X-Envelope-to: CINEMA-L@AUVM.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CINEMA-L@AUVM.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.cinema-l
Date:         Wed, 16 Dec 1992 10:26:48 -0600
From:         JACKSOSM@VUCTRVAX.BITNET
Subject:      Re: John and Grand Canyon

>    I agree with you. The title, itself, seems to suggest the enormous
>gap between Director Lawrence Kasdan's reach and his grasp as he tries
>to tackle a wide range of 90's social ills. As in his other film, The
>Big Chill, he relies on chatter rather than dramatization. Although
>the talk is sincere and passionate, these aren't real people conversing.
>And you get the feeling the characters aren't talking to each other but
>directly to the audience....
>
>.... What they're saying over and over is that life sucks...
>
> The movie ends in predictable happily-
>ever-after fashion with a visit to the Grand Canyon, a breathtaking but
>not so original metaphor for hope...
>
>                                                         Rolando

   Kasden's approach to filmmaking might seem smug, but I think he feels
his audience (which is not necessarily the same people who buy tickets
to HOME ALONE 2 or LETHAL WEAPON 3) will grant him the leeway to
proselytize if he's saying something worth hearing.  Yes, his movies are
chatty, as if they were originally conceived for the stage.  Yet I think it
is incorrect to assume people don't converse about substantive matters.
The dialogue in GRAND CANYON gets heavy handed at times, but it doesn't
violate one's sense of reality.
   I think Kasden's message goes beyond saying "life sucks."  If that were
all he had to say, there would be no justification for Kline and
Glover's characters to meet.   Obviously, many people today live lives of
"quiet desperation."  It's no surprise that clinical psychiatry and
pharmaceuticals are growth industries.  It hardly needs to be mentioned
that violence, loneliness and despair threaten to overwhelm many
people at various stages in their lives.
  In GRAND CANYON, I think Kasden is saying that life is rough, but not
unbearable.  People are not predestined for happiness or punishment.
Sometimes it just comes down to the luck of the draw.  If your car
breaks down at night in a bad section of town, it might have dire consequences.
Or you might get lucky.  Through it all, I think Kasden believes that
love has a redemptive power to heal.  Not an original idea, but
certainly not fatalistic, either.
   Steve Martin's character in GRAND CANYON, the producer of grade B
slasher films, exemplifies the moral ambivalence of Kasden's theme.
Slasher films can be seen either as a cause or a product of malaise and
neurasthenia.  There is no clear cut answer.
   Despite whatever flaws it has, GRAND CANYON ranks among a tiny
minority of films that is truly heuristic.  Kasden makes no apologies
for his pedagogical tone.  Far from having a "happy ever after ending,"
the characters in GRAND CANYON continue to search for a basic spiritual
equilibrium, even in the midst of their disappointments and fears..

j-man
    <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU