|
|
Posted by Gunther Gloop on 02/22/06 22:16
Temsonic wrote:
> "Gunther Gloop" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
> news:463gj1F8spoiU1@individual.net...
>> Temsonic wrote:
>
> I'm aware of your liking for Kubrick, that's why I specifically used
> him as an example :) As tastes change with time I may well have a
> conversion and get into Kubrick, but for now I have plenty of other
> things to be discovering.
>
I feel like that about Ang Lee. I couldn't/wouldn't write him off because I
can see he is technically great and has a big range and is thoughtful about
what he makes, etc. ... but so far, so ho-hum for me. ...But hopefully my
views on his movies will change.
Same with Steven Soderberg.
I recently realised I don't think I've seen any Michael Winterbottom films,
so I have 3 or 4 now on the way (all going cheap at play.com and
dvdpacific).... and no, I didn't get or wish to see 9 Songs. :)
>> I also think the relatively-recent movie HAPPINESS (only 8 years old)
>> caused a viewpoint-shift in my mind. I can't recall another (single)
>> movie that changed the way I look at movies in itself.
>> I _hated_ that film first time around. I had to force myself to sit
>> through
>> it again some months later (mainly because I was getting confusing
>> good/bad
>> memories of what I thought of it) and I _loved_ it second time
>> around. It got better with repeated viewings.
>>
>> I think the problem for me was that I was conditioned to root for the
>> protagonists -'subconsciously' I was looking for the heroes and
>> villains- because that's exactly how most stuff is made. Good
>> quality movies/ books/ pictures/ shoes on the whole can and do say
>> wildly different things to just
>> about everyone.
>
> I haven't seen that film, but I recently got a similar kind of thing
> regarding the Korean film Spring, Summer, Autumn, Winter. There's a
> point where the main protagonist does something so awful that you
> just can't 'root' for him any longer, it completely confused what my
> expectations of the film were and I finished the film thinking I
> didn't like it. I realised the problem was I'd expected the film to
> be about something different and when it didn't match what I wanted
> to project onto it I'd basically shut myself to what it was actually
> doing. I watched it again _the next day_ and loved it.
>
I'll have to check out that one. Thanks. Know of any other good Korean
titles while I'm at it?
So far I can only think of Failan and One Fine Spring Day that I've seen.
Failan is especially excellent. One of the best movies I've seen ever I
think.
The other one I was gonna switch off half way through, but was glad
afterwards I stuck it out the whole way. Nuff said about that. :)
....Watch Happiness (and Failan if you haven't) asap though.
>>> I don't think you can categorically state it's wrong for art to have
>>> a set viewpoint, but I do think that the art/artist should be open
>>> and honest about that viewpoint and not present it as the objective
>>> true and correct viewpoint.
>>
>> It might not be "wrong" but I can't think of an exception to cause
>> me to change my opinion -not to say there isn't one.
>
> I partly had Michael Moore in mind when I said I think it's ok for
> art to have a viewpoint as long as it's honest about that viewpoint.
> Michael Moore did openly say that he wanted to use Farenheit 911 as a
> campaign against Bush in 2004 election - it was total propaganda.
> True, it partially failed because it was so imbalanced, hopefully
> Moore will have learnt from that. I was also thinking about e.g.
> politically motivated/protest songs. Totally valid art forms as long
> as they're appreciated in context.
You probably have a point, but I still can't think of anything I would
consider an exception.
-Kevin.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|