| Author |
Message |
|
| Marilyn |
 Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 3:37 pm |
 |
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 8210
Location: Skokie (not a bad movie, btw)
|
| Once again, a third of the way through the new year and there are no worthwhile current films to talk about (except maybe Off the Map, which we discussed two years ago). I see 2005 shaping up to be worse than 2004. I may have to give up on movie mania and switch to something more exciting and changeable, like Pilates. |
_________________
http://ferdyonfilms.com |
|
| Back to top |
  
|
| lshap |
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 4:19 pm |
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 4248
Location: Montreal
|
I think it was Yun-Fat who considered Mission To Mars to be some kind of unrecognized classic.
The rest of us just nodded our heads and waited for the punchline that never came. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marj |
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 5:03 pm |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 10497
Location: Manhattan
|
Joe,
I think I understand your point. And it wasn't specifically about Star Wars but about event films in general. Those films that generate enough buzz and excitement that one has to get to the theater, even stand in line the opening weekend. And yes, I suppose Star Wars would fall into the category. Is that what you meant? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 8:16 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
Marj,
I really didn't expect to be taken so literally to begin with. What I meant, basically, was that the movie was so resoundingly loved, and I loved it (and my mom, who was in her early 40's when she saw it, loved it), that hearing nothing but digs at the movie really surprised me. And it makes me think we can get so far into the art and intellectual qualities of film (no bad thing in itself, of course) that we can forget the pure, shallow fun of a basic movie experience. I meant no diss to anyone.
What surprises me about this response I'm getting is that Mr. B wrote a few lengthy posts a short time ago saying that people who like Star Wars are people who don't like movies, and that Star Wars was to movies what soccer was to sports. I didn't get in a snit about it. I thought it was funny, and yes I saw that beyond the hyperbole he really doesn't like a movie I do, but big deal. He was giving a personal response, even if a joking one, and how are we to respond to the movie-going experience except from our personal perspectives? I'd think this would be more obvious on a site for film enthusiasts than in general conversation.
That my own post would upset people so much is kinda strange to me. And it particularly surprises me that both Marilyn and Joker would be the ones to be upset, since they both know the value of their own responses and aren't likely to feel challenged by mine. I really don't understand the seriousness of the response. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 8:22 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
I really don't understand the seriousness of the response.
Joe--For the record, neither do I. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 8:28 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| sioux |
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 9:44 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 802
Location: philly burbs
|
I agree with Marilyn about the dry times we are in. I am currently stupidly underemployed and I have been looking for daytime escape (in my neighborhood, limiting me to current pop). I saw Hitch the other day, which I enjoyed, and I knew I would enjoy it, which still doesn't make it worth talking about. My week is so slow that I am thinking of leaving the neighborhood and finding Off the Map.
But in general, this is the time of no good movies..... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Private Joker |
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:04 pm |
|
|
Joined: 28 May 2004
Posts: 322
|
Joe Vitus wrote: I really don't understand the seriousness of the response.
Because it's such a fundamentally retarded statement to make. You're asserting that anyone who doesn't get pleasure from the movie you get pleasure from can't understand why people in general get pleasure from movies. Do you see how insipid that is?
I like serious literature AND I like Stephen King. I spent a good deal defending TITANIC on here a week or two ago. I definitely understand the appeal of base pleasures to be found in movies -- stirring adventure (Indiana Jones), great special effects (2001, Day After Tomorrow, Spider-Man), wonderful characters, imagination, creativity, other worlds (The Fifth Element). Why do I have to specifically like Star Wars to "get" why the unwashed masses enjoy movies? For your moronic assertion to be even close to accurate, it would have to be amended to say that someone who didn't appreciate *any* film with those elements doesn't understand why people love movies. But you've narrowed it down to Star Wars and only Star Wars, implying that there can be any one movie (or franchise in this case) which so embodies the elements that makes film likable that it is beyond any critical evaluation.
I think if you really look into the dogmatism that your statement reveals, if you really spend any amount of time thinking about the implications of saying "if you don't like Star Wars then you can't understand why people love movies in general," I would hope you would see that it is a repulsive thing to say -- it's anti-art, anti-intellectual, and hopelessly barbaric.
I also think it's worth taking a statement like this seriously. Especially if you love movies. If you study them, spend your life working in them, and think about them in complex ways. If you really have a passion for the art of cinema and respect the subjectivity and organic nature of its affect on people, then you must be offended by a comment that reduces and destroys most of what makes film appreciation such an interesting study. A comment that assumes any one film can contain the qualities on which an entire understanding of the medium rests -- meaning that film somehow sits above the existence of all other films. You may not believe this about Star Wars, Joe (and I'm fairly sure you don't), but if you had any logical faculties I think you'd see that your comment does imply such a belief. |
_________________
-joker
www.privatejoker.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Private Joker |
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:11 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 28 May 2004
Posts: 322
|
| Also, Joe, it's not that I feel challenged by your statement. I just find it absolutely repulsive and difficult to respect in any significant way. I think it's sad that someone who professes to enjoy film-related discussion would even consider saying it. |
_________________
-joker
www.privatejoker.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:35 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Joker, I understand your complaint and I thought Joe's statement was in the league with "cineasts would etc. etc." but insipid means lacking taste as in bland, not tasteless as in an untoward comment. If I were Joe and made a high handed, arrogant (redundant?) comment like he did I would take it back and say something more in line with what I really meant instead of letting it stand and explaining what he meant. But since I'm never guilty of making ill considered remarks I don't have to worry about that.
And I liked Star Wars and very much liked Empire so I do know the joy of movies. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:51 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
Joker,
Again, it was not a comment worthy of the big deal you make of it. I don't see what the problem is. It is no more overly-hyperbolic that Mr. B's earlier contention that people who like Star Wars basically don't like movies. Anyone who seriously thinks either statement is intended as Objective Truth really needs to relax. Chill. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| ehle64 |
| Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2005 12:12 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 7149
Location: NYC; US&A
|
| Telling Joker to "Chill" after his well thought out and damn fine explanation of why he was offended by your comment is just typical Joe Vitus. Did you even read his two posts?? It's extraordinarily hilarious to me that the only one that is defending you is someone who constantly questions taste as if they have the definitive end all/be all ideas on what is "worthy". To me, your comment and those like his, are very offensive. Plus, I think Joker hit the nail on the head with "Anti-Art". |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2005 12:24 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
someone who constantly questions taste as if they have the definitive end all/be all ideas on what is "worthy".
I thought we had some kind of detente going, ehle. You just can't get over it, can you?
hopelessly barbaric.
And no matter how well-thought-out Joker's post was, this statement lessens its impact. Can you say "overkill"? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2005 12:29 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
Not to mention
"fundamentally retarded,"
which is juvenile and politically incorrect. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| jeremy |
| Posted: Wed Mar 16, 2005 4:16 am |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 6794
Location: Derby, England and Hamilton, New Zealand (yes they are about 12,000 miles apart)
|
| That Marantz is getting a bit uppity, him and that other Canadian, coming over all ironical on us. |
_________________
I am angry, I am ill, and I'm as ugly as sin.
My irritability keeps me alive and kicking.
I know the meaning of life, it doesn't help me a bit.
I know beauty and I know a good thing when I see it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
