poise and the fawning of his subjects. I think that is exactly what we need to know about the source of his power.
I can't decide which of them is worse, though sometimes Sydney's scheming seems to direct J.J's course of action.
I will say that while both were loathsome characters, I liked them both. There was such a sense of fun to their machinations.
I keep thinking about this question.
I think both went through a descent throughout the movie. I could see Sidney justifying his behavior (bribing the columnist, setting up his blonde friend, etc.) because although he was putting the squeeze on others, they always had to make the choice whether to cooperate with him. He sensed where others were weak and then manipulated the situation to test their particular character. The turning point, when he couldn't "pass the buck" to anyone, was when he was expected to plant pot on Susan's boyfriend.
Interestingly, J.J. was doing the same thing; he just had a vehicle like Sidney to do it. He pressured him to do as he wished, but Sidney always had the choice not to do J.J.'s dirty work. J.J., too, finally crossed a line when he called his police pals to pick up Sidney for the pot incident. I wonder whether that conflicted expression on J.J.'s face at the film's end was solely about the loss of Susan, or if he realized he'd crossed a point of no return, too.
That's a really interesting analysis, cl. I kept thinking Sydney couldn't be as bad as J.J. at heart — that he was self-serving, sure, and lacking in morals, but not all-out evil. Then I came to see no discernible difference in them, except J.J. was capable of greater damage simply because of the power he weilded. Sydney would have destroyed anyone in his path, too.
The look on J.J.'s face at the end was really great — Burt Lancaster is amazing! — and I imagine it was meant to foreshadow his demise. He'd reached, as you said, a point of no return just like Winchell had. What lay ahead for Winchell — after aligning himself with McCarthy and Hoover, et al, in a naked power grab — were years of disgrace and anonymity.
From Wiki: Towards the end of his life, Winchell fell from the public eye. Larry King, who replaced Winchell at the Miami Herald, observed, "He was so sad. You know what Winchell was doing at the end? Typing out mimeographed sheets with his column, handing them out on the corner. That's how sad he got. When he died, only one person came to his funeral."
Driftwood makes a good point -- the movie focused on what was interesting, which was the people in the center of it, not the masses.
As to the relative evilness, I'd say they were just different. Either would do anything to get what they wanted, but J.J. could usually keep his hands a little cleaner by having a minion do his dirty work.
I still keep thinking that Sidney was your run-of-the-mill asshole, while J.J. was deranged and egomaniacal. Perhaps they are equally evil as a practical matter, as far as the damage they could do, but I think J.J. wins the prize for all-out vileness.
Post a Comment