 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
208.148.209.85
Why is this? They seem to have a real knack for slapping at convention by any and all means: comedy, drama, or thriller. They are not afraid of criticism and hammer out politcal statements regularly. Bless'em. Too bad HW is more concerned with PC and profit margins.
Follow Ups:
[Worth thinking about...]
"Will audiences follow him, cheering the implicit detonation of America's institutions? Or will they find it all a bit...jejune? Coming out of V for Vendetta, a friend of mine called it ''radical'' and ''subversive.'' He was awestruck with disbelief that a film with a harlequin terrorist as its hero could actually be released by a major American studio. I was awestruck at his naïveté in a world where fight-the-power anarchy is now marketed as a fashionable identity statement — by the corporations that helped raise a generation on bands like Rage Against the Machine, by the armchair-leftist bloggers who flog the same righteousness day after day. V for Vendetta has a playful-demon vitality, but it's designed to let political adolescents of every age congratulate themselves. It's rage against the machine by the machine."
;^)
c
(nt)
Were you an appreciator of fine music, you would find over on Music Lane that we are always posting opinion that is not our own, for the benefit of everyone. If in music we feel enlarged by others' writing, why is it forbidden here, by you?clark
> > > "Were you an appreciator of fine music..." < < <Now who is putting words into who's mouth? FYI, I do appreciate fine music, and with a few noteable exceptions (an intense dislike of country & blue grass styles) have a wide and varied pallet. I occasionally share my informed opinions of non-rock related music on the Hi-Rez boards where Living Stereo and Jazz SACD releases are often discussed. Of course, all of the observations I make regarding music are first hand, informed impressions.
> > > "...you would find over on Music Lane that we are always posting opinion that is not our own, for the benefit of everyone." < < <
Music and film are hors'doeuvres of different colors since the shelf life of music is a good deal longer than the narrow window provided a currently running film. Selected reviews can impact a film's box-office, given the added credibility of a poster's personal validation of the reviewer's comments, so it's very important that those shared opinions be informed opinions.
As you should know by now, I'm not opposed to the sharing of reviews of others as long those opinions accurately reflect the FIRST-HAND opinions of the poster. Without that caveat, there is a strong liklihood that the reader will be mislead into avoiding a film thinking that the cut'n pasted critic's opinion is a first-hand testimonial. You're an intelligent guy; you should know this by now.
> > > "If in music we feel enlarged by others' writing, why is it forbidden here, by you?" < < <
'Forbidden?'
You give me more credit and power than I'd ever presume much less desire; as you're such a clever wordsmith, I'd suggest that you hammer out a few more before your testy mettle cools. ;^)
AuPh
"FYI, I do appreciate fine music, and with a few noteable exceptions (an intense dislike of country & blue grass styles). I have a wide and varied pallet."Hmm... Pallet: "A narrow hard bed or straw-filled mattress." So yours is wide? And filled with, what?
"I occasionally share my informed opinions of non-rock related music on the Hi-Rez boards where Living Stereo and Jazz SACD releases are often discussed."
I'll have to check that out. By the way, who has so informed you?
"Of course, all of the observations I make regarding music are first hand, informed impressions."
Of course they are! Nothing but. Although... how does being informed (and again, by whom?) comport with "first hand"?
> > > "...you would find over on Music Lane that we are always posting opinion that is not our own, for the benefit of everyone." < < <
"Music and film are hors'doeuvres of different colors since the shelf life of music is a good deal longer than the narrow window provided a currently running film."
Who you sayin' I can't compare red to orange?
Anyway a film these days has a longer expected life in the marketplace than most new music.
"Selected reviews can impact a film's box-office, given the added credibility of a poster's personal validation of the reviewer's comments, so it's very important that those shared opinions be informed opinions."
That word again... Please, please indentify the source of all this inform ation you have.
"As you should know by now, I'm not opposed to the sharing of reviews of others as long those opinions accurately reflect the FIRST-HAND opinions of the poster."
Now THAT is such bull.
"Without that caveat, there is a strong liklihood that the reader will be mislead into avoiding a film thinking that the cut'n pasted critic's opinion is a first-hand testimonial."
Quelle horreur!
Guess you figure most people can't read right, huh?
"You're an intelligent guy; you should know this by now."
Enough with the patronizing already.
> > > "If in music we feel enlarged by others' writing, why is it forbidden here, by you?" < < <
'Forbidden?'
[See above.]
"You give me more credit and power than I'd ever presume much less desire; as you're such a clever wordsmith, I'd suggest that you hammer out a few more before your testy mettle cools. ;^)"
OK, you're doing your damdest to forbid it. Unsuccessfully so far, I'll give you that.
clark
"AuPh"
Speaking of palettes, here's one artistic envisioning of Clark Johnsen's Inner Sanctum; it can't be beat for convenience, ...but damn!!!In regard to "Fine music" we both know exactly what that means and even if our definitions differ my response gave no indication of it. OTOH, based on your own skewed reasoning you could be refering to the cacaphony of the Three Stooges for all I know.
Note: I'm leaving off the usual smilies on this post even at risk of being accused of animal cruelty when Clark's Inner-weasel goes POP! The reason I've done this is out of respect for Master Johnsen as a wordsmith; after all, he fork-lifted my poorly constructed pallet all the way back to grammar school and he is due some reward.
> > > "I'll have to check that out. By the way, who has so informed you?" < < <
My method: I read a consensus of testimonials & reviewer's evaluations, listen to samples of music with which, more often than not, I'm already familiar, and select my purchases accordingly. So, my posted recommendations are informed by my own music collection and based upon my own personal experience; how about your's?
> > > "Who you sayin' I can't compare red to orange?" < < <
I never said you CAN'T compare whatever you like, just that you SHOULDN'T, especially by proxy. It's one thing to be color blind, another to rely on a blindman's review to tell you what's red, when it might actually be blue; BTW, forget about orange, because your colour 'palette' lends itself more to the tertiary (gray area; shady) when folk's are looking for more accuracy from a personally evaluated primary.
> > > "Anyway a film these days has a longer expected life in the marketplace than most new music." < < <
Baloney! when a film shown in your local mall cineplex can move from a 500-1000 seat capacity auditorium to the janitor's store room on it's way out the Exit and to the Dollar House in as little as one or two weeks, that's a bogus assertion. Music rarely gets a magazine review until weeks after it's release and album sales fluctuate dependent upon a variety of factors which include touring, air-play, reviews, etc., at least with new contemporary music across the board (jazz, rock, etc.). Classical releases, or fine music if you will, has an even longer shelf life and rarely depends on airplay for sales, but reviews in the high-end press are certainly important.
> > > ["it's very important that those shared opinions be informed opinions"] - "That word again... Please, please indentify the source of all this information you have." < < <
My opinions are INFORMED, ergo first-hand impressions of whatever I review or comment on, as opposed to the lazy, hero-worshipping of other's deftless prose. If I excise a comment from or post a link to someone else's review, it will only be to corroborate my own clearly stated personal evaluation. If there has EVER been an exception to this, and I don't recall there ever having been one, I would go out of my way to make sure that everyone would know that I'd yet to see the film in question and could not verify the accuracy of the reviewer's impressions.
Do I make mistakes? Sure, and some may not be pallet-able, but they are MY mistakes and no one else's!
> > > "["As you should know by now, I'm not opposed to the sharing of reviews of others as long those opinions accurately reflect the FIRST-HAND opinions of the poster."] - "Now THAT is such bull." < < <
Do you require proof? Here's a post from December of last year where I addressed this very subject:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In Reply to: The question was: "What MOVIES with CGI effects [have you] seen this winter?" posted by clarkjohnsen on December 28, 2005 at 12:47:23:
What do I have to do, hand you a friggin' Aztek calendar and request that you check the stars alignments against Peter Jackson's sacrificed entrails before being granted a direct, unnuanced response?
My ONLY point in all of these discussions is that you've relied (ONCE AGAIN) on a second hand review (Duncan Shepherd) to diss a film that you apparently haven't seen (King Kong). If you've seen the film, then why not just say so without all the evasive crap? Since you make every effort to not go on record, it looks to me like you see nothing wrong with linking critical opinions for public consumption when you yourself are uninformed, and there's the rub.
Analogy time: It's like a certain politician telling the American people that there were WMDs in Iraq in order to get support for a war. He lacked personal knowledge and relied on a critic of Saddam's government just like you lack personal knowledge about a movie and have chosen to link the opinion of a critic you favor even though you have no basis to criticize the film yourself.
Now if you have seen Kong, just say "yes, I've seen this film" and post YOUR own opinions. Then link whichever critical reviews you choose that are in agreement with your POV and open the topic for discussion. That's easy enough isn't it? To do anything else is deceitful, IMHO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > "["Without that caveat, there is a strong liklihood that the reader will be mislead into avoiding a film thinking that the cut'n pasted critic's opinion is a first-hand testimonial."] - "Quelle horreur!" < < <
You might have a point there, if by QUELLE HORREUR you're refering to one of Victor or patrick's grey poupon slathered French pastries!
> > > "Guess you figure most people can't read right, huh?" < < <
Reading isn't a problem, it's learning to read weaseleze that wastes a lot of time!
> > > "["You're an intelligent guy; you should know this by now."] - "Enough with the patronizing already." < < <
Well, nobody's perfect; I could've been wrong on both counts.
> > > "['Forbidden?'] - "See above." < < <
See what? I forbade nothing, but sadly, my admonishments seem to have fallen on deaf ears and corrospondingly blind eyes! This one is all on you; you've managed to hoist yourself on your own petard, but we both know that it isn't the first time.
FYI, in spite of our differing views, I still respect your writing talent and wish you all the best.
Cheers,
AuPh
..you/he's just painted a picture of a world without hope where 'the machine' sucks in and transforms everything into it's own image.
Oh well...
Yes, the picture is bleak, but not hopeless. The success of the individual through force of numbers and a strong desire for liberty overcome their fear. Without support of the masses and a manipulated media, an overbearing dictator, his corrupt aristocratic machine and christian-nazi enforcers can't spin their way out.The only unanswered question is whether society would crumble from within following the collapse of this regime or rebuild on a new stronger foundation, but while this remains ambiguous the implication is that the good within society will rise to the surface. The destruction of the symbols of a corrupted government had the feeling of London's version of the Boston Tea Party, a bloodless celebration complete with fireworks. This is what one should take away from the film; apparently this is an element Owen Glieberman completely missed.
Cheers,
AuPh
...I was just hitting at the critic and CJ because, if, as they seem to imply, the film is just a 'product' of the machine whilst it's message seems to be the opposite, then that leaves the world a bleak place.
I think it was just a 'hip' critic ploy (critics are like that)but I'll see the film first before committing myself and am looking forward to it.
I saw little in the way of "hip" rhetorical sophistication; it came across more like humbug in a smug-ular vein (to paraphrase Mad's old slogan), if you know what I mean.> > > "...if, as they seem to imply, the film is just a 'product' of the machine whilst it's message seems to be the opposite, then that leaves the world a bleak place." < < <
Well, CJ & OG may not be aware of this, but the world is already bleak place; if you doubt it, just turn on the news. As cautionary films and literature go, Moore's story & Wachowski's screenplay is no bleaker than Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 or the cautionary allegories in George Orwell's Animal Farm and 1984.
I'm not sure where all of this Hollywood "machine" rhetroric is coming from, unless there's a ghost in it that Japanese animators haven't recovered or a Son of Deus ex machina from Mel Gibson lurking about. ;^)
The movie industry can be faulted for being too predictable (trendy) at times in the effort to mirror popular themes and/or target certain demographics. In that regard, I guess Hollywood is manipulative and machine-like, but I'm of the opinion that film producers are fully aware that they can guarantee sizeable profits from movies which go against the grain through the publicity that controversial themes generate.
For instance, The Passion was controversial AND manipulative, but through ingenious marketing, this film and it's producers were the beneficiary of LOADS of free publicity; it made a killing at the box-office.
Narnia, another example of manipulation, was a poorly made, logic challenged, Disney-ized flick based on the popular work of C.S. Lewis. It also generated a lot of free (word of mouth) publicity as a christian-friendly, "safe" fantasy film for god-fearing parents to take their Harry Potter crazed kids to see.
V for Vendetta's bleak tale is politically rather than spiritually manipulative; it's allegorical subtext is timeless, but feels so blatantly contemporary that some will undoubtably find it's cautionary premise offensive. However, this film is no more reflective of the Hollywood "machine" that produced it than Mel Gibson's Aramaic bloodletting or Narnia's mythological characters bowing to the "sons & daughters of Eve."
> > > "I think it was just a 'hip' critic ploy (critics are like that)but I'll see the film first before committing myself and am looking forward to it." < < <
Good for you!
BTW, I tend to appreciate critics who are clever over those who try to appear sophisticated through use of subtlety and smugness; I'm even less impressed with critics who fall back on playing the in-joke game. Note: These are critics tend to think so much of their deftless prose that they believe everyone regularly reads their columns and should be instinctively be able to divine their genius & decipher where the critique is headed.
Sorry about the verbosity, Jeff, but the bottom line is that we're basically in agreement here.
Cheers,
AuPh
...
"Where are we going? And what am I doing in this hand basket?"
From a review:Practically the whole of western popular rock 'n' roll [and cinematic] "culture" is geared to [debased] tastes. For the tiny minority that is the rest of us, discovery of the Baffler is like Robinson Crusoe's discovery of footprints on the beach. Sharp writing, lots of attitude, socially conscious, and funny!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
