Just because a film shows something, does not mean it endorses it.

This might sound like it's obvious, but I've seen so many people forget about this when evaluating a film.In some cases it's glaringly obvious, especially in satire, or parodies. Starship troopers being a more nuanced example of thisIn other cases it isn't even attempting to serve any ideology, or to make any great point.Sometimes it's just a film about an interesting thing.I made this mistake when watching phantom thread. I continually made the judgement that what was shown was somehow a representation of the director's thoughts on relationships, when the film in fact gives very few clues as to what PTA thinks on the matter.It's just a film about a weird relationship that by the end the characters believe they have found a "healthy" balance in terms of power.The line is very easy to blur, and there is rarely a way to know what intentions were unless explicitly stated, but it's an important thing to factor in.One that I'm torn on is "the darjeeling limited".Is wes Anderson insensitive? On one hand the India depicted in the film is very stereotypical, and exaggerated.On the other, the main characters are clearly outlined to be the selfish and stupid ones, and although stereotypical, the Indians aren't placed in too bad a light.Do I know the answer? No. Only wes Anderson does.Is there anything here that Is damning enough to come to a consensus? I don't think so. 9 via /r/movies https://ift.tt/3g2IZkG