![]() ![]() |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
66.74.85.223
In Reply to: RE: "Avatar ": Accept no substitutes ! posted by patrickU on January 06, 2010 at 04:53:28
PAINTING: "The Alchemical Trickster"
PatrickU,
Je crois la meilleure maniere de voir le " Avatar" est laisser la connaissance adulte du cerveau et tout de critique de film de Bergman, de Kurosawa, et de Godard dans votre maison. Voyez que le film la meme maniere un enfant entend une histoire d'heure du coucher.
Leave disbelief, intellectualism,- and history at home. Just have fun as would a child.
Cheers,
Bambi B
Follow Ups:
great adult fare?
![]()
PAINTING: "Design for a Study for Prospero"
tinear,"
I honestly can enjoy a movie of any genre, and intended for any demographic as long as there's a noticeable intelligence- and hopefully some good craftsmanship. This is why I think some childrens' movies to be highly worthy of serious attention: I know I 'll think of 20 more examples later but consider in this regard only "Pinocchio", Tom and Jerry, Cocteau's "Beauty and the Beast", the many Warner Brothers Bugs Bunny and Co. cartoon, "Raiders of the Lost Ark", "The Princess Bride", more recently, "Shrek", "The Incredibles". These movies all are attractive and memorable for me because they are all really smart - they don't pander to what adults believe children want- or should want or what adults believe children can and can not understand. Adults almost always get it completely wrong when they underestimate kids' understanding of how thing work. Strange how so many seem to forget what being a child was like.
Whatever we may feel is lacking or mis-proportioned in James Cameron movies, there is no doubt that they are among the finest crafted and visually memorable- and smartest. Of the most important contributions Cameron has made in my view is in the realm of internal logic- which with Cameron is impeccable. This amazing tightness of concept- possible only when one person can devise a integrated, total work of art- what the German's call a Gesamptwerk . < [I wish English had such a good word for this.] Further, the totality of vision in turn means that within the hierarchy of plot structure to image, every tiny detail is contributing to the big picture- telling the story.
And, certainly Cameron knows how to tell a story! Cameron is just not nearly as verbally orientated as he is bursting with visual inventiveness. And while some quibble that the plots and/or dialogue are derivative and not refined or mature, there's a simplistic politic statement and so on but that there's no denying that there's a giant brain and engineer/craftsman/artist shining through and with all the faults elsewhere, that creative intelligence on it's own is enough to pay attention to his work.
Cheers,
Bambi B
And too egomaniacal to let an actual verbally oriented writer take a stab at... you know.. the writing.
"The man is only half himself, the other half is his expression." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
![]()
PAINTING: "Man pulling his Beard" (Rasputin)
sjb,
Yes, the ego of the "King of the World" is massive enough to generate it's own gravitational field and Cameron is short-tempered with those who don't keep up with his vision, but that is the lonely path of the auteur- those lucky creators of personal universes, for example, Newton and Wagner, didn't rely on others creatively (and probably didn't any friends either). In the end, whose judgment can geniuses trust other than their own?
And as it seems that Cameron aspires to the highest possible level of movie-making, he apparently acts on the axiom that great art was never made by a committee- with which I completely agree.
Cheers,
Bambi B
not seriously?
tinear,
As you seem to be closed to any hint of positive comments about James Cameron, it seems futile to continue to list the good and the bad. Every artist has their weaknesses- Beethoven was not the best composer for the human voice, Picassos sometimes seem crude technically, Rothko did the same painting from 1949 to 1971. Shakespeare could be a political opportunist skewing history. If you have the inclination- and you seem to have a special negative niche for Cameron, you can find flaws in any artist and their work.
Cameron's relative weakness in my view tries is that he tries to do everything and he is simply not very verbal, nor interested in complex emotional structures, and even intimacy can be mechanical- preferring everything to be of an epic scale and as dynamic as possible. I read that there was a sex scene between the aliens finished that was cut from the movie- it probably was too quiet and interrupted the pace.
But, on the other side, movie- lovers should become aware of how amazingly complex making a movie is. The nearest analogy I think of to movie-making is architecture: the artistic, client relations, technical, bureaucratic, craft, and financial demands make accomplishing any good work almost a miracle. Think of coordinating the hundreds of people and hundreds of millions of Dollars involved over 18 years that required to make "Avatar". In that effort, there was substantial, important craft innovation and that ll this could be juggled into producing such a detailed, integrated work is quite amazing.
No, I don't think of Cameron as a "great artiste" but more a brilliant engineer/craftsman/logician combined with a remarkable visual inventiveness with attention to internal logic and detail. It's a small wonder
Come to Los Angeles and visit a movie set. I think if you saw first hand how extraordinarily complex movie-making is, you would probably appreciate what Cameron accomplishes even if the content is not to your taste. And, we have to keep in mind that we are not anywhere near the intended demographic for these movies- after all, they're intended for an audience 40 years younger.
Cheers,
Bambi B
Wagner was the greatest swine in history.
Pfui.
IŽll leave me home...
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: