Commentary 19 Jul 2008 08:40 am
Politicks a-plenty
- I’m surprised and a bit pleased that my little piece on the New Yorker cover got such attention. I can’t imagine what slings and arrows the magazine had to face, but I hope it was disastrous for them. They’re the leader in published cartoons, as far as I’m concerned. If the cover of last week’s issue created such problems, I think it probably needed another draft before they published it. We should have understood the perspective of the artist.
The little gem to the right is a reworked piece by Tom Hachtman on the subject. (Though I messed it up a bit with some color – it was too white posted here.)
- Joel Stein in the LATimes had a funny piece about how to tell jokes about Obama. There are a couple of good ones in the article (an a couple of
bad ones.)
- I have to applaud Judith Warner‘s opinion piece in yesterday’s NYTimes. It discusses in length John McCain’s attitude toward women, yet
it doesn’t bring up the many crude remarks, snide jokes, and rude actions that have been attributed to McCain. Check here if you’re interested. This seems to be information that hasn’t gone past the blogs to make it to television, yet Judith Warner has successfully avoided this part of McCain’s actions in her article. __ David Remnick with Barack Obama
Warner simply uses his voting record to back up
the worst. (Note that I admit to having no compunctions about referring to McCain’s crude jokes – past or current.)
I look forward to Frank Rich’s Op-Ed piece tomorrow to see if he broaches the subject. However, I suspect he’ll be writing about the trip to Afghanistan/Iraq etc. It seems to be today’s hot subject.
- Am I the only one who’s had it with Lou Dobbs’ obsession with illegal immigrants. This guy has had a daily hour long show on CNN, and he deals with nothing else but immigration. I live in a city of immigrants – legal and illegal – yet I can’t see that it’s that great a problem. Maybe it is in Lou Dobbsworld. Also, aren’t his teeth a bit TOO white. I think they’d shine in the dark.
- I also have to say that the new Jib Jab cartoon is the first one I’ve liked. Usually, they’re a bit too milquetoast for my taste. A cartoon without a POV is just pointless. In this one they do a bit more than just “jab” everyone. It’s funny. I assume NBC must give them a good part of the budget. They always premiere on the Leno show then receive endless repeats on MSNBC the next day.
Space Chimps had the misfortune of opening against The Dark Knight and Mamma Mia!. Though I like looking at review of animated films, I kinda missed this one. I didn’t know it was opening. Mark Mayerson‘s article clued me in.
- The NY Times, the one glowing review, said: “Space Chimps is hilarious. . . If “Wall-E†pushes the boundaries of what can be done in an animated movie, “Space Chimps†proves that the old formula is still pretty effective when executed well.
The NY Daily News said “Nothing to go ape for.” One star.
Newsday/AP said: “‘Space Chimps” sucks a whole lot of talented people into a wormhole of lousy.” One star.
The NY Post said: “No Ape-peal!” ½ star
Fox, the distributor, obviously was prepared to just dump it on the market. Barry Sonnenfeld is one of the producers; I’m surprised he didn’t have more clout – or didn’t use it.
on 21 Jul 2008 at 11:15 am 1.Richard O'Connor said …
Hi Michael,
Just saw your piece on The New Yorker cover. I feel pretty much the same way. At dinner with a New Yorker artist on Friday he described it, aptly, as “half-baked”.
It’s not a bad idea, but the execution is all off.
Part of that has to do with venue as well. The New Yorker cover is not seen as a place for political satire, the satire needs to be established in order to work. This is especially so since The New Yorker is a mainstream magazine which is here trying to address a fringe topic.
If it were Mother Jones, In These Times, or The Progressive it might be a 3/4 baked cover.
In comparing Blitt’s cover to some of Spiegelman’s “controversial” covers, Art comes out looking good. And I say this as great fan of Barry’s work and frequent critic of the Spiegelman covers. The Hasid kissing the black woman was an obvious parody of the Life Magazine kissing sailor, the cop shooting the ducks at the amusement was clever and well executed (and on target), even the crucified bunny was a cute enough idea -hey, Easter and tax day are both April 15!- that was lost in execution.
I should also add, that you missed something in your Emmy nomination round up -we were nominated in the News and Documentary category for “Outstanding Individual Achievement in Art Direction and Design” for a PBS show called “Curious” that contained about 75 graphics/animation shots.
on 21 Jul 2008 at 12:03 pm 2.Michael said …
Congrats, Richard, on the EMMY nomination. Hopefully, you’ll win. As a matter of fact, I missed a couple of categories. It took me a full half hour to read the nomination list. For the most part, it was a waste of time, but I try to stay informed.
I couldn’t agree more with what you wrote about the cover. I’m not always the biggest Spiegelman fan, but his covers were succinct and distinguished an on-the-mark. Even if you one didn’t get the reference to other material, they were funny. The “black” 9/11 was one of the all time great New Yorker covers.
Barry Blitt’s cover was more like one his Frank Rich illustrations. You needed the accompanying article to tell you what it was about. (As a matter of fact, he had a great McCain illustration in the Times yesterday.)