<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: An interesting (if disturbing) take on the cop action movie
Review: Man. As a privileged white male, author Neal King has some issues. While his premise is interesting, and seems to hold up under cursory scrutiny, after only a few pages it becomes apparent that King is approaching his subject from a position of guilt about his own white male privilege. Early on it is uncomfortably evident that he sees himself as akin to the "cop heroes" he writes about--someone from a working-class background out to right the wrongs perpetrated on non-whites by rich white males who feel they're "losing ground" to the same non-whites. As a sociology professor, King has no doubt seen the irony in that. His agenda shows early on when he begs the question, positing social theory as fact without so much as hinting at another viewpoint (e.g., parroting the "rich get richer and the poor get poorer" mantra). By page 25 I had coined a new oxymoron: "conservative sociologist." I'll bet King surrounds himself with non-white friends and sees himself as the Great White Savior (not that he'd actually admit it). That's not only the portrait of the cop heroes he writes about, but also the portrait of the classic elite liberal academic. I hate too sound too harsh about King, because the book is really fascinating, and meticulously researched. And that he ably defends his theories against competing (and yet more farfetched) theories shows how much he truly loves cop action movies. Perhaps the most disturbing part of the book, though, is that King finds homoeroticism lurking under every stone. If he's not straight, then he obviously hasn't come to terms with his homosexuality. Certainly many "guy" movies contain homoerotic under- or overtones (just look at any movie starring Tom Cruise, particularly "Top Gun"), but saying that in the climactic sequence of Point Break, "Johnny jumps from an airplane without a parachute to take Bodhi from behind in a close, drawn-out embrace...all grunts, groping, and intertwined legs..." is a little much. ... Methinks King doth protest too much. What I find really fascinating is that although King writes about cop heroes in movies as if they are actual living entities, the fact remains that they are all the product of artists in an industry that is overwhelmingly left-liberal. So cop heroes don't reflect real life so much as they reflect the worldview of a small group of liberal artists who are likely pursuing their art not only for the money, but also to "make a difference." That is, to push their own social agendas any way they can. And we all know that cop movies bear little resemblance to real life. Something else to consider: The heroes of Hong Kong cop movies are remarkably similar to the heroes of Hollywood cop movies. Is this purely because HK films are but carbon copies of Hollywood's? I can't imagine that it's because Chinese cop heroes have their own guilt over Asian Male Privilege to exorcise. And what about the protagonists of the thousands of no-budget Mexican cop movies? On a larger stage, King's theory starts to get wobbly. King's book is an enjoyable read, even if it is, at times, difficult (in more ways than one). I have never considered really analyzing my movie genre of choice--although I was aware that Evil White Men were always the "safest" villains--but now I will certainly look at it in a new light. Additionally, I'll need to rethink my own cop action screenplays. Yes, my cop protagonist and his sidekick were white males. And their supervisor was a well-spoken black man. Perhaps, unfathomably, I do indeed harbor some guilt over being an attractive, intelligent heterosexual white male. Never mind that White Male Privilege hasn't paid my credit card bill, or given me a new car or my own house. "Heroes in Hard Times" is not a book for everyone, but if you're a student of film, a fan of action movies, or just someone looking to win a bet that "Point Break" really was about a closeted gay man pursuing his romantic obsession, you'll find something here to enjoy.
<< 1 >>
| 
