Being there

Being There

Being There is, intentionally I think, designed like the main character to be hard to classify, in that any commentary towards the movie is reflective of the viewer himself. Being complimentary of the film is either recognizing the genius that is hidden there all along, or perhaps looking for things in the movie they fine personally appealing. Criticisms of course, reflex badly upon the critic, as it makes them seem small minded and unaware of the irony of the film. A critic who calls it boring or simplistic instead looks like a conservative close minded conventionalist (I wish that play on words was clever). Calling the film plotless only makes you similar to the President in the book, who simply can’t comprehend something that doesn’t fit to their narrow minded and bourgeois standards (this film making the pretension of being Avante Guard). Summarily, those who call the film condescending or unrealistic are like Mr. Rand (is that a play on Ann Rand, or the Rand diamond factory?), and thus are simply unimaginative and materialistic, too caught up in their own lives to appreciate the simplicity of the film, or you’re an undereducated plebe. Now I get the film, I see what its about. Chance is a mirror for other people’s egos, people bounce their various ideas off of him, and he also represents the ideal example of Tabula Rassa, a blank slate that absorbs ideals. However, its pretentious, it is trying to be something outside the box, but it follows all of the conventions of a conventional “spiritual” film.