The Battle for Charlie’s Bones
Charles Manson is all up in the news as of late. First he died. That was newsworthy. And then there were the rumors that Quentin Tarantino wanted to do a Charlie Manson movie. Rumors? Pshaw! The film, tentatively titled 1969, is happening. It’s slated to debut on the 50th anniversary of the infamous Tate/LaBianca murders. (Actually, Sharon Tate was killed one day after the LaBiancas.) Rumors that Tarantino wants Tom Cruise for a “key role” are seemingly credible, but the ink hasn’t been scrawled onto any contracts as of yet. The same applies to Margot Robbie, whom* Tarantino supposedly wants to play Sharon Tate. (To me, Robbie will always be simultaneously Jane Porter Clayton from THE LEGEND OF TARZAN and Harley Quinn from SUICIDE SQUAD.)
*I’m an English major and a sometimes grammar nazi, but I confess that the whole “who” versus “whom” thing is a perpetual thorn in my side. I’m never certain which is correct. In this instance, Ms. Robbie is the object of the sentence, as she is the commodity wanted by Tarantino, who is the subject of the sentence. I think. And thus “whom” is correct. I think. Hell, if I don’t know, chances are most of y’all don’t, either, right? And odds are even better that none of you care. Still, I believe in full disclosure with my readers.
Oh, yeah. They’re fighting over Charlie’s mortal remains. Some five people all want a piece of him. And, if we were to phrase this as a question, WHO do they want? or WHOM do they want?, the correct answer would be “whom.” Because Charlie is the object; in this case, literally, as he is no longer legally considered a person.
Anybody else have a headache?