MaryJae
Each 'Manchurian Candidate' Is of Its Time
RECEIVED Wed., Aug. 25, 2004
Dear Editor,
Theoretically, every human emotion can be considered a subset of two primary feelings, love and fear. The Manchurian Candidate examines the latter through turbulent imagery and dialogue; however, the origin of this fear varies greatly when comparing the 1962 and 2004 films.
Needless to say, America was a very different place in 1962. Reflecting on the McCarthy era, the version starring Frank Sinatra was critical of the fear Americans were casting upon a societal movement much different from their own. Overseas, unbridled socialism had given way to communism, and domestic fears revolved around the idea that America's economic system would be compromised by similar, outside influences. TMC satirized this fear, real or imaginary, that was pervasive in conservative and traditionally capitalistic corners of American society.
Today's adaptation shows a very different world. The version starring Denzel Washington has flipped and redirected the fears of 1962. Today, unbridled capitalism has produced global corporatism, and many fear that greed could jeopardize the global economy. TMC is satirizing this fear of corporatism, real or imaginary, that is pervasive in liberal and progressively socialistic corners of American society.
And therein lies the dramatic differences between the Americas of Frank and Denzel. Primal feelings have no boundaries, especially that of political difference. One person's ideological fear is another person's love. Conservatives that feared communism in 1962 see the current criticism of corporate strength as preposterous. Conversely, liberals who viewed McCarthyism as the proverbial witch hunt of the 20th century see corporatism as the real fear of the 21st.
The historical significance of TMC is its uncanny ability to record the volatile political theories of the day. If the first film effectively translated the right-wing fears of left-wing economic theory, while forecasting the fall of communism 27 years later, then perhaps the second could follow suit.
Theoretically, every human emotion can be considered a subset of two primary feelings, love and fear. The Manchurian Candidate examines the latter through turbulent imagery and dialogue; however, the origin of this fear varies greatly when comparing the 1962 and 2004 films.
Needless to say, America was a very different place in 1962. Reflecting on the McCarthy era, the version starring Frank Sinatra was critical of the fear Americans were casting upon a societal movement much different from their own. Overseas, unbridled socialism had given way to communism, and domestic fears revolved around the idea that America's economic system would be compromised by similar, outside influences. TMC satirized this fear, real or imaginary, that was pervasive in conservative and traditionally capitalistic corners of American society.
Today's adaptation shows a very different world. The version starring Denzel Washington has flipped and redirected the fears of 1962. Today, unbridled capitalism has produced global corporatism, and many fear that greed could jeopardize the global economy. TMC is satirizing this fear of corporatism, real or imaginary, that is pervasive in liberal and progressively socialistic corners of American society.
And therein lies the dramatic differences between the Americas of Frank and Denzel. Primal feelings have no boundaries, especially that of political difference. One person's ideological fear is another person's love. Conservatives that feared communism in 1962 see the current criticism of corporate strength as preposterous. Conversely, liberals who viewed McCarthyism as the proverbial witch hunt of the 20th century see corporatism as the real fear of the 21st.
The historical significance of TMC is its uncanny ability to record the volatile political theories of the day. If the first film effectively translated the right-wing fears of left-wing economic theory, while forecasting the fall of communism 27 years later, then perhaps the second could follow suit.
Rad Tollett
