The Jeffrey Wells Thread
- HJackson
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 7:27 pm
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
The relationships between conservatism, liberalism (and libertarianism today), and socialism are complex and I certainly don't think any of them boil down to a simple antonym.
Adam Smith, Edmund Burke, Friedrich Hayek, and Michael Oakeshott are all prominent figures in the history of ideas who can easily be described as both liberal and conservative coherently (Hayek's account of evolutionary liberalism in The Constitution of Liberty is instructive). Even Carl Schmitt - who was a prime, and supportive, theorist of dictatorship in Weimar and an active Nazi in the early years of the Third Reich - has been quite successfully described as an authoritarian liberal by one scholar, despite his most celebrated works acting as active critiques of a particular form of liberalism that make him strangely popular today among the hard left (again, the liberal/socialist distinction the American usage drops).
History of course wrestles around with these terms and in America "conservative" - which in the British tradition you could initially pin to an anti-rationalistic attack on a number of episodes of the Enlightenment - came to be associated with a hyper-rationalistic, metaphysical attempt to describe natural law and then bring society and an interpretation of the Constitution into line with it. "Liberalism" I think underwent changes in late 19th and early 20th century when the idea of positive liberty took hold beyond the confines of political philosophy and public welfare became a major issue. Britain's Liberal party were part of that, but the existence of a Labour party kept the distinction between modern liberalism and socialism more relevant in our vocublary.
In all cases these labels are pretty useless once you dig down into the ideas they attempt to describe.
Adam Smith, Edmund Burke, Friedrich Hayek, and Michael Oakeshott are all prominent figures in the history of ideas who can easily be described as both liberal and conservative coherently (Hayek's account of evolutionary liberalism in The Constitution of Liberty is instructive). Even Carl Schmitt - who was a prime, and supportive, theorist of dictatorship in Weimar and an active Nazi in the early years of the Third Reich - has been quite successfully described as an authoritarian liberal by one scholar, despite his most celebrated works acting as active critiques of a particular form of liberalism that make him strangely popular today among the hard left (again, the liberal/socialist distinction the American usage drops).
History of course wrestles around with these terms and in America "conservative" - which in the British tradition you could initially pin to an anti-rationalistic attack on a number of episodes of the Enlightenment - came to be associated with a hyper-rationalistic, metaphysical attempt to describe natural law and then bring society and an interpretation of the Constitution into line with it. "Liberalism" I think underwent changes in late 19th and early 20th century when the idea of positive liberty took hold beyond the confines of political philosophy and public welfare became a major issue. Britain's Liberal party were part of that, but the existence of a Labour party kept the distinction between modern liberalism and socialism more relevant in our vocublary.
In all cases these labels are pretty useless once you dig down into the ideas they attempt to describe.
- Big Ben
- Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
- Location: Great Falls, Montana
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
The first part if true as perceived by people on the far right (Fox News is famous for doing this.) and has been going on for as long as I've been interested in politics (which would have begun a year or two before Obama took office.). A conservative here may very well see little difference between "Insert Liberal Filmmaker Here" and someone like Ken Loach.MichaelB wrote: I also get the sense from American usage that there's not much distinction drawn between "liberal" and "socialist", which is pretty baffling to my European ears - where I come from, liberalism has very little in common with socialism, being both more tolerant socially and a fair bit more right-wing economically.
As for Clint Eastwood, he's always struck me more as a libertarian than a conservative in the traditional sense.
Libertarianism here is often associated more with conservative thought, at least where I come from. The complete and uncompromising view that personal liberty (gun ownership, taxation is theft etc) is paramount to everything else. So when people talk about Eastwood he is considered right wing at least by conservative nomenclature in the United States. Eastwood is a good example to compare to say Death Wish because he starred in the highly successful Dirty Harry series. A series of films where a man very liberally (Ha) uses his gun to smite anyone deemed a threat. This loose cannon use of firearms is almost always a conservative issue politically as well.
- MichaelB
- Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
- Location: Worthing
- Contact:
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
I wasn't actually thinking about guns (I'm not American, so this is rarely at the forefront of my mind) so much as social attitudes. For instance, I wasn't the least bit surprised to find out that Eastwood is a supporter of gay marriage, which is emphatically not a standard conservative position - although it's certainly one that you'd expect a libertarian to hold.Big Ben wrote:Libertarianism here is often associated more with conservative thought, at least where I come from. The complete and uncompromising view that personal liberty (gun ownership, taxation is theft etc) is paramount to everything else. So when people talk about Eastwood he is considered right wing at least by conservative nomenclature in the United States. Eastwood is a good example to compare to say Death Wish because he starred in the highly successful Dirty Harry series. A series of films where a man very liberally (Ha) uses his gun to smite anyone deemed a threat. This loose cannon use of firearms is almost always a conservative issue politically as well.
- matrixschmatrix
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
I think, in an American context at least, the line between libertarianism and conservativism is often pretty thin, because the more prominent libertarians- the Pauls pere et fils for example- almost never make a stand on things like gay marriage, where they're theoretically further to the left than the conservatives. That may be due simply to the habit here amongst the right of policing their leftward borders far more strongly.
- Big Ben
- Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
- Location: Great Falls, Montana
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
He's currently getting roasted by Film Twitter. I'll let you all decide how you all feel about it but it's gotten so bad they're dragging up his Vanessa Shaw stuff.
- colinr0380
- Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
- Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK
-
- Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 12:49 pm
- Brian C
- I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
- Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
- Location: Chicago, IL
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
I dunno, that sounds suspiciously like Wells trolling his own trolls.
- willoneill
- Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:10 am
- Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Kirkinson
- Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 5:34 am
- Location: Portland, OR
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
Would've been around the time Smith turned the fictional "Movie Poop Shoot" from Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back into a real movie news site (basically turning a parody of Ain't It Cool News into a replica of it). It's long defunct now, but I looked up a random page on archive.org and there he is, same damn picture and everything.
- Brian C
- I hate to be That Pedantic Guy but...
- Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:58 am
- Location: Chicago, IL
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
Man, I remember that. It’s crazy that was 15 years ago? Back in those days he was still doing actual bi-weekly columns instead of a blog, and personally I thought he was much more worth reading than he is now. The lack of editing and the discipline that goes with that has not been kind to him.
- DarkImbecile
- Ask me about my visible cat breasts
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:24 pm
- Location: Albuquerque, NM
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
I'll second this, though the mention of Movie Poop Shoot made me realize I've been reading this guy for so long that Smith's site was the third place I read Wells' work online, after Mr. Showbiz and Reel.com, the former of which I started reading in high school 20 years ago. On the one hand, it can be hard to continue to justify wading past the poor-man's-Armond-White provocation posts when there are far fewer substantive reviews and articles than he used to churn out way back then, but I still check his site regularly for two reasons: A) pure habit and B) while the reasons he uses to dismiss or actively hate good films are often uniquely infuriating and wrong-headed - as detailed in this thread - when he latches onto a film he loves and fights to the death for it, I still more often than not end up agreeing with him (Call Me By Your Name being the example from this year that he's been riding for since Sundance 2017). There's plenty of coal to dig through for the increasingly rare diamond that he highlights from a festival or advocates for in award season, but they're not non-existent.Brian C wrote:Man, I remember that. It’s crazy that was 15 years ago? Back in those days he was still doing actual bi-weekly columns instead of a blog, and personally I thought he was much more worth reading than he is now. The lack of editing and the discipline that goes with that has not been kind to him.
As an odd illustration of the fact that I've read Wells for almost two-thirds of my life, I sat down to the premiere of Darkest Hour at Telluride last year and - though for some reason I've never listened to his awards podcasts with whatever co-host he hasn't alienated at the moment, or his interviews with filmmakers, so I don't know his speaking voice at all - I heard the man seated directly behind me talking to the woman next to him and almost instantly knew it was Wells from his tone, syntax, and attitude. I turned around and said hello, noting that I'd been reading his writing for almost two decades, and he seemed a little surprised to be recognized. I'm not sure what it says about me that I'm far less confident I could do the same with A.O. Scott or Anthony Lane.
- DarkImbecile
- Ask me about my visible cat breasts
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:24 pm
- Location: Albuquerque, NM
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
The latest Cannes edition of Wells' semi-regular explorations of the limits of social awkwardness is worth a read both because it's funny and because it's more unclear than usual whether he's posting this self-deprecatingly: "Attractive" Isn't the Idea
- mfunk9786
- Under Chris' Protection
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
- Location: Philadelphia, PA
- Big Ben
- Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
- Location: Great Falls, Montana
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
- swo17
- Bloodthirsty Butcher
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
- Location: SLC, UT
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
Later in that thread:
Jeffrey Wells wrote:Incorrect -- 45 minutes in. Show started at 10:15 am, I was out the door at 11 am.
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
Update on Incredibles2Gate
- Dead or Deader
- Joined: Sun May 08, 2016 12:47 am
- willoneill
- Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:10 am
- Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- mfunk9786
- Under Chris' Protection
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
- Location: Philadelphia, PA
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
I sort of feel bad for him. I can't believe I'm saying this.willoneill wrote: ↑Thu Dec 06, 2018 4:11 pmThe Sundance Film Festival (in its infinite wisdom) has denied Wells press credentials for 2019.
- senseabove
- Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:07 am
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
"I seriously doubt that they’ve told other critics of my calibre and experience that there’s no more room at the inn." (his emphasis)
Seems a shame to not just go straight to crucifixion if you're gonna compare yourself to Jesus...
Seems a shame to not just go straight to crucifixion if you're gonna compare yourself to Jesus...
- mfunk9786
- Under Chris' Protection
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
- Location: Philadelphia, PA
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
Well, Mary. He hasn't gotten to Jesus yet until the Three Wise Publicists gift him with passes to the latest squishy Nick Offerman vehicle in January
- willoneill
- Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:10 am
- Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
The issue is that Sundance's reason isn't public. If it's because he's been critical of them, then it's a little censorshippy; if it's because he's an ass who's made very crass critical comments about female actresses (let alone the whole Vinessa Shaw thing), then I actually applaud them on their stand.
Last edited by willoneill on Thu Dec 06, 2018 4:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- mfunk9786
- Under Chris' Protection
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
- Location: Philadelphia, PA
Re: The Jeffrey Wells Thread
I just can't imagine wanting to go to Sundance. Cannes, Venice, Toronto - sure, but Sundance seems behind the times these days in terms of exhibiting films that people want to see