I hear a theatrical movie is coming out next month that dramatizes the events of Chappaquiddick from way back in 1969--49 effing years ago.
Ted Kennedy has been dead now for what, eight and a half years. Is there really a public clamoring for this kind of expose? Is there really an audience losing sleep over this scandal after all these years?
I ask why? Who would want to see this?
When discussing this with one of my friends who would call himself conservative, he claimed he didn't see anything wrong with this, reminding me that "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." I retorted that I do not see how that possibly applies to this situation.
I ask why? Who would want to see this?
When discussing this with one of my friends who would call himself conservative, he claimed he didn't see anything wrong with this, reminding me that "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." I retorted that I do not see how that possibly applies to this situation.
He felt it necessary to remind me that a 37-year old Ted Kennedy left a woman--not his wife--to die when his car slipped off a bridge and the car went into the waters at Chappaquiddick Island. Yes, I remember the events very well.
Yes, 'scandal' is the only way to describe the incident. Yes, Kennedy used incredibly poor judgment that night in July 1969. Yes, a woman lost her life that night. And yes, Kennedy was raked over the coals by the press and he pretty much got a slap on the wrist, legally speaking.
Kennedy's presidential aspirations were torpedoed that night and his wife miscarried a few weeks after the tragedy. And in the ways that matter most, none of that is as important as the fact that a woman died and Kennedy may have been able to have prevented it.
Enough of that. I admired Ted Kennedy, but that does not mean I hold him in reverie or awe. I do not condone his behavior of the events of that evening. That is not my objection to this movie.
Thing is, is there really a huge audience out there pining over the thought "Gee, I would love to see a movie that crucifies a politician nearly five decades after the fact." This movie has National Enquirer journalism written all over it.
My friend pointed out that movies like "Wag the Dog, Manchurian Candidate [sic, considering these two films were a piece of fiction], All the President's Men, Selma, JFK, Malcolm X, Munich, Schindler's List, Patton," and "The King's Speech" are important teaching tools.
As a former US History teacher, to call 'Chappaquiddick' a teaching moment is an insult to my profession and I call BS on that notion (in this case), None of the aforementioned films set out with an agenda to embarrass or punish any of the people involved.
Ted Kennedy has been dead for nearly nine years and leaves him unable to defend or at the least, explain, his recollections and thoughts on the tragedy. I will agree there is little to defend, which is really not the point of my objection to this film.
A movie like this surely has no agenda other than to embarrass the Kennedy family and to hurt Ted's children and grandchildren. Do they need to be reminded of this? Do they need to be punished "for the sins of the father?"
Yes, 'scandal' is the only way to describe the incident. Yes, Kennedy used incredibly poor judgment that night in July 1969. Yes, a woman lost her life that night. And yes, Kennedy was raked over the coals by the press and he pretty much got a slap on the wrist, legally speaking.
Kennedy's presidential aspirations were torpedoed that night and his wife miscarried a few weeks after the tragedy. And in the ways that matter most, none of that is as important as the fact that a woman died and Kennedy may have been able to have prevented it.
Enough of that. I admired Ted Kennedy, but that does not mean I hold him in reverie or awe. I do not condone his behavior of the events of that evening. That is not my objection to this movie.
Thing is, is there really a huge audience out there pining over the thought "Gee, I would love to see a movie that crucifies a politician nearly five decades after the fact." This movie has National Enquirer journalism written all over it.
My friend pointed out that movies like "Wag the Dog, Manchurian Candidate [sic, considering these two films were a piece of fiction], All the President's Men, Selma, JFK, Malcolm X, Munich, Schindler's List, Patton," and "The King's Speech" are important teaching tools.
As a former US History teacher, to call 'Chappaquiddick' a teaching moment is an insult to my profession and I call BS on that notion (in this case), None of the aforementioned films set out with an agenda to embarrass or punish any of the people involved.
Ted Kennedy has been dead for nearly nine years and leaves him unable to defend or at the least, explain, his recollections and thoughts on the tragedy. I will agree there is little to defend, which is really not the point of my objection to this film.
A movie like this surely has no agenda other than to embarrass the Kennedy family and to hurt Ted's children and grandchildren. Do they need to be reminded of this? Do they need to be punished "for the sins of the father?"
Does this film have any hopes of punishing any other members of the Kennedy family, such as Joseph Kennedy III? Second newsflash: Joseph is not Ted.
What do the filmmakers hope to gain? Will the film bring justice to Mary Jo Kopechne? Will this lead to a prosecution case? Newsflash here, you cannot prosecute the dead. Ted is dead.
So what is the purpose of this film? If this sort of thing is okay, will it be okay to punish Chelsea Clinton, say, if she has political aspirations, for her father getting a blowjob in the Oval Office?
Let me be blunt. This film is a nothing short of a hatchet job, short and simple!
Films like this are mean-spirited, vindictive, poisonous AND pretty damned pointless! I cannot imagine why anyone would really want to plop down their hard earned money for a box office ticket.
I hope the movie finds its theater stadiums empty; I hope it dies a quick, painful box office death... and its funding partner losing their ass.
Films like this are mean-spirited, vindictive, poisonous AND pretty damned pointless! I cannot imagine why anyone would really want to plop down their hard earned money for a box office ticket.
I hope the movie finds its theater stadiums empty; I hope it dies a quick, painful box office death... and its funding partner losing their ass.
My advice? If you want to see something historical, then spend your money on the likes of 'The Darkest Hour, Dunkirk,' or 'Hidden Figures.'
No comments:
Post a Comment