Films/DVD Asylum

Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

Must a film be "entertaining?" If it does, in the true sense of the word,

Posted by tinear on February 21, 2012 at 08:43:49:
then much of the art world's output in this medium is a failure. But the scope must be wider: must all music be so? Painting? Certainly, Expressionism is not fun to look at: much of it is horrendous, upsetting. And what of architecture? The haunting Holocaust Museum by David Liebeskind, in Germany, is that non-artistic because of its jarring, jagged, upsetting form?
To those that restrict their film viewing to escapist or "fun" vehicles, I'd argue they're missing the greatest this medium has to offer. It is work to "get it", certainly, just as much of 20/21st century music is difficult to appreciate without concerted effort.