Just saw Anniversary Party

[mattias]

> Right, comparing Pollack & Warhol, to Rembrant, Michaelangelo, and Curt Cobain to Beethoven & Bach, and those who "follow the rules".
> Who has had more influence, and who's art is loved more?

actually, i like nirvana's stuff better than most classical music, and certainly better than the incredibly overrated bach (and i do think nirvana influenced the 90's more than any old master). i'm a bit ambivalent regarding the painters, but surely you must agree there are a lot of people who love warhol more than rembrandt?

i do think woody allen is something of a genius too. guess that makes us thirteen... :-)

> So, if you show the average non-filmmaker two films, a great Dogme film, and a great film made by conventional means, they are going to probably have no interest in the Dogme film.

oh, that must be why many of the dogma films became mainstream hits in scandinavia. ;-)

/matt

[Matt Pacini]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by mattias:
[B]>
"actually, i like nirvana's stuff better than most classical music, and certainly better than the incredibly overrated bach"

(Matt Pacini responds): Try writing a fugue and then tell me how overrated Bach is! The guy wrote so much music that they have estimated that just to simply copy it, would take at least 50 years! This is extremely difficult, intricate music, and he could whip the stuff out off the top of his head, and nobody since has matched it!


mattias:
"(and i do think nirvana influenced the 90's more than any old master).

(Matt Pacini responds): There is no escaping the influence of Bach, Beethoven and all the "old master" because they influenced the guy who influenced the guy who influenced Curt Cobain and everyone else. You need to study music theory before you make statements like this.
Claiming Bach has had less influence, is like saying that your grandfathers genes have no influence on your own genetics.

And as far as "incfluencing the 90's" I'm referring to music of all time, not just some thin slice of time, and influencing one particular music style ("grunge" or alternative, or whatever you want to call it) that will be forgotten when the next famous garage band barely changes the sound of rock.
Personally, I loath this style of music, which is defined mostly by not being able to sing well (or hit the right notes, as you said), and mediocre musicianship. (When is the last time you heard a guitar solo? That's because all these guys can do is bang out crunch bar chords.) It's boring beyond belief!


Matt Pacini

------------------

[Alex]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Courier, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dogstarman:
Amen.

Frankly, I thought the whole Dogme95 nonsense
had gone away in about 1999, which would have given the filmgoing public plenty of time to realize it was a bunch of bullshit, and those who came up with it to get over themselves. I provide as evidence:

1. Shooting must be done on location. Props and sets must not be brought in (if a particular prop is necessary for the story, a location must be chosen where this prop is to be found).

2. The sound must never be produced apart from the images or vice versa. (Music must not be used unlesa it occurs where the scene is being shot).

3. The camera must be hand-held. Any movement or immobility attainable in the hand is permitted.(The film must not take place where the camera is standing; shooting must take place where the film takes place).

4. The film must be in colour. Special lighting is not acceptable. (If there is too little light for exposure the scene must be cut or a single lamp be attached to the camera).

5. Optical work and filters are forbidden.

6. The film must not contain superficial action. (Murders,weapons, etc. must not occur.)

7. Temporal and geographical alienation are forbidden.(That is to say that the film takes place here and now.)

8. Genre movies are not acceptable.

9. The film format must be Academy 35 mm.

10. The director must not be credited.

- Furthermore I swear as a director to refrain from personal taste! I am no longer an artist. I swear to refrain from creating a "work", as I regard the instant as more important than the whole. My supreme goal is to force the truth out of my characters and settings. I swear to do so by all the means available and at the cost of any good taste and any aesthetic considerations.

I think the only part that was ever strictly adherered to- and pretty much sums up the whole thing- is the vert last paragraph, especially the last sentence...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Independent Film Channel devoted the early morning hours to dogme.

by no killings, I assume you mean, none of the idiotic gun battle 6 people fall type of killings.

So murders can occur, but keep it to the action at hand.

And if a gun is fired, no afterdubbing of the gunshot...yikes....

...and the titles can only exist in the actual location scenes, like written on a rock or a brick wall, and the director not being credited, I saw that mentioned, I don't get that one.

Anyway, I fell asleep (it was in the wee hours) and missed some.

I find it interesting and very pro-actor.

It's SPY TV meets Survivor on Temptation Island.

-Alex





------------------


[This message has been edited by Alex (edited August 23, 2001).]

[mattias]

> There is no escaping the influence of Bach, Beethoven and all the "old master" because they influenced the guy who influenced the guy who influenced Curt Cobain and everyone else.

that only matters from the historical perspective. do you think people in general analyze pop music and like it based on which influences they find from a few hundred years ago? it's obviously important to know where you come from, but it shouldn't (couldn't?) stop you from doing other things than your ancestors. and i still think nirvana was better than bach, no matter how "difficult" his music was to write.

/matt

------------------

[dogstarman]

actually, those quotes are directly from the goofballs who dreamed the whole thing up.
it has nothing to do with what I said... that's what they said.

just want to be clear as to who said what.

------------------

[Matt Pacini]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Matt Pacini:
"There is no escaping the influence of Bach, Beethoven and all the "old master" because they influenced the guy who influenced the guy who influenced Curt Cobain and everyone else."

QUOTE]Originally posted by mattias:
"that only matters from the historical perspective. do you think people in general analyze pop music and like it based on which influences they find from a few hundred years ago? it's obviously important to know where you come from, but it shouldn't (couldn't?) stop you from doing other things than your ancestors. "

(Matt Pacini responds):
I'm not referring to "historical perspective" or "pople in general analysing music".
I'm saying that whether Curt Cobain was even aware of it or not, the old masters influenced him, because all the music he (and everyone else) heard growing up was based on music, that was based on the music of these guys.
If you could jump in a time machine, and shoot J.S. Bach in the head when he was 10 years old, then come back, all music would be different, and I suspect, not nearly as good.
Do you get my point?
Just like if your great grandmother married a different guy than she did, you would look different, and maybe think differenly too, get it?

Composers and songwriters have always been innovative, and combined the music of their influences with their own ideas, but just as a poet does not completely invent a new language to speak for his poetry, so it is with original music. All "new" music sounds different to those without the background & training, but I could sit down and explain the similarities of Bach and Nirvana to an educated musician, and there is an amazing amount of the underlying structure that is all there, just like if you tore apart a mobile home, and a mansion, you would see internal structural similarities.


------------------

[mattias]

> I'm saying that whether Curt Cobain was even aware of it or not, the old masters influenced him, because all the music he (and everyone else) heard growing up was based on music, that was based on the music of these guys.

yes, i can read, and i agree. what i want to know is what your *point* is.

> Who has had more influence, and who's art is loved more?

this is the question you asked that started this. imho, nirvana is more loved and more influencial today than bach. whether nirvana was influenced by bach or not (they most certainly were) doesn't change this.

/matt

[Matt Pacini]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by mattias:
["imho, nirvana is more loved and more influencial today than bach"


Well, you're quite wrong, if CD/tape sales and performances are any indicator (and I would say that's a good indicator, since it's a head count of how many people like someone's music.)

(Matt Pacini responds):
They guy (Bach) has been dead for 250 years, and there are litterally millions of performances per year of his music, and countless recordings have been made, and continue to be made each year, which far outsell any Nivana sales.
Millions of musicians learn and perform his music all over the world.

This far exceeds any popularity that Nirvana EVER has had, and in 250 years, (or probably in 25 years for that matter) they will certainly be completely forgotten, not that I'm happy about it.

Just because you don't travel in circles that appreciate classical music, doesn't mean that nobody out there is listening.

Go to a search engine, type "BACH", and count the numbers.
Then type "NIRVANA" and see how that stacks up.

O.K., I just did.
Bach = 1,393,000
Nirvana = 693,000

I win!

Matt Pacini



------------------

[mattias]

no, you don't win, since i still like nirvana better, and so do a lot of my friends (yes, i called around before posting this). you simply can't take that away from us. ;-)

i'm sure i hear bach music every day, but i don't think that's the point. i mean, i see colgate commercials every day too.

/matt

[Matt Pacini]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by mattias:
[B]no, you don't win, since i still like nirvana better, and so do a lot of my friends "

(Matt Pacini responds):
I thought the question was who was more influential?
Oviously, someones personal taste is entirely subjective.
I never said I like Bach's music better than anyone elses' music.
You changed the question!
Matt

------------------