The Michigan Daily - Wede4, 4e. - Thursday, March 14, 1996 - 3B Despite gore, 'Braveheart' ranks as best of 1995 YkLEXANDRA TWIN Public Access While everyone in America was probably utterly thrilled to see the buff, bare butt of "Friends"' master thespian, Jennifer Aniston, on the cover of a certain national magazine last week, I was not. It's not that I'm offended by the presence of a buff, bare butt that greets me at the 7-11. Hell no. I'm as red-blooded as the next All-Ameri- .In the immortal words of 4l ikely Republican Presidential Candidate/Nominee Steve "Taxes for everyone but me and my cronies" Forbes, "A buttock is a buttock, be it male or female. Seeing it at the 7-11, be it in the flesh or on the cover of a magazine, is always faboo." It's not even the fact that "Friends" is the most insipid, condescending and hilariously unfunny television show to grace the wee screen since *ved By The Bell" (go ahead sororities and South Quad, start the letters rolling). It's not even the fact that Aniston is possibly a worse actor tban Pamela Anderson. No, the problem with Jennifer Aniston's buff, bare butt on the cover of the magazine was the fact that it reflected so precisely the nature of the article inside. Oh-so-subtly titled "The Girl Send," 29-year-old alleged reporter Rich Cohen's article glossed vaguely over Aniston's career, her extensive work on television prior to "Friends," her modest stage work, her dad's =alling her "not interesting" as a child, and then settled into what it Ivas really gearing up to talk about: T '. A. Yep, Cohen spent about half the article talking about the way her ass ked in a pair of pants, drooling Jalously as she hugged Matthew Perry, speculating shamelessly about what kind of underwear she was wearing, and most pathetically, commenting on the state of her "erect nipples asthey poked up from her T- shirt like little peaks," etc. The problem with his disgusting excuse for reporting is the realization of the source of this blatant mi- gyny. What magazine would you imagine that this article came from? Was it perhaps a feature in "Holly- wood Hussies"? Nah. Maybe a profile in "Hustler"? Nope. How about a centerfold in "Penthouse"? Hmm. Maybe "Playboy"? Respectable actors are sometimes on the cover of that. But no. It wasn't any of those publications. It was good ol' "Rolling Stone." This same reporter did a similar *sservice when he recently inter- viewed "Clueless" mega-babe Alicia Silverstone. Throughout the supposed Article on the state of her career, he was preoccupied with her lips - their texture, their size, what she ate, the way she ate it, etc. Clearly, Rich Cohen needs to get laid. But that's not really the issue. The problem is the fact that there is othing unusual about this practice. When the media reports about ,women whom they perceive as being non-sexualized in the public eye - most women who are over 35, all women who are overweight, many women of color, all women who are not heterosexual --the articles tend to balance the woman's sexuality with other qualities of her life, such s friends, ambitions, interests and er CAREER (which is the supposed reason that the magazine is writing about her at all). But when women whom the media perceive as being sexualized are featured, what they do for a living becomes secondary to their physical- ity, to how horny they make the often male reporter feel as he is talking to them. This is not the stuff of objective porting, nor is it professional. Yet, ''s accepted. It's even traditional. It's been stated a million times that women are esteemed by their beauty or lack thereof, and that men are esteemed by their status or lack thereof and that the media is just reflecting this in its portrayal of people. But here you've got these women who possess both beauty and status and they're still treated like ~whores. And here you've got anew age of ~eorters, 29-year-olds like Cohen who Irenot part of the old school boys' club of anti-female cultural news reporting and they still spend an article talking about tits instead of talent. I'm not a fan of Jennifer Aniston. "Friends" could be canceled tomor- row and I wouldn't bat an eyelash. But she arguably got herjob on that show for more than just her ass, so show a little respect. - You can reach Alix at alixt@umich.edu. By Christopher Corbett Daily Arts Writer As a welcome change of pace from the lukewarm and leftover feel of "Apollo 13," "Pocahontas" and "Clueless,""Braveheart," when itcame out last May, became perhaps the big- gest surprise (and greatest pleasure) of 1995. The film tells the story of William Wallace - when English imperials at- tack his Scottish homeland, he arrives. And lopping off an English soldier's legsjustabovethekneewithhisdouble- sided battle ax just goes to prove that he did not come to funk around. In "Braveheart," Mel Gibson takes no prisoners. We get a lot of chopped heads flying across the way, impaled bodies landing on wooden spikes, ar- rows slicing through shields and into people, garrotings, scaldings with mol- ten tar and throat-cuttings. Brutal, yes, but Gibson handles the savageness with wit, with a keen eye. We don't get blood for the hell of it; we get it because the soldiers are at war in the 13th century story - when armies fought hand-to-hand. Gibson's battle scenes wallow in the violence, giving the fights a terrifying grandeur. For the most part, the camera stays low, among the swords. The intensity of the violence peaks when we see blood splatter the camera after a ham- mer knocks a man's head apart. They are warring, and it is not pretty: The battle scenes -thanksto stellar special effects - rank among the best on film. Scenes linger in the mind: Wallace, blood smearedacross the blue war paint on his face, stands against the sky, his nostrils flaring; armed men charge from the left and right of the screen and spill into each other; majestic green moun- tains cradle Wallace as aboy; Wallace's lover Murron closes her eyes, strapped to a post in the center of the town square, helpless, surrounded by heart- less, armed English troopers. Gibson hands us quiet, understated moments here. Most of the little details in "Braveheart" feel right and suck us into the reality of the story. After a :r battle, a young man writhes among the many lifeless bodies;mortally wounded and dripping with blood, his mouth moves without a sound, in pain. Gibson - pans over the boy, and we only see him for a moment, off to one side of the frame. But the sense of loss and the absurdity of war registers and sticks with us. "Braveheart," on the whole, dodges melodrama. The film slips, however, with a ro- mantic-tragedy ending, which feels Mel Gibson directed and starred in 1995 overly sappy after the gruesome, bar- baric battles earlier. The ending doesn't come off poorly; but it does end up Wallace makes us root for him as he giving the film an uneven tone. Like- steps up and leads the sorely-needed wise, Gibson has drawn some flack for rebellion.French-born Sophie Marceau, his rather tasteless handling of the En- as Princess Isabelle, withherstatuesque, glishKing's foppish, waifishson, Prince sublime, upright presence is a crucial Edward (the King gives his son's male beauty, and we fall in love with her courtier the heave-ho - literally - when she says the best line of the year which, as filmed, often brings giggles ("The king will soon be dead and his from the audience). son is a weakling ... who do you think But Gibson's deft direction serves to will run this kingdom?"). And sinister, saturate thealready intensely clear char- subtle King Edward the Longshanks acters. His full-throated, energetic - (Patrick McGoohan) becomes so sala- the role that did it for him. Here, crazed, he massages his ass, blows chunks, and snogs a bird. Doesn't this guy have any self-respect? But of course: He's the one pulling up to the bank in the cherry red Ferrari to deposit his $20 million check for acting in this film. "The Prophecy" also arrives. AL WAYSrent a Christopher Walken flick. Yes, you can look at him and know something is amiss, peculiar, awry .. He RULES! Don't even look at the box Why bother?Justgrabit and GO! YESI DO IT! "Clockers," Spike Lee's latest di rectorial effort, spasmed at the box office. Perhaps he's running out of creative juice, because this film does not have the snap of a "Do the Right Thing," nor the luster of a "Malcolm X." Hopefully, his upcoming "Girl 6" will. "Assassins," starring Sylvester Stallone and Antonio Banderas. Hu- morous. "The Baby-Sitters Club," starring Kevin Costner's daughters. Oh, Lord. what is this? Look, if you have acam- era, some film and some actors, why de you have to make something like this There's absolutely no need. Just don't do it. "Muriel's Wedding," starring some overweight, annoying woman. If some one put a gun to my head. s "Braveheart." ciously wicked that we love to hate him. These three characters packa punch, which helpsto stack "Braveheart" up as perhaps the finest film of the year: Gibson has received several Academy Award nominations for his efforts - including Best Director and Best Film. Also new on video: "Ace Ventura 2." Jim Carrey reprises Robert Redford takes his place among cinematic icons By Bryan Lark Daily Arts Writer Once upon a time, when motion pictures were young and going to see a film was a major happening, Holly- wood was populated and ruled by cinematic icons. Greta Garbo. Clark Gable. Joan Crawford. Bette Davis. Cary Grant. Katherine Hepburn. These stars were more than just renowned entertainers. They were at- tractive, talented gods and goddesses, worshipped for their diverse on-screen personas and glamorous public ap- pearances, while their private lives, for the most part, remained private. The level of stardom icons of film history shared owed much to that shroud of mystery provided by audi- ences. People saw their beloved stars' performances exclusively in movie houses, not stars' scandals incessantly on "Hard Copy," "Extra" and "Inside Edition." However, that was the past. In today's society of inquiring minds, screen icons are hard to find and even more difficult to worship. To live and endure as an icon takes much emo- tional stamina, self-confidence and evasion of fame and tabloid photog- raphers. One candidate who meets the criteria is Robert Redford. Frequently labeled as press-shy, Robert Redford has lived in the pub- lic eye for nearly four decades, per- forming in that coolly intense, boy- ishly handsome way that has become his unique style. Supporting numerous environmen- tal and social charities, Redford has used his talent and sex-symbol status to gain awareness for worthy causes, not to gain lucrative movie deals and underwear campaigns. Despite gaining recognition from several films in the '60s, Redford first became a household name by starring alongside fellow screen icon and salad connoisseur Paul Newman in "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid." Though teaming again with Newman in the Oscar-winning "The Sting" proved one of his greatest suc- cesses, Redford enjoyed much criti- cal acclaim and many box-office hits as a singular presence in the '70s. A prestigious list that includes "All the President's Men," "Jeremiah Johnson," "The Candidate" and "The Electric Horseman," Redford's films during this decade justified his mete- oric rise to fame. Leaving his outstanding perfor- mances in the aforementioned films aside, the Redford image, the strong- willed yet romantic hero, was most greatly impacted by his three roles in "The Great Gatsby," "The Way We Were" and "Three Days of the Con- dor." The immense impact of these roles is partially due to the female com- pany he kept and had such amazing chemistry with - Mia Farrow, Bar- bara Streisand and Faye Dunaway, respectively. If any doubters of Redford's star power or talent remained at the end of the '70s, they were quickly proved wrong by his directorial debut, the stunning "Ordinary People." This film gave Redford his only Academy Award to date, bestowed upon him much respect from the film industry, and enabled him to start the Sundance Film Institute in 1981. The institute and subsequent film festival showcases independent films and filmmakers that normally would not gain recognition. Following "Ordinary People," the remaining nine years of the '80s were just as financially and creatively ful- filling. "The Natural" and "Out Of Africa" proved that audiences still loved Rob- ert Redford as the leading man in sentimental romances. Riding the wave of romance, Redford stumbled a bit by assuming that audiences wanted to see him be romantic with Daryl Hannah and Debra Winger, a decision that made "Legal Eagles" extinct. If "Legal Eagles" was a slight stumble, then the miserable "Havana" was a slip-and- fall accident. In true Redford style, he rapidly regained his footing as a star in 1992. Beginning with the techno-thriller "Sneakers" and continuing with the breathtakingly beautiful "A River Runs Through It," in which he di- rected the heir apparent to his tal- ented, quirky pretty-boy style, Brad Pitt, the present decade renewed Redford's position in Hollywood. Next, for some unknown reason, Redford chose to star with Demi Moore and Woody Harrelson in "In- decent Proposal," a film that made millions of dollars and was repeat- edly called "controversial" and "hot- button" - everything but "a good movie." 1994 allowed Redford to make a marvelous account of the loss of America's innocence with "Quiz Show." Redford's most recent screen tri- umph, the narratively shallow but sty- listically gorgeous newsroom drama "Up Close and Personal," openedu the top spot in theaters. If nothing else, this film was a les- son in screen chemistry (betweer Redford and quasi-icon Michelk Pfeiffer), and made blatantly clea that Americans will pay to see Rober Redford make love, liver spots an( all. Yes, he is aging and makes som< mistakes, but being an icon of cinem; and historical figure of popular cul- ture, Robert Redford can do no wrong Regardless ofwhetherhis next filr wins 18 Oscars or he chooses to direc Pee-Wee Herman'snext venture, Rob ert Redford is a cool, reclusive starec old, who has definitely earned hi place alongside Gable, Garbo an Grant. ANTI-INFLAMMATORY MEDICATION RESEARCH STUDY: If you are a healthy, 18-50 year old male, and your weight is between 110 and 220 pounds, you may qualify for a medication research study. You must not have a history of: You must not: " Ulcers " Take daily prescription medications " Allergies to Aspirin or Ibuprofen Payment for completing this study is $2,422.00. For more information, please call Ann or Barb at (313) 996-7051, Mon. - Fri., 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Warner-Lambert/Parke-Davis, Community Research Clinic, 2800 Plymouth Rd., Ann Arbor, MI 48105. AMERICA'S MOST WANTED! r " CHOOSE FROM THESE AND MANY .OTHER RAP TITLES ON SALE a. W NT e :WA NT E D: {# ~ ~DR. DRE IECB The hronic The Predator For: For: .. 11.99 CD 1.99 D Ceasselle 7.99 \. .._! C tW 15Ir asseffe 7.99. WANTETD: EAZY Ei"" EAY E9 U LYNCH HUNG Eay ItSeasonOf For:a Do Sicness 11.99 (CD(Thi Resnareinl Cassette 7.99 For: Passele 17.99 OPEN LATE EVERYDAY TO SERVE YOU! SALE ENDS 3119196 Oooh, Robert Redford! He is so dreamy, I wish he'd "Indecently propose" to me. Upto 70% Off! Replacement Contact Lenses-Ali Major Brands! Designer Frames, Glasses, & Sunglasses! "No Club to Join! -No Coupons to Clip! "Express 24-72 hour Delivery! Factory Fresh Sealed Boxes-Vials! Student Optical Services Co. Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105 Call 1-313-996-1925 Mon.-Fri. 9 A.M. - 6 P.M. Pleasehaveyourreriptinreadw.you cull as wll s yur octr's ame& lleponenumber. ANN ARBOR South University Galleria 1214 South University Avenue, Upstairs (313) 741-9600 1000s & 1000s OF BOOKS * BESTSELLERS 30% OFF! 1000s OF MAGAZINES a TONS OF BLANK TAPE & ACCESSORIES 1 HOUR VALIDATED PARKING - s - "