America
- Episode aired Sep 28, 2012
YOUR RATING
Photos
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Featured review
1.2: America by Christopher Durang: Liberal-biased and with overly present edits, but engagingly written and performed
After the free-flowing self-referential smartness of the first film, the second, while no less interesting, seems a bit more grounded in commentary and modern politics. The writers takes us back to a simple childhood and a simpler time (although isn't it always thus?) and discusses the politics of his older relatives, who did not see his later opinions as "different" but simply "wrong", albeit America gave him the freedom to be wrong. He mentions this but is also clear that although they voted for Nixon, they did not rail against Kennedy and indeed mourned with the nation at his death. From here we mull on the idea of Obama being assassinated – not so much that happening, but more the genuine question, would the country unite in shock, and could we be sure that half the nation would not dance in the streets?
It is a thoughtful question and all the more so for the answer being "no – no I could not for say they wouldn't". This backs up the new toxic America, the one split so totally with liberals on one side and the continuing extremes of the religious right on the other – with not only no common ground in the middle, but no desire to find any anyway. It must be said that such questioning is being delivered from a very obviously liberal point of view and the same could have been said of Bush Jr at his least popular. As a liberal this didn't affect my enjoyment of the film, but it could be a barrier to those not of that persuasion who could rightly say that the writer seems to be speaking as if his side is the innocent party in all of this, which it is not – it takes two to tango (even if someone has to lead!).
The actor delivering the piece is Jack Gilpin and his age and manner convinces as one having a thoughtful discussion over modern politics. The shoot is again in a simple location but again the need for frequent editing bugs me. I'm not sure if this is the nature of the shoot that it was pretty much a rehearsal with freedom and space which would be tightened and closed up in the edit, but the frequent fades-to-black bugged me – at one point I thought it may be better to listen to than watch.
For this and the rather liberal-biased view, the monologue is still engaging in how it constructs and presents its case.
It is a thoughtful question and all the more so for the answer being "no – no I could not for say they wouldn't". This backs up the new toxic America, the one split so totally with liberals on one side and the continuing extremes of the religious right on the other – with not only no common ground in the middle, but no desire to find any anyway. It must be said that such questioning is being delivered from a very obviously liberal point of view and the same could have been said of Bush Jr at his least popular. As a liberal this didn't affect my enjoyment of the film, but it could be a barrier to those not of that persuasion who could rightly say that the writer seems to be speaking as if his side is the innocent party in all of this, which it is not – it takes two to tango (even if someone has to lead!).
The actor delivering the piece is Jack Gilpin and his age and manner convinces as one having a thoughtful discussion over modern politics. The shoot is again in a simple location but again the need for frequent editing bugs me. I'm not sure if this is the nature of the shoot that it was pretty much a rehearsal with freedom and space which would be tightened and closed up in the edit, but the frequent fades-to-black bugged me – at one point I thought it may be better to listen to than watch.
For this and the rather liberal-biased view, the monologue is still engaging in how it constructs and presents its case.
helpful•00
- bob the moo
- Aug 17, 2014
Details
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content