 
|
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 |
In Reply to: Re: OK, Andrew T, you've done it again posted by Victor Khomenko on February 04, 2002 at 16:05:42:
Hello Victor,Completely my pleasure! Always fun to talk film with someone else,
particularly someone who obviously makes the effort to watch
as many good ones as possible.I agree wholeheartedly with your statement that too much has been
inflicted upon our good sense in the name of 'subjectivity'..;-)!
I believe someone in the Music Asylum once had a good rant about
its analogue in music...but the grevious body piling he suffered after
was something to see indeed ( I think it was Felix ). I tend to subscribe
to the notion that we won't necessarily like all things 'good'; nor are all
the things we like automatically 'good', myself. In other words, taste is
subjective, but what is deemed 'good' is more 'objective'. But, given
our finite resources of three score and ten, I suppose a good case could be made
for not wasting too much of one's time on trash. ;-))I think your wife's strategy is a good one: no reason to OD on one country or director..
after all, there is an embarrassment of cinematic riches to be had out there.Since Ichikawa and Oshima are japanese, that should break the tedium. I have been waiting
for Criterion to release the DVD of 'Makioka Sisters' for a very long time...their
LD release was beautiful, although alas, without much by way of extras. The oft
adapted story was given the royal treatment by Ichikawa, and the final scene,
with 'ombra mai fu' from Xerxes playing is flat out and out beautiful. If you like his style,
then you may enjoy 'Tokyo Olympiad'.The Oshima piece may be more of an acquired taste...after all he made In The realm of The Senses.
How about Mizoguchi's 'Ugetsu Monogatari'? Now there's a ghost story for you.
Regards,
A.
Follow Ups:
Thank you Andrew, the fun is all mine. Always appreciate the guidance in the areas in which I am not to advanced. Although I am not entirely new to Asian cinematography, I have to admit that it is definitely a very rich area that deserves more attention on my part.On that taste issue, it is often the matter of education. When you see someone praising a particular weak work, it is often true that that individual is not too familiar with the volumes of great work that has been produced in all kinds of genre in many, many countries around the world. So you end up with an American teenager who has seen every sequell to Friday the 13th and not much more.
This is true of any art form - paintings, music, dance or anything else.
This is not a phenomenon unique to America. But unfortunately the American situation is aggravated for two reasons. One is its isolation and the mostly justified self-pride. That self-pride often leads to the idea that one should only be concerned with the local production.
And the second - the inescapable fact that Hollywood has created and developed to the highest degree the art of making movies just for revenue. I don't think there is any doubt that the American movies generate the largest cash flow, while at the same time being on the steady decline in the areas of their artistic content.
They tend to adress the simpler and simpler and yet simpler emotions, the most superficial ones at the expense of more deep and fundamental.
Just how many times can you recreate the silly story about a lovable underdog attaining a competely undeserved wictory at the final moments of the boring film? Some of that is deeply rooted in the American phyche and probably shall continue being with us forever.
Anyway... what is YOUR take on the In The Realm of Senses? Did you find it artistic in the unique sense, or just plain gratuitously vulgar?
Hello Victor,Agreed. Taste is pretty much a function of one's upbringing, education being a primary component
thereof. I guess much of the vitriol and enmity which gets stirred up during discussions about
things which have a strong subjective component to them is when one confuses or blurs the distinction
between what they 'like' and what is 'good'. I tend to think of it as food..candy/treats = 'bad' ,
veggies/5 food groups =' good'( at the risk of oversimplification). I like both, but would be hard pressed
indeed to justify ever calling candied treats good for me! But. human nature being what it is, I guess
people just don't like hearing what they like categorized as trash.... the implicit assumption being
that they're being called stupid. Probably gets most everybody's goat.The American filmmaking industry is an interesting animal. Some of my (US)friends have in fact insisted that
the popularity of American films is proof positive of their inherent superiority ( as films, that is)! This
is probably where it gets tricky...so much being dependent on one's definition of such. As vehicles
of mass communication to reinforce a certain conformist idea ....I guess they are second to none.
But as 'art'...obviously you would disagree;-).I agree that corporatism is one of the ills of mainstream American filmmaking. But I think the constant progression
toward very basic, unsubtle, overly simplified films is also a function of US popular culture. I don't believe, for instance,
that one makes a film with anything other than a domestic audience in mind ( with the exception of a few 'internationalists',
who intentionally pitch their films at international 'art house' audiences ). Most audiences are typically culturally
homogeneous, with shared references, histories etc.. thus there isn't the need to have to put everything in bas relief
or underline every theme. The US demographic audience however, is probably more diverse than most other places.
It is no wonder then that the films, in order to reach as many people as possible, are designed to appeal to the lowest
common denominators : sex, violence, feel good, triumph of the underdog type stories. The films are designed specifically
for easy consumption, to not be challenging, which would otherwise alienate its primary constituency."
Just how many times can you recreate the silly story about a lovable underdog attaining a competely undeserved wictory at the final
moments of the boring film? Some of that is deeply rooted in the American phyche and probably shall continue being with us forever. "LOL!!
Re: In The Realm of The Senses...well, now you've opened a can of worms ;-). While I realize that Oshima's purpose
is to incite indignation in the audience ( I believe one japanese critic called his films ' provocations directed at the spectators ' ),
and in the context / milieu , his aggressive and graphic films work as protest, I have to say that I never warmed to the film.
But then perhaps I was never meant to?Regards,
A.
***I agree that corporatism is one of the ills of mainstream American filmmaking. But I think the constant progression
toward very basic, unsubtle, overly simplified films is also a function of US popular culture.Sigh....
It looks like Oshima was doing to the Japanese public what Pasolini was doing to the Italians... shock, and if they complain - shock them more.
But I don't think the Realm has risen even close to the level of the best Pasolini works.
Hello Victor,Re the quote...just to clarify: I did not mean it in the popular usage of the term 'pop culture', but rather
literally as the more prevalent culture. No elitist nose-raising was implied.Regards,
A.
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 ]
