Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Cannes It, Film Festival Judge Sean Penn

Judges for 2008 Cannes Film Festival opening pictured from left to right, Apichatpong Weerasethakul, Rachid Bouchareb, Natalie Portman, S, Jeanne Balibar, Sean Penn, and Alexandra Maria Lara - Photo courtesy JustJared
The Cannes Film Festival is in full bloom with overachieving Pandas, starlets clad in attractive summer wear, and loud mouth extraordinaire, actor Sean Penn. There he is on the red carpet for the premiere of opening night film, Blindness, along with a distinguished panel of fellow judges, including the luminous Natalie Portman.

Too bad she and Penn hijacked what should have been a breezy promotion for the film industry, unleashing a Bush bashing, Democratic presidential nominee thrashing, roll your eyes tongue lashing on a topic best left to smoke-filled Hollywood parties. Does Penn honestly believe the current political climate will decide which film walks away with top honors?

Yes, according to an editor at the daily Telegraph who interviewed the actor at length.
Penn said it was impossible to separate film from politics, and promised that the winning film would be a reflection of the current climate.

'One way or another, when we select the Palme d'Or winner, I think we are going to feel very confident that the film-maker who made the film is very aware of the times in which he or she lives.'
This from a man who endorsed dark horse Dennis Kucinich for president. Must be their symbiotic penchant for all things wacky. Penn unleashes tirades against Brad Pitt during movie shoots and Kucinich gives first hand accounts of extraterrestrial encounters.

According to JustJared's account of the event, Penn had choice words for the Dubya administration, essentially charging the President with war crimes.

When somebody operates without a brain and without a heart they kill hundreds of thousands of people throughout the world. It is a shame that we have to bastardize the word 'politics.'
Oh puh-leeze. The only one operating without a brain is Mr. Penn. You can't go around vilifying the President for a war approved and ratified by Congress, even if the purported justification was in fact botched intelligence. Especially not when one is an ambassador of some sorts abroad. This kind of nonsense emboldens enemies, fueling battles the majority of Americans would rather put to rest.

Apparently, the left-handed jab at our elected leader wasn't enough because Penn then unleashed his vitriol on likely Democratic presidential nominee, Barack Obama.

'I don't have a candidate I'm supporting and I'm certainly interested and excited by the hope that Barack Obama is inspiring,' he said, but went on to accuse him of a 'phenomenally inhuman and unconstitutional' voting record.

'I hope that he will understand, if he is the nominee, the degree of disillusionment that will happen if he doesn't become a greater man than he will ever be,' Penn said. 'This is the most important election, certainly in my lifetime, and maybe ever.'
A greater man than HE will ever be?? Was Penn referring to himself? Because honestly, no one will ever become a greater man than that same person will ever be.

As for the candidate's voting record, there is nothing phenomenally inhuman or unconstitutional about it. In fact, it's verbatim the same voting record of Hillary Clinton, save an absence here or there, but you don't hear Penn ragging on her.

The comment itself is inane and idiotic, not to mention a mother load to throw on the shoulders of the first credible African-American candidate for president. A nomination for Barack Obama would be historic, lending an air of credibility to Penn's statement that 2008 is the most important election in his lifetime and perhaps ever.

If elected, however, Barack Obama will serve just like all other prior presidents. With the hope and desire to make this nation strong and secure and to provide a comfortable existence for all of its citizens. We're not talking about a black messiah here, just someone who wants to make his mark in American history.

Although not endorsing any particular candidate, I love how Portman weighs in with more fluffer-nutter trivializing the political process.

[F]or the first time in a while we have to chose between who we like better instead of who we hate less.
Is this supposed to be inspiring? Because from where I sit there's a lot of people who don't particularly like any of the candidates. They're casting ballots for the one they fear less. Doesn't say a whole helluva lot for our political process.

But then again, neither does this lunacy at Cannes.

[Source]



0 comments:

ss_blog_claim=b2bbf1587aa8ca90bac621e412981fcc