Lena Dunham

Discussion and info on people in film, ranging from directors to actors to cinematographers to writers.
Locked
Message
Author
Zot!
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: Lena Dunham

#576 Post by Zot! » Thu Jun 27, 2013 3:22 pm

Matt wrote:I'm not saying she's Orson Welles, but I'm beginning to understand the Schadenfreude of the industry concerning him when Ambersons flopped.
Has she suffered some career set-back? I'm pretty sure the inverse of this is true, and it's her success despite lacking in any considerable talents where the majority of animosity derives from. Some meatheads on the internet concerned about her appearance is only going to feed her rote miserablist act.

User avatar
Gregory
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm

Re: Lena Dunham

#577 Post by Gregory » Thu Jun 27, 2013 3:28 pm

I think it's because she's a celebrity, and in particular a female celebrity and one who doesn't fit the prevailing view of what is sexy (if she did she'd get a different type of abusive comments). Celebrities now exist in a culture where countless people see it as their place to anonymously make scathing personal comments every moment someone is in the limelight, especially about women's appearances. It comes not just from men but women as well. And especially if a woman is obese or even just overweight, people who are getting paid to write their pieces will attack ruthlessly (see the instances directed at Melissa McCarthy for example). A lot of it comes from a place of envy: "This person isn't so great! Why do they have fame and money while I have to work a shit job?" Lack of "talent" of course being a pretty subjective observation, and not a very interesting one.

Also, people who comment on things like Tiny Furniture's inclusion in the Criterion Collection tend to be a predominantly male enclave, and things can get pretty ugly within those when comments are unmoderated. For example, several women have begun openly talking about misogyny in the gaming community, and here's a small, unedited sample of YouTube comments aimed at a critic/blogger as she was getting ready to do a series on female archetypes in video games. Just appalling.

There's also the very common inability to distinguish an actor from the character they're playing/writing, especially if it's a semi-autobiographical character. An extension of that with Girls was the assumption that Dunham was proudly endorsing all of Hanna's character flaws and inability to cope. many who couldn't relate to the character got angry and called "first world problems" (as if HBO would have done a comedy-drama series about seriously poor or oppressed people and the viewers criticizing Girls would have welcomed it).

User avatar
Black Hat
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:34 pm
Location: NYC

Re: Lena Dunham

#578 Post by Black Hat » Thu Jun 27, 2013 3:31 pm

Who are Dunham's parents and how have they hooked her up? I find this a tough thing to quantify because say what you want about her but one thing that's clear to me is that she's hit a nerve with the public. I think there's something to be said for that.

As a native New Yorker the last time I remember this happening was the backlash The Strokes got which was grossly unfair given how fresh, good and authentically New York their first record was.

User avatar
Matt
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Lena Dunham

#579 Post by Matt » Thu Jun 27, 2013 3:31 pm

Zot! wrote:
Matt wrote:I'm not saying she's Orson Welles, but I'm beginning to understand the Schadenfreude of the industry concerning him when Ambersons flopped.
Has she suffered some career set-back? I'm pretty sure the inverse of this is true, and it's her success despite lacking in any considerable talents where the majority of animosity derives from. Some meatheads on the internet concerned about her appearance is only going to feed her rote miserablist act.
Clearly many people do think she's prodigiously talented. Her success doesn't exist in a vacuum, and she has been nominated for and won several awards voted on by her peers (DGA, Emmys, Gracie).

She hasn't had a setback yet, but when she does you can expect no small amount of glee from her "haters."

User avatar
Matt
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: Lena Dunham

#580 Post by Matt » Thu Jun 27, 2013 3:37 pm

Black Hat wrote:Who are Dunham's parents and how have they hooked her up?
Her parents are visual artists Laurie Simmons and Carroll Dunham. Theories and rumors abound that they used their connections and wealth to make their daughter's career happen (though I can't imagine what kind of cachet people think two modestly accomplished visual artists have at HBO.)

User avatar
jindianajonz
Jindiana Jonz Abrams
Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2011 8:11 pm

Re: Lena Dunham

#581 Post by jindianajonz » Thu Jun 27, 2013 3:51 pm

Didn't Dunham have some comment where she was very dismissive about the history of film? Something like "No good films were made before 1990" or something like that? That's the only thing I've seen that would justify resentment for her.

I found Tiny Furniture to be pretty underwhelming. It had a few good moments (cum omelette) but overall it was rather boring and didn't have too much to say. But using "you made a film that doesn't deserve to be in the Criterion Collection" as grounds to attack somebody is ridiculous.

EDIT: I don't want to accidentally spread misinformation, so I will say that so far the closest anyone has found to her dismissing old films is in an interview where she states
I'm a total movie geek, but I can't get into movies like Nicholas Ray's. I'll go with my friends and they'll say, "Bigger Than Life—that was incredible." And I was so distracted the entire time by watching James Mason act in that fashion.
Last edited by jindianajonz on Thu Jun 27, 2013 4:45 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Lena Dunham

#582 Post by knives » Thu Jun 27, 2013 3:53 pm

Her shallow attack of Nick Ray started things off on this site at least.

User avatar
swo17
Bloodthirsty Butcher
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: Lena Dunham

#583 Post by swo17 » Thu Jun 27, 2013 3:57 pm

Black Hat wrote:one thing that's clear to me is that she's hit a nerve with the public. I think there's something to be said for that.
Why is there something to be said for that? When you play Operation and clumsily elicit a buzz from the game board, do you also say "Well, there's something to be said for that"? What about in an actual operation, if the doctor strikes the wrong nerve and paralyzes you for life. Is there something to be said for that as well?

onedimension
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 4:35 pm

Re: Lena Dunham

#584 Post by onedimension » Thu Jun 27, 2013 4:19 pm

My resentment of Lena Dunham was purely class-based- not necessarily fair or justified, and based on a mis-appraisal of her work based on her first film.. But a lot of the hate now does seem to be about her gender and her refusal to conform to gender norms about how young women who don't fit the approved mold for attractiveness are supposed to act, talk/not talk about sex, etc.

User avatar
Gregory
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm

Re: Lena Dunham

#585 Post by Gregory » Thu Jun 27, 2013 4:33 pm

knives wrote:Her shallow attack of Nick Ray started things off on this site at least.
It wasn't an "attack of Nick Ray," it was an offhand comment that she can't get into his films, Bigger than Life specifically, which she found unengaging due to Mason's stylized performance. This is actually an extremely common (probably even the majority) response to films of that age and ilk, but of course a real filmmaker would never admit such things publicly. Or at least that idea of "acceptable opinion" seemed to be the basis for Glenn Kenny going into a complete tizzy, attacking her personally, and impling that her film, which he hadn't seen, was probably just terrible.

Wow, it feels like 2012 again.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Lena Dunham

#586 Post by knives » Thu Jun 27, 2013 4:38 pm

Well it is ridiculous for someone to be completely ignorant and pig headed about an art form they work in. Would you trust a lawyer who disregarded Roman law completely out of hand?

User avatar
Gregory
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm

Re: Lena Dunham

#587 Post by Gregory » Thu Jun 27, 2013 4:46 pm

It's not ignorance, it's a preference, a personal perception of a film. Not everyone has to like Bigger than Life, or melodramas in general. Lots of present-day viewers, even those who are very knowledgeable, have a hard time swallowing older Hollywood melodramas, even those that I think are huge achievements. Don't we have wide disagreement over personal taste in films all the time here? What's the difference, except possibly her willingness to say things in an interview that reveal that she's not some learned critic or intellectual but are at least honest.
Last edited by Gregory on Thu Jun 27, 2013 4:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

onedimension
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 4:35 pm

Re: Lena Dunham

#588 Post by onedimension » Thu Jun 27, 2013 4:48 pm

Well it's not a given that an artist has to be educated about the entire history of their form.. It's possible to have an original and lively vision without undue deference to The Greats. And plenty of filmmakers have idiosyncratic tastes or biases..

Zot!
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: Lena Dunham

#589 Post by Zot! » Thu Jun 27, 2013 5:15 pm

I don't expect Cheech & Chong to know about other filmmakers. However, miss Dunham posits herself as a legitimate artist.

User avatar
Gregory
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm

Re: Lena Dunham

#590 Post by Gregory » Thu Jun 27, 2013 5:20 pm

Yeah, and all "legitimate artists"* agree.

And lets not sell Cheech's knowledge short. Ever seen him clean up on Celebrity Jeopardy?

*Not in fact Dunham's description of herself to the best of my knowledge.

onedimension
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 4:35 pm

Re: Lena Dunham

#591 Post by onedimension » Thu Jun 27, 2013 5:51 pm

It's actually an interesting question, because it doesn't seem to me a priori true that a 'legitimate artist' has to know and appreciate the history of his/her form. And anyone with a strong enough sensibility may have canonical artists they just can't stand..

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Lena Dunham

#592 Post by Mr Sausage » Thu Jun 27, 2013 5:59 pm

This reminds me of that one interview where Bergman slagged off a bunch of classic films, including saying of Au Hasard Balthasar: "Who wants to watch a donkey? Donkeys are boring."

You can have pig ignorant opinions about the arts and still make great art yourself. Anyone who thinks otherwise is deeply mistaken. The creative act works independently of the critical one.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Lena Dunham

#593 Post by knives » Thu Jun 27, 2013 6:02 pm

See, that's an appropriate way to knock me down though I've always gotten a feeling that Bergman always viewed film as a secondary art.

Zot!
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:09 am

Re: Lena Dunham

#594 Post by Zot! » Thu Jun 27, 2013 6:02 pm

Okay, I'll put it as simply as I can, she sounds like a child when she talks shop, and her movies reflect this immaturity. The difference is that Bergman is brilliant and accomplished and watched tons of movies, and can slag off anyone he likes.

User avatar
Gregory
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm

Re: Lena Dunham

#595 Post by Gregory » Thu Jun 27, 2013 6:11 pm

What is a "pig ignorant opinion"? "Ignorance" is usually understood as having to do with what is true in the world, while "opinion" is the realm of what's true in one's own mind, according to one's own tastes, perceptions, priorities, and emotional engagement with an experience like watching James Mason act like he's out of his skull on cortisone. If we think it's unbelievable that someone found Bigger than Life hard to take, well, that's just another opinion. Opinions can certainly be based on ignorance of something, but I don't see how a subjective opinion of a film can be dismissed as "ignorant."
Last edited by Gregory on Thu Jun 27, 2013 6:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Lena Dunham

#596 Post by Mr Sausage » Thu Jun 27, 2013 6:15 pm

Zot! wrote:The difference is that Bergman is brilliant and accomplished and watched tons of movies, and can slag off anyone he likes.
Sorry, no. Your claim was an all or nothing gambit: either "legitimate artists" have good all-round critical opinions of their own art-form or they don't. You can't excuse or explain away the counter-evidence just to save yourself the hard work of revising your opinion.

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Re: Lena Dunham

#597 Post by Michael Kerpan » Thu Jun 27, 2013 7:58 pm

If I were to judge Bergman by his criticism rather than by his films, I'd consider him pretty foolish.

Some great artists, on the other hand, have excellent taste (and are pretty decent human beings, to boot) -- Brahms, for instance. Would-be sycophants who thought they could curry favor with Brahms by trashing Richard Wagner's music typically got a tongue lashing (despite Brahms dislike of Wagner the man -- and the fact that he had a very different musical vision).

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Lena Dunham

#598 Post by domino harvey » Thu Jun 27, 2013 8:30 pm

If you like Dunham and disagree with her comments, it's a difference of opinion. If you dislike Dunham and agree with her comments, it's a plus in her column. If you dislike Dunham and dislike her comments, it's fuel for the fire. At the end of the day, I reserve right to look askance at anyone, educated or not, great artist or not, who willingly offers opinions of that manner, which I take to be highly ignorant. It is not because I hate women or Dunham or her parents or whoever does her audits. I think she's young and has the vocal arrogance of a frosh. I'm sure I sounded more like her than I did Andrew Sarris when I was eighteen. Only problem is neither of us is eighteen, which makes this kind of swagger hard to take-- and I'm barely older than her, so please spare me from claims of agism. Defending Dunham against attacks is its own Internet Olympic sport these days, so have at it, but don't be so sure you know the nefarious motivations behind her detractors
Last edited by domino harvey on Thu Jun 27, 2013 8:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
FerdinandGriffon
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 11:16 am

Re: Lena Dunham

#599 Post by FerdinandGriffon » Thu Jun 27, 2013 8:35 pm

Amen.

User avatar
Gregory
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:07 pm

Re: Lena Dunham

#600 Post by Gregory » Thu Jun 27, 2013 9:07 pm

Her comments on the Criterion Top 10 seem a lot less like "swagger" to me than humorous writing, which is taken too seriously around here sometimes. (I remember a similar thing when Flying Lotus offered some flippant and humorous comments in his top 10.) I guess funny doesn't always come across well, especially in an email newsletter. And I've seen flippant comments, silliness, and wild hyperbole on this forum from those who then chide others for saying things that are "immature." Then theres the whole context, especially apparent today, of opinions about films being seen as wrong, ignorant, unacceptable for a Serious Artiste, and the merits of some directors' work being declared not "up for discussion." Sometimes we need a comedian to poke holes in this pomposity, even if they make themselves look a little silly in the process.
Someone a page back suggested that she would have been better off just sounding "kind of reverent." That sounds incredibly boring to me. I'd rather have her try to be funny and personal and let the chips fall where they may. That's what she does. One wouldn't know it from this forum, but I think the newsletter is meant to be something that's fun to read.
I've seen a lot more cheap, ugly attacks (which I comment on above, obviously not trying to describe all who disagree with her) than defenses, so I'd say attacking Dunham is the "Internet Olympic sport" and any defenses that come along are mainly calling out bullshit where people see it. But whatever, it's not like it's an actual conversation or any of it really matters.

Locked