So before I even begin on this (and don’t worry, I intend to be brief and not waste much of your precious time), let me quote Bill Hicks talking about Basic Instinct:
But you know I saw this movie this year called last year called er, ‘Basic Instinct’. Okay now. Bill’s quick capsule review: Piece-of-Shit. Okay now. Yeah, yeah, end of story by the way. Don’t get caught up in that fevered hype phoney fucking debate about that Piece-of-Shit movie. “Is it too sexist, and what about the movies, are they becoming too dddddddd.” You’re, you’re just confused, you don’t get, you’ve forgotten how to judge correctly. Take a deep breath huuh, look at it again. “Oh it’s a Piece-of-Shit!” Exactly, that’s all it is. Satan squatted, let out a loaf, they put a fucking title on it, put it on a marquee, Satan’s shit, piece of shit, walk away. “But is it too, what about the lesbian connot.. ddddd.” You’re, you’re getting really baffled here. Piece-of-Shit! Now walk away. That’s all it is, it’s nothing more! Free yourself folks, if you see it, Piece-of-Shit, say it and walk away. You’re right! You’re right! Not those fuckers who want to tell you how to think! You’re fucking right! Sorry wrong meeting again. I keep getting my days mixed up. tomorrow, it’s the meeting at the docks. Tonight it’s comedy entertainment with young Bill. Horrible film. And then I come to find out after that film. that all the lesbian sex scenes, let me repeat that, all the lesbian sex scenes were cut out of that film, because the test audience was turned off by them. Ha. Boy, is my thumb not on the pulse of America. [1]
I am quoting Bill here because The Expendables could be given pretty much the same review (I mean the Piece-of-Shit review, nothing to do with lesbians. But in case you were wondering, there are no lesbian sex scenes, or indeed any sex scenes in The Expendables. But there is quite a high bodycount).
I went to see The Expendables because I wanted a break from thinking about my thesis, and a friend wanted to go. So I went with him. I humoured him; humour me. The reason I am writing this is twofold: first, the same reason I went to see the film, and second, because the film tells us all sorts of interesting (but not particularly surprising) things about American masculinity in 2010. Viewed through this lens, the plot can be summarised as follows: Man 1 (Stallone) is doing his job, and encounters a damsel in distress (Itié). After trying to rescue her, he retreats. Man 2 (Rourke) explains to Man 1 that unless he rescues the damsel, he will be cursed to not be a real man for the rest of his life, and spend his days regretting, and having unfulfilling relationships, doing drugs and tattoo art, painting guitars and crying. Man 1 resolves to rescue the damsel. His mates rally round him, including a Chinese man (Li) whose role in the film is to get into situations where he needs to be rescued by big, white American Man 1 and his big, white American buddies – much like the role of the damsel, in fact – and a black man (Crews) who has a much bigger gun than any of the big, white American men. In the end it seems that if the big, white American men can rally round and look after each other as friends, and provide a space in their little group for a black man with a big gun, then it is possible for all of them to not only rescue the damsel and the Chinese man, but their wounded egos too.
Oh, and I almost forgot to mention, they get to defeat some enemies of America too: a rogue CIA agent (Roberts), who must be bad because everyone knows the CIA defends America’s interests, and General Garza (Zayas), who manages to represent three phantoms at once: not only does his position as a Latin American dictator make him a representative of Chavez, Morales, Castro and all those other leaders in Latin America who are refusing to play ball with the world superpower, but his name indicates that life would be so much easier if those Palestinians would just quit complaining and let Israel wipe them off the map completely, and the fact that he also looks a bit Mexican indicates how we are supposed to feel about- oh, hang on a minute, Stallone has publicly attacked the idea of a wall separating the US and Mexico [2], so maybe this theory of mine doesn’t work so well.
So all-in-all, what my review amounts to is that the film fits well with the conservative siege mentality that means that not only does something like the Tea Party movement do very well in contemporary America, but a Piece-of-Shit like this film will probably do fairly well in the Box Office.
Anyway, whatever. I have a thesis to write, and it won’t write it by itself. Er, let me try that again: it won’t get written by itself. Especially if I come out with garbled sentence constructions like that one.
Peace.
References:
1. You should read/listen to/watch more of Bill’s stuff. I got this particular quote from http://www.gavinsblog.com/revelations.htm?seenIEPage=1
2. “Stallone attacks Mexican Border Fence”, www.breibart.com, http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8MF698O0&show_article=1