it's too bad this isn't the kind of society where errors or misprints can absolutely, without question be taken as just that--an unintentional mistake on behalf of the writer or publisher.
from time to time while reading i'll come across inaccuracies that don't allow me to simply continue on and attribute the error to what could have been an honest mistake on the author's behalf.
one such instance that clearly stands out in my mind is in regards to the 2006 film
children of men. i remember going to the theatre to see it and not too long afterwards reading a review of the film in a local paper. a very critical mistake--or so i feel-- made by whoever it was that wrote the review was the assertion that the one pregnant individual in a land where infertility had dominated for years was julianne moore when in fact the pregnant character in the film is claire-hope ashitey, a british actress of ghanaian descent. and just as i was sitting here getting read to sum up why i felt this was a critical mistake made by the film critic, i came across this:
**Claire-Hope Ashitey as Kee, a character who did not appear in the book. The role of an African illegal immigrant was written into the film, based on Cuarón's opinion of the recent single-origin hypothesis of human origins and the status of dispossessed people:"The fact that this child will be the child of an African woman has to do with the fact that humanity started in Africa. We're putting the future of humanity in the hands of the dispossessed and creating a new humanity to spring out of that."
so there's that. (bold and italics added by me.)
so there's that. (bold and italics added by me.)
peace.
No comments:
Post a Comment