<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Two-thousand years of cultral development encompassing Shakespeare, Da Vinci, the Rennisscance, Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome, the Mona Lisa, the Sistine Chapel, and my work say otherwise.How can art be more than entertainment?
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yes it is. Didactic war films that flake out the Oscars are not works of art.Hey, Saving Private Ryan is pure entertainment...
what was so morally instructive in SPR ?
though I think 'fascination' and 'shock' count as forms of entertainment, as distasteful as that may be.
and if there is no moral debate in the tale, what is the point? a film without a premise of any sort?!
i think if you deconstruct any film, you will find morals and opinions.
There might not have been a moral debate, but there was definitely a pre-determined moral standard that was driving the film.
The moral standard being that no family should ever lose all of their sons in a war.
Just thought I'd bump this.
It's been a while since there's been a discussion of this type on the forum. [img]frown.gif[/img]
I know someone who I know has some talent, but he keeps making these meaningless visual pieces with all kinds of effects and shit thrown together without an actual story.
I don't know if anyone of you guys know what Derrida's 'decontructionism' is, but that's really what his screenplays are.
Saw some of his movies, all very visual and shit, but they get boring because they don't have any actual 'content' or 'meaning'.
I made a lot of movies without content or meaning, but I can get away with it because of my self mockery and the knowing that what I make is not supposed to be good or anything like that. For some kind of reason I found that people dig that. No one likes pretentious bullshit.
I want to make movies with some kind of content. They have to tell something. That experimental visual flair - that's just not my cup of tea. It's not only better, but I FEEL better when I'm not making another meaningless movie which is about absolutely nothing. I have more fun that way, knowing that I'm creating a story on more than one level.
I've now (kind of) finished my 'no concience' screenplay. (posted a version here a while ago). It is about something, and I feel it's important that I believe what it's about.
(although through all the different versions it has really been about everything)
peace
one mans meaning is another mans porridge.
Anyway this is one of the reasons I like David Lynch films. There is a great skill in combining elements of 'pretensious shite' with some kind of more conservative/normal story telling.
Some people seem to manage to do this, others fail miserably and end up with a self indulgent moodpeice, which doesnt always work.
However Videoing everything that moves and then editing it together somehow is a very timeconsuming way to make a film. Its not much fun either. Much more fun to discuss shots, and moments - and whys and wherefores, and then getting down to it.
Talk is cheap. [img]graemlins/sure.gif[/img]
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">That sums up something ive been thinking for a while but not been able to put it into words. When I make a movie its becos i want to entertain other people. People seem to see this as a sell out, that the movie should in some way be made purely for you to express yourself, if someone else understands it or not isnt important. What a load of bull. I make movies becos i want people to come up to me and say "that movie ruled" not becos I want to express some inner daemons or something. If I can entertain people and also deal with some deep shit at the same time then even better.Having a great vision and lots of fun doesn't mean people will like your stuff though.
I think a big aspect with filmmaking is that you're making the film not for yourself, but for others to view. If you'd be making that film only for yourself because you'd be following your own vision, you really woulnd't have to make that film in the first place. You already have that vision.
As for whether SPR is entertainment or not. I think you need to get away from the fact entertainment needs to uplifting or a happy event. Look at how many people pay good money to be frightened by a movie at the cinema. Entertainment if you look it up in a dictionary just says something to the effect of "a diversion which holds your attention", so yes SPR is entertainment.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">True, but discussions are important so people can express ideas and share opinions. This is the point of this forum.Originally posted by Spoon Boy:
Talk is cheap.
What's really cheap is trying to mock, prevent or interupt others from doing this.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks