Cracker: Wallywood
735 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 30 Newer→ Last
-
Sure I watched District 9 and thought "That was one seriously fucked-up system"
See - even you're over-analysing. Are you suggesting District 9 wasn't just about aliens? :)
While I'm not the brightest crayon in the box, I think I have a few brain cells to rub together, but I am spectacularly bad at picking up on themes, hidden or otherwise in books/movies. I read Animal Farm and thought it was a sad story about some animals...
On the other hand, I think you can draw lines that aren't necessarily there. When I came out of Hurt Locker the other night, my mate said to me "so the main guy represented America right, and how it's addicted to conflict?" I looked at him strangely... or is this me being dense again?
-
*pointy-headed* zero-gravity trapeze artist on ecstasy
tee shirt
-
I think I have a few brain cells to rub together
though probably fewer after last night, you jammy bugger
-
Geoff will perhaps confirm this - we come to formal education as already very sophisticated readers of films and the such; that was certainly my experience tutoring first year film students.
Well, yes and no. Many are well versed through prior learning (to use the jargon) but some also have very limited or very naive experiences of film, or media generally. I find this especially so with my Chinese students, partly because of language problems and their limited access to film (the Chinese Govt only permits the importation of 20-25 English (aka American) features per year (setting aside the blackmarket here, of course) Currently trying to get these students to recognise the distinctions between mainstream/global cinema, and world cinema!
There are many students who come to first year courses as sophisticated readers of film and there is an extra pleasure in incorporating their knowledge into teaching--a characteristic of much media teaching, in fact.I think I have done enough for this week--off to catch a screening of Alice in Wonderland (work and pleasure combined!).
-
your reactions to movies are SUBJECTIVE
Well, that's your opinion...Touché.
-
If I wanted to analyse movies, I'd go and study film and media at university. I watch fictional movies for the same reason I read fictional books: to be entertained.
So, how is that a zero-sum game? And sorry for being all pointy-headed here, but saying "ooh, shiny! Shit go boom-ba, kewl" is an aesthetic judgement arrived at after a certain degree of analysis. Just as I can adore Gone With The Wind and it's film adaptation, and still find the notion that women enjoy being raped, or that human slavery is anything other than a degrading obscenity, utterly risible.
While I'm not the brightest crayon in the box
No, you're a very special coloured pencil. :)
-
You can enjoy or be entertained by films without bringing any kind of analysis to them whatsover. Example:
How old were you when you first saw Star Wars (A New Hope, if you must)?
And how old were you when you figured out that George Lucas was trying to make a statement about Vietnam?
I'm sure there are millions of people who have watched Avatar without thinking of Vietnam, Iraq, the conquest of the New World, Gaia theory and so on.
-
And how old were you when you figured out that George Lucas was trying to make a statement about Vietnam?
Analysing doesn't mean looking for or finding hidden statements or complex allegories. You don't need to read Heart of Darkness into Apocalypse Now to enjoy the film critically.
My (no smarter than your average bear) eight year old analyses films all the time, you only need to talk to him about something he's just seen to figure it out. He looks for meaning and for narrative structure, and I'd argue it's really, really hard not to do that.
-
How old were you when you first saw Star Wars (A New Hope, if you must)?
And how old were you when you figured out that George Lucas was trying to make a statement about Vietnam?
1) Five.
2) Never. I'm still not willing to concede that George Lucas is politically or intellectually sophisticated enough to have a point of view on Vietnam or anything else.
3) I was sixteen when I saw Kakushi toride no san akunin (aka 'The Hidden Fortress') and started wondering whether Akira Kurosawa had ever received a royalty cheque from Lucas.
-
So Ben, now we're talking about how you wouldn't discuss something you've never seen and have no intention of seeing? Well, I should hope not.
You're talking it up anyway. I'm happy you enjoyed it, and I'm not going to torture myself with it. Or anyone else.
So, how is that a zero-sum game? And sorry for being all pointy-headed here, but saying "ooh, shiny! Shit go boom-ba, kewl" is an aesthetic judgement arrived at after a certain degree of analysis.
It can also be arrived at without that analysis. In much the way I see a girl and think "wow, she's hot". I don't have to go "hmmm, well her breasts are smallish, but she is rather small so it's in proportion, her face lacks classical proportion, but makes up for it with striking eyes, her legs could be a little on the chubby side, one can't tell with that skirt, will have to look into it more first. Can't really tell about her skin, she's wearing foundation, and does that look a bit like a push-up bra?". You can do it that way. I notice that people who tend to do that are extremely critical about appearance and seem to find no woman I like hot at all, because it turns out that their fundamental framework, however carefully rationalized, is just totally different.
-
My (no smarter than your average bear) eight year old analyses films all the time, you only need to talk to him about something he's just seen to figure it out. He looks for meaning and for narrative structure, and I'd argue it's really, really hard not to do that.
I'd probably need some examples before I agreed that what your eight-year-old does is what I would call analysis. But for me, and this is just subjective, a statement about or review of Star Wars -- to use that example again -- that doesn't talk about the era the film was made in, its sci-fi antecedents and influences, Lucas' contemporaries, his body of work etc, wouldn't qualify as an analysis.
In the case of Avatar, those hypothetical millions who were not thinking about Gaia, Iraq, Native Americans, etc surely had views on whether the story seemed corny or was exciting, whether the effects looked realistic, whether they liked the characters or didn't -- but I wouldn't call that an analysis. I'm not saying that's what your son does.
-
But for me, and this is just subjective, a statement about or review of Star Wars -- to use that example again -- that doesn't talk about the era the film was made in, its sci-fi antecedents and influences, Lucas' contemporaries, his body of work etc, wouldn't qualify as an analysis.
That's one type of analysis, but it ought to be possible to evaluate Star Wars without talking about intertextuality or THX 1138. And anyway yes, my son often refers to other cartoons he's seen to make sense of and rate one he's just seen.
-
I'm still not willing to concede that George Lucas is politically or intellectually sophisticated enough to have a point of view on Vietnam or anything else.
You know that Lucas was pegged to direct Apocalypse Now at one point? Makes that 'Nam analogy thing with Star Wars a little more plausible. But I'm not 100 per cent sure I buy it either.
-
You're talking it up anyway.
I mentioned it in *passing*, as an example of a film I like a lot for which one would have to 'suspend one's disbelief', 'just enjoy it', etcetera, in order to note that I am not, in general, someone with a bug up my ass about film realism or believability. I don't understand what you're not getting about this point.
I'll leave the 'I'd hit that' metaphor for someone else to unpack, if you don't mind. :)
-
Personally, I did actually feel entertained, because I was immersed in the feeling of horror and disgust, and the elation of survival I was supposed to feel.
I actually enjoyed Gladiator. [Runs and hides]
Look, I went into Avatar expecting, nay determined, to love the damn thing, if only because Craig, amongst others, hated it ;-)
Can't I be a *pointy-headed* zero-gravity trapeze artist on ecstasy? :)
Bingo.
Perhaps my astigmatism prevented me from getting the full effect of the 3D wonderfulness, but after a while it got a bit headachy. As for walking out, I could have, but I'd have to have woken up first...
-
And how old were you when you figured out that George Lucas was trying to make a statement about Vietnam?
Eh? 38, and not buying it.
Everyone knows Star Wars is all about Chaos Theory, anyway.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Star-Wars-vs-Chaos-Theory-Spaced
-
How old were you when you first saw Star Wars (A New Hope, if you must)?
Too young to remember how old I was.
And how old were you when you figured out that George Lucas was trying to make a statement about Vietnam?
38 years, 158 days, 12 hours, and 17 seconds. At 2:46 on March 12, 2010 the revelation hit me like a thunderclap. I feel the world shifting beneath me even now... My God! How blind I've been.
-
And how old were you when you figured out that George Lucas was trying to make a statement about Vietnam?
@philipmatthews - phew I'm glad you say you don't buy it either... I was worried that the colour of this particular crayon was getting duller by the second...
-
I actually enjoyed Gladiator.
Me, too. and for the opposite reason that Ben outlines.
And at that point, the crowd was not cheering, because what he had just finished doing was actually not entertaining - he had killed everyone the way a soldier would, fast and efficiently, and with some measure of empathy, no torturing the last helpless victim, asking the crowd if they should be spared, etc.
If I said I found that amusing and entertaining, would that make me a bad person?
-
Everyone knows Star Wars is all about Chaos Theory, anyway.
I'm not capable of that level of analysis, with or without Jaffas in my pocket, so I'm going with I just didn't like it.
If I said I found that amusing and entertaining, would that make me a bad person?
I do recall a little giggle around that point. Mind you, having met the man in his former life, all his movies make me giggle at some point.
-
I don't understand what you're not getting about this point.
And I don't understand why you think I'm not getting it. So you can suspend disbelief, and you didn't like Avatar, but did like a singing dancing movie from 1952. And yet at the same time, people who say that enjoying Avatar comes down to suspending disbelief are somehow insisting that you do the same. It's a straw man. They're insisting that they did, and they are not defective because of it . They are certainly not people who generally enjoy the irrational, stupid, offensive, and manipulative (as Gio put it), any more than everyone who watches any fiction at all is .
-
They're insisting that they did, and they are not defective because of it .
[Redacted]
Ahh, enough already!Has anyone done 'WOODY WELL' yet?
-
but did like a singing dancing movie from 1952
Which, unlike Avatar, happens to be a masterpiece.
They are certainly not people who generally enjoy the irrational, stupid, offensive, and manipulative (as Gio put it)
I most certainly never said that. What I did say is that I'd like to be allowed to think that Avatar is all of those things (well, except I never said it was irrational) without somebody telling me there's something wrong with me.
-
I thought this whole thing got sorted out with the "all our opinions are subjective" line... No-one's forcing anyone to like Avatar, although it doesn't hurt to say what we respectively did or didn't like about it, does it?
-
A short comment apropos recordari's astigmatism remark: I now have one eye with perfect distance vision and the other with very limited sight (cataract.) 3D doesnt work for me, and couldnt have altered my perception of "Avatar."
Post your response…
This topic is closed.