I saw \Million Dollar Baby"" last week. It was a good movie-well written, well acted, well directed. But as I left the theater, I found myself feeling displeased. At first I wasn't sure why. Then it started to dawn on me that I had felt a similar displeasure when John Kerry clinched the Democratic presidential nomination. It's a feeling that many writers have trouble articulating, but I believe the most accurate term is an onomatopoeia often used by college students:
Meh.
It's not that there's really anything wrong with ""Million Dollar Baby."" Clint Eastwood, Morgan Freeman and especially Hilary Swank turn in excellent performances. The story-about a washed-up boxing trainer agreeing to train a woman after being cut loose by the new champ-is compelling enough, and Eastwood's direction is solid as always. But there's no originality, no pizzazz, no extra spark that makes the movie more than the sum of its decent parts. Eastwood and Freeman essentially reprise their aging-tough-guy roles from ""Unforgiven,"" and while Swank gives by far the film's liveliest performance, her character is yet another trailer-trash-turned-superstar that's been played a thousand times before.
On top of that, the movie is awash in Hollywood clich??s: Eastwood as the psychologically complex lead, Freeman as the loyal black subsidiary (""Driving Miss Daisy,"" anyone?) and both Swank and Freeman as the lovable disabled characters. (Did anyone notice that three of four actors this year took home Oscars for playing characters with disabilities?) The film's one weak stab at depth, the supposedly symbolic ""pie with real lemon filling,"" was the lamest attempt to be artsy since the plastic bag floating in the wind in ""American Beauty.""
Notice that I've already made references to three other movies here. Is our culture really so stale that the year's most honored cinematic achievement is simply a rehash of used characters and ideas?
Now hold that thought. I have to come back to John Kerry.
I can't think of anything really terrible about Kerry. Did he have a distinguished r??sum' Yes. Was he qualified to be president? Sure. Was he a good liberal? Good enough, I suppose.
As we all know, he had his share of problems. He combined the chilly patrician air of Michael Dukakis with the grating, know-it-all smugness of Al Gore, and his lackluster attempts to be original and genuine were even more painful to watch. Kerry was a good senator and a solid candidate, but he lacked a certain je ne sais quoi that would have put him over the top.
Therefore, I paraphrase the question I posed before: Is our political culture so stale that a cross between Dukakis and Gore is the best the Democratic Party can come up with?
In both American politics and cinema, entrenched interests rejecting outside-the-box greatness in favor of predictable mediocrity is a time-honored tradition. Sixty years ago, it was the nice, safe ""How Green Was My Valley"" winning Best Picture over the searing ""Citizen Kane."" Last year it was establishment Democrats preferring the safety of John Kerry to the inspiration of Howard Dean. Last Sunday it was the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences showering honors on ""Million Dollar Baby"" but flat-out ignoring brilliantly original movies like ""Garden State,"" ""Kinsey,"" ""The Life Aquatic"" and ""Napoleon Dynamite.""
What neither the Democratic leadership nor the Academy realizes is that the establishments they represent are corroding themselves every time they play it safe. Yes, Howard Dean could have been another Barry Goldwater, but remember, Goldwater's defeat led to the ascendancy of a generation of Republicans with his ideas. How many new legions of inspired young Democrats did John Kerry's campaign create?
Yes, Hollywood protected itself by awarding its own ""Million Dollar Baby"" instead of giving the Oscar to an outsider film like ""Napoleon Dynamite."" But ""Dynamite"" was a huge hit and is on its way to modern classic status, while ""Baby"" and many of this year's other Oscar nominees were box office flops. What's that going to do for the prestige and viewership ratings of the Academy Awards if the most popular and original movies are always passed over?
Cinema and politics are often industries that play by the same fundamental rule: to the establishment go the spoils. But there won't be an establishment much longer if the spoils stop coming in. As the Democratic establishment candidate, John Kerry won in the short-run, but he lost the overall election. Similarly, ""Million Dollar Baby"" won the Best Picture Oscar this year but will likely be trounced in long-run popularity due to the same sentiment that sank Kerry:
Meh.
Nick Barbash is a sophomore majoring in political science and international relations. He can be reached at opinion@dailycardinal.com. His column runs every Thursday in The Daily Cardinal.
