Posts by 3410
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Anything that needs to lay claims (to authenticity) has already lost them.
Hmmm...
-
Any requirement for authenticity is necessarily false.
In Art, or generally?
-
I wonder how many people have seen David Simon's Generation Kill?
I started last night (2 eps.), and then woke up to this. For me, the true horror is that the American people just don't want to know.
-
Unsurprisingly, ONe News completely ignores the day's biggest story.
Plenty about Tiger Woods though.
-
Peter Sellers & John Cleese (at the art gallery):
-
Is it possible for this to be a genuine, reasonable, yet catastrophic mistake?
Hardly; this is S.O.P. The real tragedy -- apart from the obvious -- is that so many people won't realise that this happens all the time in Iraq and Afghanistan.
-
That's the one!
-
I'm sure they do realise [that SST is not an organisation; it's just him!]
I can find the post, but Editing The Herald once featured some correspondence between a Herald journalist and a reader asking why McVicar gets so much airtime. Her response was basically that anyone is free to start an organisation.
-
I just wish the journos would realise that SST is not an organisation; it's just him!
-
He shot new film, with his own actors etc., but it's really every film he's ever loved, spliced together. As I said, there's little substance to any of it, he's just toying with the history of cinema.
... which, as an idea, makes as much sense as putting all of my favourite foods in a blender and expecting the result to be a great meal instead of a grotesque inedible mess.
So, he uses his film to take the ultimate revenge that everyone really wants to take on the Nazis, by having a beautiful jewess kill them all in an inferno. And she does it by exploiting the combustibility of film -- by setting hundreds of reels of old film on fire. More than a medium, film becomes a weapon.
Okay, but only literally so. To me, the power of film (film as a weapon, if you like) is in its ability to change how people see the world. I suppose you could say he's confronting our ghoulish fantasies, but to me it just looks like he's indulging his own. So, we want our guys to punish the bad guys. At heart, how is that different from the average Duke-Wayne-M16s-the-Japs opus?
he's just toying with the history of cinema.
To what end, I keep asking myself? I guess it's "fun" for some; I just find it pointless. I'd definitely spend a lot of time at Quentin's Drive-In, if such a thing existed, but his films? Supremely annoying, in a way I can't yet quite articulate.