![]() ![]() |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: Well, it appears that this stream is almost fished out. posted by Audiophilander on January 23, 2002 at 21:51:37:
It is always fun to see how quickly the liberals fall apart and start being personal. No need for that, really, as this was supposed to be about fun, after all.But going back to your arguments. This is the second time you fall into your own trap. Now you are trying to get out by repeating that our likes or lack thereof is just the matter of pure taste. This is not what you stated originally in both threads, and this is not what started that argument. Instead you - again - tried to provide some "objective" justification, however lame, for film's and director's goodness. My counter was in both cases that there is no, and could be no such objective criteria.
If we go back to the start of this thread we will find that you considered Scott great director for two (among a couple others) reasons (I shall not hide from you that I think both are indefensible when applied to ANY art form):
1. His film had high number of sequels.... wow...
2. He showed two girls doing something against the male-dominated society... well, another wow...
And these "arguments" are exactly what I attacked, and I have not seen you put up any reasonable defence of these two.
Instead you kept digging yourself deeper in your last post by repeating this greatness kaka again: "As for Ridley Scott's talent, besides having a roughly 2/1 ratio of hits over misses his track-record has more critical successes than many of his well known contemporaries and he's achieved those successes through a broad range of subjects which is a major accomplishment in itself."
I certainly don't know nor care what "critical successes" you are talking about but presume that is along the Ebert lines, and I already told you I have no respect for that individual.
As we see again, there is no defense based on any artistic merits, just some alledged "success"... mass appeal, really... or the lowest denominator. Figures.
So according to you - popularity, agenda, "success" are what defines the director talent.
According to me it is the ability to touch the inner souls of its viewers, and that is where he, in my opinion, is lacking.
You seem to be so fixated on the woman's role that you just can't let it go. Have it if you want, but just as a very brief summary I would rather have my daughter grow up to be like Ms. Loy than one of the two of your hero brainless morons who's sole contribution to society was - according to you - in standing up against the male domination.
I would submit to you that one could certanly make more worthy contribution to mankind... but that thing touched you so much you just could not stop talking about it. OK, enough of that.
Are you a contributor to the "conspiracy of dumbing up of America"? Yes, I'd say so, with your insistance on agenda driven films. If not for the audience like you we would not see the explosion of "social issue" trash. It certainly was not ME who asked for marvels like T&L or Philadelphia. So accept that blame as just result of your labor.
Here is your last quote: "The fact that I see greatness in many of the director's films while you do not we can always chalk up to personal preferences,
I would not have any problems with that. If you look back some people always express their preferences and I usually don't argue with that. Your problem, just like the last time, was your attempt at providing the "objective proof".
***but the contempt you have for his work seems more deeply rooted to me.If you allow me, my "contempt" or whatever has grown tremendously since you started throwing items like "success" and "agenda" into this fish soup. Again, blame yourself. Before your argument I didn't see it that way, now I do understand what his works mean to some CERTAIN portion of population, so thank you for educating me. Perhaps not the way you wanted it, but that is outside of your control. This is what you get for getting up on your social soap box all too soon.
I shall pass on that silly mental health sub-attack - I would consider responding to that sort of statements below most individuals here.
Follow Ups:
You, Victor, turned this discussion into one about agendas, not I. Calling a movie "trash" that in the opinion of many has social relevence is as far off base as suggesting that it's two featured characters are supposed to be "heroes" in the literal sense (mine, as you casually insinuate or your daughters, as you apparantly fear) and "brainless morons" or whatever.Since you don't like Roger Ebert (are there any critics that you DO like or is it simply a matter of your believing that your own viewpoint ascends to a height superior to all others?) I'll link Peter Traver's impressions; perhaps his observations will persuade you since my opinions have failed so miserably in that effort.
FTR, I don't demounce actresses like Myrna Loy, et al., but they are from another time and representative of a system that abused women without remorse. Perhaps you, as a father, would prefer dressing your daughters in Victorian attire (okay, 1930's era), which isn't an uncommon thought among fathers of girls I'd wager, but one really should try to appreciate the complexities of life in the new milennium, IMHO. Films are, after all, movies and not reality, but they do reflect social change. If T&L offends you, perhaps it was intended to by drawing attention to FEELINGS women have about abusive relationships.
OTOH, by taking Callie Khouri's screenplay too literally, latching on to the films depiction of violent feminine outrage as an indication of moral decadence rather than a symbolic release of repressesd inhibitions, it's easy to see why issues like relationship abuse get shoved into the closet by well meaning folks like yourself.
AuPh
Hello Victor,If you have the time, you may wish to look for this Japanese film by a director named Miike called 'Audition'.
There isn't a region 1 DVD for it ( but doesn't every self-respecting film buff own a region-free player :)?) but there should
be region3 discs for it available on the 'net or your local/closest Chinatown. Also, may like 'Unagi' by ImamuraRegards,
A.
Thank you Andrew. I dutifully wrote down these and your previous recommendations and will take them to my store. Sorry to disappoint you, but I don't own a region-free player... ten lashes with VHS tape for me, I guess.
Hello Victor,Sorry, didn't mean to sound snotty..I watch films in whatever format I can get it on.
Unfortunately, a whole bunch of films are not available for domestic release in NAmerica,
thus the region-free player. I should have brought back a multisystem player the last time
I was in Asia...can't believe how many films are in PAL and not NTSC.Regards,
A.
***Sorry, didn't mean to sound snotty..I didn't take it that way, don't worry, I perfectly understand the reason.
***I watch films in whatever format I can get it on.
Unfortunately, a whole bunch of films are not available for domestic release in NAmerica,
thus the region-free player. I should have brought back a multisystem player the last time
I was in Asia...can't believe how many films are in PAL and not NTSC.And I am sure there are some great SECAM films too. I presume one can buy such player in NY City - no?
...if you wish to continue your conversation with Auph, there's always the thread with John Dem 'above'.A.
He is not the most shy guy here, he can always find me... he-he...
(nt)
Hello Victor,"And I am sure there are some great SECAM films too. I presume one can buy such player in NY City - no? "
No doubt one can find such machines in NYC...but over here in Canada, we're such law-abiding citizens that
we don't have them for sale ( 'cept maybe in chinatown ).Regards,
A.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: