I went into this showing, at the CineMark Multiplex, a matinee (11 am actually), with a fresh mind, meaning I'd avoided doing a lotta homework pre movie.
However, since yesterday, when I saw it -- Dr D joined me, and drove me home (via WinCo); I came by Tri-Met -- I've been more immersed in the after-buzz. That helps me keep it brief; I think others are doing a good job.
As I was telling DAF in our meeting: I'm not super-focused on individual psychology as a topic, preferring the anthropologist hat wherein group dynamics are the thing, entire societies, subcultures, at least villages, which could be companies, which could be family-run. Here "the village" is Silicon Forest (far from "global"). These were characters of that mileu.
Meaning I don't wanna hafta try to get into Mrs. Thernos's head. I thought Nathan did a fine job with his own examination (of himself too).
Nor do I think Nathan at all oblivious to the wavelength I'm on: that of analyzing (or do we say deconstructing?) the subculture of VCs and circus barkers, startups, smoke and mirrors, California gold. What's hollow is at that level, no need to make it all be about the Holmes character, smartly groomed for her role.
When I say "groomed" I don't mean anything gross. Think of race horses, which are elegant. She plays herself. It's the world that swirls around her that provides a wave for her to surf. Techie capitalism ala Silicon Valley is a made-for-TV celeb world. I tend to distance myself from that matrix, as a Silicon Forester (Cascadia-based).
I go with the analysis that what we're really looking at are cult religions, staffed by dreaming zealots more than by any purely cynical money-making schemers (these categories overlap). They drank their own kool-aid. The cons need the true-believer pawns.
Put another way: deluding others is one thing; being outright delusional is another.
Maybe it's because I'm catching up on Deleuze-Guattari that I'm thinking capitalism must be schizophrenic.
