My apologies to the 80s

As someone who claims to be (or at least have been) a film buff there are a fair amount of holes in my film viewing history. For example, I have never seen Citizen Kane. It was on the syllabus for a film class I took but I missed that day. If only I could have been out sick the day we watched Zardoz instead (believe me I wish I could un-see that one), but alas it was Citizen Kane day that I missed.

I'm trying to make up for it now. I've been interspersing classics into my queue in between Entourage and Mad Men viewings at a rate of two per month. Last month it was Funny Face and A Star is Born (the original), this month Eight Men Out and The Natural...but I have a lot of catching up to do.

Some of these are of my own choosing, but many of them are recommendations from people. Someone will say, "You haven't seen _______! Oh my God, it's classic you have to see it" and so I will dutifully add it to my queue and watch it eventually (Yes, Goodfellas is still on there and I will get around to it some day).

For the most part, whether or not they were of my own choosing or recommendations, I've really liked all of the "classics" that have been part of my re-education in film. However, I have to admit, because it's on my mind (and on TV a lot in the run up to Halloween), and I know how unpopular this will be....I really didn't like The Goonies.

I know I should fit perfectly in to this film's demographic. I'm a child of the 80's and a fan of many of the cast members. I should love the The Goonies, but I just can't work up any enthusiasm for it. Maybe if I'd seen it as a kid (as most of my friends who've recommended it did) I'd feel differently, but I didn't. Maybe it just loses something in translation from kid to adult. I don't know, but I really didn't like it. Maybe it was just that it had been so hyped to me that it just couldn't live up to it, but I don't think so. It wasn't just that I didn't see what all the fuss was about, I actually disliked it.

So, my apologies to the 80's, I feel like I've betrayed you, but the heart wants what the heart wants, and mine does not want The Goonies.

Supreme Court

I feel like I have to justify myself before I make the argument I'm about to make, because as much as I fully believe in this argument the reason for the argument hurts my heart more than almost anything else ever has.

There is a case currently before the supreme court regarding animal cruelty and whether or not it is okay to produce and sell films depicting actual acts of animal cruelty (actual as in not simulated, as in would not and could not have that disclaimer at the end stating that no animals were harmed in the making of the film). More accurately the case is about whether or not it is okay to ban the production and distribution of films depicting actual acts of animal cruelty. Now, here comes my own disclaimer. I am an animal lover. I have volunteered at an animal shelter and given money to the ASPCA and North Shore Animal League. Animal cruelty makes me sick. Hearing about this case, talking about this case, breaks my heart. I can't even bring myself to describe, as I heard described, the acts depicted in the videos that resulted in this case. Hearing the description of these videos made me want to believe in Hell. If there is a Hell, like Dante described, the lowest level of it would be reserved for people who harm the defenseless.

The case is a first amendment issue. The producers of these films are claiming that it isn't constitutional to ban the production and distribution of them.

The opposition is saying that some speech is already banned, namely child pornography, and that these types of films are just as bad and should also be banned federally, or at least be allowed to be banned by state and municipal governments. They also reference snuff films (saying that if there were snuff films that we were aware of we would and should absolutely ban them). Basically they are saying, yes we have free speech, but some types of speech are bad enough that it's okay to ban them.

I basically agree that some things are so bad that it's okay to ban them even though it infringes on free speech. I mean, I don't agree, but if it were up to me to pursue a case against the government for banning something like child pornography or animal cruelty videos, I wouldn't do it simply because my belief in free speech isn't a strong as my belief that it's wrong to hurt animals and children.

Having said all of that, the case has been brought, and I have heard about it and I have to make an argument because I have a compulsion to make arguments and because I do believe in free speech.

Banning the videos is unconstitutional. More importantly (to me anyway, and to other animal lovers) it's unnecessary. Animal cruelty is already illegal. The same holds true for snuff films and child pornography. Molesting children is already illegal. Rape and murder are already illegal. Filming illegal acts doesn't need to be illegal because the acts themselves are illegal. Filming these acts and selling those films (or otherwise distributing them) is actually remarkably ill advised since documenting your criminal behavior, if anything, creates a trail that might make it easier for the authorities to catch you. Regardless, given the constitutional protection of free speech, the animal cruelty videos can't be banned. Animal cruelty itself, however, can be (and has been in most, if not all, states and municipalities in the US).