You can be sure Trump is offending 55% or more of the people in the United States with every Tweet and up to 100% of the people on earth. So, even people not pissed off with the U.S. yet will be soon. And with the majority of the People in the U.S. already pissed off with him this is just like he is twisting a knife in a wounded populace separating us more and more each day. Partisanship run completely amuck!
How many people have already died from his tweets nationwide? Worldwide? How many more will die? The tortured disabled White kid likely wishes Trump would stop it too.
Critic's Notebook: Donald Trump Takes Aim at Meryl Streep — and We All Lose
The Hollywood Reporter via Yahoo News6 hours agoWe'll never know if Hillary...secured more votes by using the slogan, "Trump: Wrong About the... Globes: Meryl Streep Talks Immigration, Takes Aim at ...Barbra Streisand Calls Donald Trump "Disgraceful" for His Attack on Meryl Streep
The Hollywood Reporter via Yahoo News2 hours agowe need more in this world is kindness and common decency, and how he reacts and how he has the need to talk back and insult anybody who doesn't agree with ...Meryl Streep's Golden Globes Speech Boosts Donations to Press Freedom Group
The Hollywood Reporter via Yahoo News4 hours agoRead more: Critic's Notebook: Donald Trump Takes Aim at Meryl Streep — And We All Lose The CPJ ...
Critic's Notebook: Donald Trump Takes Aim at Meryl Streep — and We All Lose
It hasn't even begun, but the Trump presidency has always been about erasing lines.
If
you're a fan, you obviously feel like Trump has erased the boundaries
between the people and their government and, through Twitter, the
boundaries between the leader of the free world and the voters he's
speaking to.
If
you're less of a fan, it's the boundaries between hate and respect,
between verbal terrorism and civilized discourse, between competent
professionalism and dangerous dilettante amateurism that are becoming
increasingly hard to visualize.
And
if you're a movie or TV critic, perhaps the oddest thing Donald Trump
has done is erase the boundary between what I do for a living and what
he does - which is mighty peculiar, since I've never, for a second,
thought I should be president, but Donald Trump is certain that he's
qualified to be a cultural critic.
This
isn't a new thing. Even before he ever imagined he could be president,
Trump was using Twitter to critique TV shows he hadn't seen, singers he
didn't listen to and actors and actresses whose careers he wasn't really
following. We'll never know if Hillary Clinton would have secured more
votes by using the slogan, "Trump: Wrong About the Title Black-ish,
Wrong for America," but it probably wouldn't have hurt
Read more: Golden Globes: Meryl Streep Talks Immigration, Takes Aim at Donald Trump in Passionate Speech
Since
being elected, Trump's transition to acting presidential doesn't seem
to have happened, and he also hasn't moved away from a clear yearning to
forgo the White House for an unpaid community blog on Entertainment
Weekly's website.
He
continues to malign Saturday Night Live, a show that politely enabled
him for several months, during which he was silent about a creative
decline that he seems to be suggesting happened overnight - as if "Why
Isn't Saturday Night Live as Funny as It Used to Be?" isn't the hack
critic's favorite annual column.
Trump
continues to analyze TV ratings, particularly the glories of his own
Celebrity Apprentice numbers, even though the last time he appeared at
the Television Critics Association press tour, I tried to explain to him
that not only was Celebrity Apprentice not the No. 1 show on TV, it
wasn't the No. 1 show on its night, and it wasn't even beating Mike
& Molly. Donald Trump is obsessed with TV ratings, and has always
been obsessed with TV ratings, and yet is consistently wrong in his
understanding of TV ratings.
Now
Donald Trump is attempting to encroach on the terrain of THR's film
critics and awards expert Scott Feinberg by declaring Meryl Streep to be
"overrated." Unlike his objectively incorrect analysis of TV ratings
and his objectively banal analysis of Saturday Night Live, I think
there's room for a conversation here. Streep is absolutely one of the
pre-eminent actors of her generation or any other generation, but can
even the biggest Streep fan say that she has earned all of her Oscar and
Golden Globe nominations exclusively on merit, rather than on the power
of being Meryl Streep? I'm sure some can, but if the standard of being
overrated is the ability to garner attention or praise based on
reputation alone, this is at least open to debate.
But
Donald Trump is not tweeting, "Overrated Meryl Streep! Why did she get a
Golden Globe nomination for The Manchurian Candidate? She's no Angela
Lansbury. Sad!"
No,
Donald Trump is calling Streep "overrated" without further analysis
because she was a vocal Hillary Clinton supporter and, mostly, because
Streep used her Golden Globes Cecil B. DeMille Award speech on Sunday
night to take Trump to task and not to speak on the pleasures of working
with Jonathan Demme on multiple occasions or to ask the HFPA why it
didn't like Ricki and the Flash.
If there's any line Trump has erased most completely, it's that between "bait" and "fish."
Was
Streep chiding Trump with the assumption that he would take the bait?
Sure. Donald Trump may be the biggest man in the world, but when it
comes to rhetoric, he's pathologically incapable of ever being the
bigger man - and he seems to have passed that trait along to his
supporters, or at least enabled and emboldened his supporters to follow
his lead.
What,
exactly, did Streep say last night? Well, if you listen to conservative
Twitter this morning, whatever she said was more evidence that
Hollywood liberals are out of touch with America and that Hollywood
liberals like Streep are the reason Trump was elected, which is
nonsensical on many levels. But more than being nonsensical, it doesn't
in any way address what Streep actually said. It's actively ignoring
what Streep observed at the top of her speech, when she recited
biographical details about many of the stars in the room, details meant
to argue that "Hollywood liberal" is a convenient and monolithic
designation that has nothing to do with the very diverse group of people
who are part of Hollywood. Her point was that Hollywood isn't just one
thing and that it isn't just about embodying, portraying and presenting
one point of view.
I'm
politically liberal, and Streep didn't say anything that I found
particularly liberal in any way. I've seen people talking about Streep's
speech on behalf of Hollywood socialists, but, um, none of that was in
her actual speech. She didn't advocate a redistribution of wealth, but
she also didn't warn about potential infringements on abortion rights,
humanitarian aid or anything that liberals fear might be hurt by a Trump
presidency. She urged the press to do its job - prompting thousands of
predictable "Why didn't she ask the press to do its job in investigating
Clinton?" tweets - and she called Trump a bully.
As
powerful and careful as Streep's speech was, she made it easy for those
wanting to marginalize her. What was gained from suggesting that
without artists, we'll have only football and MMA to watch? Nothing.
That's not a binary that benefited her argument or even a rudimentary
dream of national unification. I watch hundreds of movies and television
shows per year, and I also watch football for hours each Saturday and
Sunday - and although I have no interest in MMA, I like boxing, and you
wouldn't gain my sympathy by telling me that the sweet science isn't
actually science at all.
She
also chose to focus her illustration of Trump's bullying exclusively on
his alleged mockery of reporter Serge Kovaleski's disability. You can
believe that there's no other rational explanation for Trump's famous
mimicking of Kovaleski - I happen to - but Trump has addressed this one
repeatedly, which gives him easy license to be dismissive. It's only
the tiniest corner of what Trump has done, but it comes close to saying,
"The House of the Spirits is a bad movie, so Meryl Streep is a bad
actress." I think Streep probably used it as her example because she
thinks it's a piece of cruelty that is so beyond the pale that nobody
would defend it, but that hasn't been the case.
Donald
Trump loves punching down. As a billionaire and now the future
president of the United States, there's literally nowhere Trump can go
to punch up. When he takes on individual journalists, he's punching
down, but he's also punching down when he challenges sitting senators or
award-winning actors or even many media organizations. There's a reason
why no president in the modern media age has made it a practice to
insult rivals or a motley assortment of variably potent civilians. It
previously was considered to be immature or unsightly, but Trump doesn't
care, and he doesn't care that he's basically never had a moment in his
life where he's been in a position to be the underdog, where he hasn't
in some way been the hegemonic power forcing himself on others.
One
might make the argument that Trump's lone moment of speaking "truth" to
power was his trollery against President Barack Obama's citizenship -
except that the reality that he was given publicity and a forum for a
crusade for which he possessed not one iota of facts in his favor proves
that he was never at any disadvantage at all. A person without power
doesn't get the forum Trump's birtherism got, so even when he was just a
businessman, Trump was maybe the only person capable of bullying the
president of the United States.
The
only ideology Streep actually was espousing was, "Don't let a bully be a
bully," and if that's out of touch with mainstream America, we should
all be terrified of what that means. It shouldn't be ideological. But
here we are.
It
certainly doesn't matter if it's ideological to Trump because he was
able to call Streep overrated without citing any of her work, which is
the worst cultural criticism imaginable. But if Trump took Streep's
bait, the rest of the media is now taking Trump's bait, and we're
writing about this, just as we wrote about his ignorance of TV ratings
and his obsession with Saturday Night Live. And I'll leave it for folks
on Twitter to continue to chronicle Trump's number of tweets about these
frivolous matters, rather than other things that probably ought to be
more important, given his position
We've
never had a president who wanted to be a TV and movie critic before,
and we've definitely never had a president who used that desire to
distract us from his presidency before.
We don't have to let him. But here I am, taking the bait.


No comments:
Post a Comment