Skip to content

“Talking Cure,” A.K.A. “Soft P0rn,” A.K.A. “A Dangerous Method”

June 22, 2011

I have always disliked Keira Knightley’s acting since I first saw her in Love Actually. To me she conflates acting with sticking her chin out as forward as it can go while periodically smiling and/or wincing. Not to mention the character she portrays in Love Actually is extremely annoying, –a young beautiful white woman freshly married to a black man enjoying the attentions of the black man’s white best friend instead of telling him immediately to take a hike.

Then when Pride and Prejudice (2005) came around curiosity got the better of me and I watched that horror. Jane Austen should be rolling over in her grave at the thought of Keira Knightley thrusting out her playacting as Elizabeth Bennet. Throughout the entire movie, I was never convinced that Knightley’s Elizabeth Bennett had any prejudice whatsoever toward Mr. Darcy. Instead, she came off as a pouty brat who is pissed that he does not instantly find her engaging at the town dance.

Yet, she did the Duchess and I gave her a pass, and when I saw the PSA that she did about domestic violence I convinced myself that I mustn’t allow my prejudice toward her pullulating horrid acting form a fixed opinion. It’s hard though, dreadfully hard. Must they put her in everything? Could they at least keep her out of the period dramas and maintain her meretricious performances to romantic comedies intended for Cosmopolitan subscribers?

In my Downton Abbey post, I mentioned how Hollywood (a generic term for almost everyone making contemporary films) is determined to revise history. There seems to be something particularly sinister about revising history in film. Thus, we have Keira Knightley mucking up the Edwardian era with present day BD$M sensibilities in A Dangerous Method.

Also, why would Knightly agree to do a BD$M-type movie, after she did a PSA about domestic violence. Did the PSA make her come off too much as an unfun fun-feminist?

No doubt Knightley will be given an Oscar nod. Nothing like a woman portraying a woman who wants to be beaten and fucked at the same time.

Here is the trailer, if you can bother.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZ7JKmcLTsI

14 Comments
  1. la redactora permalink
    June 22, 2011 2:00 pm

    “To me she conflates acting with sticking her chin out as forward as it can go”
    LOL! Sometimes her acting bothers me, but sometimes it doesn’t. I actually liked her in Pride and Prejudice.

    The answer to the PSA issue is that domestic violence isn’t bad if she wants it! DUH!

    With history, I am not sure it is revision in this case–at least not from the male point of view. Not when you consider that de Sade was even earlier than that. And I have read that Victorian “pornography” was quite twisted.

    Also, David Cronenberg is a sick, sick, man. I’m legally obligated to say that whenever he comes up.

    “Nothing like a woman portraying a woman who wants to be beaten and fucked at the same time.” And probably with a bad Russian accent, to boot.

  2. Mary Sunshine permalink
    June 23, 2011 5:12 pm

    … trundles off to look up the word “pullulating’.

    • June 23, 2011 9:33 pm

      Perhaps I used it wrong, but I must use words that I run across somehow or I will forget them. i preferred an –ly adverb form similar to its cousin, teemingly. But, I couldn’t verify if pullulate could be conjugated into adverb form or not. I keep a journal-like book that I write down words that I come across that I don’t immediately know. Of course, this happens more often in books written before the Great War. People say language is fluid, yet, I have found that language has become limited. As in, fewer words are being used in contemporary writing.

      Now I find myself coming across some same words and writing them down again and again. So recently I asked myself why is it that I come across the same word, find it written in my journal but cannot recall its meaning. I concluded that the meaning could only sink in if I use it. Naturally, I have my critics who leave nasty comments saying they don’t have a clue what I am talking about (yet they continue to read and leave comments) and criticize my language. However, I have long since decided if one cannot point me to the exact grammar rule and explain explicitly, as in a way to make me understand how and why I am using something wrong, then one can just shut the fuck up.

      {On a tangent now} I notice as the middle class continues to shrink (more like the working class if people were honest about what truly constitutes placement in a particular class. Let some people tell it and they were all from upper middle class. A farce indeed. I had no ideal our “upper middle class” was so huge in this country), voices from lower classes are further silenced. And there is no technique more efficient than silencing a lower class voice than to shame that poor humble soul for their lack of grammar. Although, as I already said, those doing the shaming cannot seem to point the offender to the rule and articulate the infraction explicitly.

      {Aside} over this summer while school has been out, my daughter and I have been studying two SAT words a day.

      None of this has anything to do with your comment Mary. Although, I must ask, don’t you just love looking up words? I do. I just wish I would remember them more readily.

  3. la redactora permalink
    June 23, 2011 11:09 pm

    Most of the people who say they are upper middle class are millionaires (with perhaps a single million, but still) who feel poor because of inflation and billionaires. Therefore, they get to pretend like they are not rich.

    And yes, all the protesting I hear is about “the death of the middle class” “the shrinking of middle class” blah blah blah–god forbid someone give a damn about working class or poor people, who were already screwed long before the current Depression.

    “People say language is fluid, yet, I have found that language has become limited. As in, fewer words are being used in contemporary writing.”
    Yes, in workshop, I had people who would circle my “large” words and simply write “huh?” Well sweetie, I would think, why don’t you “huh?” yourself right on over to dictionary.com.

    • June 23, 2011 11:24 pm

      The word does not necessarily have to be large, just more exact. Why not use a word with an undeniable connotation instead of relying on the reader/hearing to know the connotation.

      Such as: Really. Really-Really. I mean really. It was really.

      It seems the more literate we (as a society) are the more illiterate we become.

      By the way, there must be a lot of millionaires posting on the internet. If only I had a nickel for each time I read how someone came from an “upper middle class” family. I just do not believe there are that many millionaire families in this country.

  4. la redactora permalink
    June 23, 2011 11:36 pm

    Well by “large” I meant words that were difficult for them to understand. That is why I put it scare quotes. Something like “avid” would elicit their “huh?”s.

    “It seems the more literate we (as a society) are the more illiterate we become.”
    Yes, though aren’t actually illiteracy rates still quite high? Or did I dream that up?

    “If only I had a nickel for each time I read how someone came from an “upper middle class” family.”
    Lol, it seems they are bluffing in the opposite way I was thinking. I guess it is all about the prestige daaahling.

    • June 23, 2011 11:50 pm

      Read some of the comments on pseudo-liberal sites especially after the collective are supposedly enlightened by a post that exposes their privilege. It will most always read like this, “As someone who grew up in an upper middle class home, I was never aware of my privilege………..” I want to scream, shut up, just shut the fuck up! Because I am sensing something in their remark that is not said. There is bragging for sure, and also an unvoiced request for forgiveness, but not really. There is something fake about it. But the deceit is not to be fake but something else that I haven’t quite put my finger on. Maybe they believe they were really upper middle class, they don’t know actually who/what is upper middle class, they know and they are willfully lying, they have prejudices about the upper middle class and use those prejudices as a scapegoat……..I don’t know. I just know there cannot be that many upper middle class families producing adult children posting on pseudo-liberal sites thanking people for opening their eyes.

  5. Mary Sunshine permalink
    June 24, 2011 12:34 am

    Kitty, I *adore* looking up words. 🙂 I used to crouch beside the heat vent when I was a child and read the dictionary; it was happy times! Like you, I no longer remember meanings unless I use the word. But our minds are devilishly overcrowded these days with all the digital rubbish. Grammar: I *loved* grammar in public school. Parsing sentences and analysing usage was thrilling to me. It was my precursor to mathematical thought.

    As far as I can tell, you used the term “pullulating” correctly. Also, right now it is “pullulating” down rain. Or as the Aussies say, pissing.

  6. la redactora permalink
    November 16, 2011 8:35 pm

    Here’s a word for your journal, TFKG. Rumbustious! Never thought I would be thanking the London Review of Books for something, but there you have it.

    http://www.thefreedictionary.com/rumbustious

  7. la redactora permalink
    November 17, 2011 7:11 am

    Haha, it might be my new favorite word. Rambunctious just doesn’t do the phenomena justice.

  8. la redactora permalink
    November 17, 2011 10:36 am

    Black, should I be concerned? Or was it just time for a change?

  9. la redactora permalink
    November 17, 2011 11:36 am

    Oh, dear, it must have been something hinky on my end. But it seemed like you had changed your blog background to black. Now everything is normal and white, but that was very odd.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: