I couldn’t agree more. I liked Casablanca, but if you don’t like, or even if you say “I think it’s a bad film” that’s fine because since this is art every opinion… Well, every respectful opinion is acceptable.
I think is fine to be open to discuss, though, but if you say “why do you think so?” and not “you have no idea”.
3 Likes
I think it’s ok if someone doesn’t like something if they can give a good reason. It seems to me we’re seeing a lot of people hating on stuff just because it’s cool. This happens in video games a lot, but also in film with stuff like the MCU, Harry Potter, video game movies, anything that mainstream really.
Unless you have a decent argument you’re just a pathetic anarchist trying to get Reddit points.
P.S. Just wa t to be clear I’m not saying anyone here is doing that, and I’ve not seen anyone on Grouvee do it, it’s just something I’ve noticed happening “out there.”
I do think it’s ok to have a gut feeling that you don’t like something and not really need a concrete reason. If you watch a movie and you don’t like it but can’t really articulate why, I think it’s still valid. Not everyone has the ability to turn those feelings into arguments but I think everyone knows what their reaction is to a piece of media.
5 Likes
I also often like something and just can’t explain why. There is this blue painting in a huge local public gallery. It is just that, blue. I love it.
The picture in the link does not do it justice, no picture does, I guess because pictures are flat but the surface of the painting isn’t it is a very rough surface. It is the most intense and beautiful blue I have ever seen, but how do you explain that I sat in that room where the picture is and looked at it for 40 minutes straight being happy? IT IS A BLUE RECTANGLE.
The text beneath the picture does explain how the painting was made and what it meant to the artist, but I am too dumb to understand what “a space of freedom” in this context means. All I can tell you, that I love it and I visit the gallery once a year to look at it (and other great art there).
3 Likes
Before clicking on the link I showed your message to my partner because I had a feeling it was a Yves Klein painting and knew she’d think the same. The colour, International Klein Blue, doesn’t translate to a screen especially since the colour value is patented and can’t be reproduced. It’s astonishing in person, I agree.
3 Likes
That’s true.
Of course, it doesn’t make sense if someone say “that’s a trash” to you and don’t argue anything after that. But that’s just common sense in comunication.
Besides, sometimes the arguement is as simple as “I’m not agree with what you say”.
1 Like
Tarrantino was talking about Hollywood, I want to add a German article about German film making (translated into English) that talks about the crisis good talent faces for very long now. Even films that collect a price are not shown in movie theaters and money does not get invested in anything that involves a risk.
Maybe it’s time that a lot more people than just young people became very concerned about the future of German cinema.
1 Like
Really starting to feel like your only purpose is to counter anything I say. 
In regards to the blue painting, it could be any number of things affecting you when you see it. Blue is a calming colour, so it has a psychological effect, especially at that scale. Subconsciously it could evoke images of the sea, a clear sky at night both of which are calming. Similarly, depending on how the brush strokes are (I’ve not seen it in person so can’t say) the movement they create could have a similar effect. The psychology of art and colour is really fascinating.
I remember seeing an interview with Tarrantino where he spent like 20 minutes going on about how the MIB logo ripped off the logo of this production company or some crap. Then Kill Bill comes out which rips off about 100 different - and much better - martial arts films. Guys can go suck and egg as far as I’m concerned.
Definitely. I have to admit that before I saw the Klein painting modern art seemed like a scam to me, but now I am more open minded about it and check out every new exhibit.
I love that you wrote that, because I have never met/talked to someone that understood my love for the colour before.
2 Likes
Differing opinions on subjects, but I’m not sure if this is about a specific topic.
The thing with Tarantino is that he’s simultaneously a huge dick and an enourmous film nerd. The reason his films reference a million other films is because he’s a pastiche artist and part of his goal is to pay homage to those films while also creating interest in those films among new audiences. In fact, he’s responsible for funding the western distribution of films that he’s referenced specifically because he wants the films he loves and references to reach wider audiences. I don’t particularly think he’s the greatest guy and he certainly has an ego, but I do recognize his desire is to get more people interested in obscure films, which I can’t fault.
Additionally, I think he’s wrong about the resemblance of the A Band Apart logo and the MIB logo, but the art of pastiche, intertextual reference, and homage and the degree to which those are accepted by filmmakers and artists is a bit different than what is accepted in the world of trademarks and commercial design. Now we could debate that topic all day but I do think that even if he’s wrong, there are subtle differences between copying a logo and referencing other films in your own film.
3 Likes
Differing opinions on subjects, but I’m not sure if this is about a specific topic.
I was joking, hence the smiley face. No offence taken/ meant.
The thing with Tarantino…the art of pastiche…
I know what you mean, but I feel there is aa very fine line between pastiche and rip off/stealing and I feel that - based on Kill Bill - he falls into the former.
I used to get into arguments with on my art tutors all the time over Lichtenstein’s art because they claimed he was “creating new ways of expressing pop art” I would say no, he was just ripping off comic artists and claiming the work as his own. There plenty of examples out there where his “work” is just 1-for-1 copies of comic panels and all he’d done is change the text/ onomatopoeiaor added tears or something. Yet all these art critics are going on how his stuff is amazing while simultaneously poo-pooing the very medium from which he was stealing. You can probably tell how much it infuriated me.
At any rate, I felt Spaced did it much better than Tarantino.
2 Likes
Spaced did do it much better than Tarantino, very much agreed.
This is why I say we could debate this for hours, lol. I think one thing about Tarantino is that he adores the stuff he lifts from because he’s a huge film geek. His cinema language is to dialogue with the things he loves, so at the very least I don’t think he is trying to borrow to uplift, he’s borrowing because it’s what has shaped his cinematic thinking and expression. And the fact that he has helped move obscure films into wider distribution, even just helping small and hard to get films obtain exhibition, means that the things he does are borne out of affection and reverence. I suspect he’s happy if people end up liking the movies he references more than his own, because those are some of his favourite movies.
I also think Spaced is a pastiche of a different element of cinema. Tarantino is referencing exploitation and grind house and Spaced was referencing horror, sci-fi and pop-culture. Spaced means a lot to me personally because I’m only a fraction younger than they were, I was living in the UK at the time it was popular and they captured a precise slice of my existence as a result. Tarantino’s references tend to be more esoteric, harder to find in the mainstream and thus don’t evoke the same sense of connection. So I end up liking both. But it’s very true that I like many of the films Tarantino uses in his pastiche more than I like his own films, while I love Spaced as much as I enjoy what it references, if not more.
1 Like
The other day I was bored/depressed and watched one of my favorites; Wreck-it Ralph
I’ve been listening to the soundtrack too
6 Likes
The main take away I have from Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 3 is why isn’t Nathan Fillion cast as the main character in any of these - or EVERY - film?
(Also, the movie was really, really good!)
2 Likes
The film made less than the last Guardians film and missed Disney’s targets. Hollywood being what it is I wonder how long before Disney pivots to something else because the MCU isn’t making them rich enough, lol.
2 Likes
Yeah, someone else is attached now.
1 Like
This kind of crap makes me wanna vomit. How much bloody money do these ingrates need?
1 Like
All of it. There is no ceiling to the amount that will satisfy them.
3 Likes
It’s just…so vile. I mean, I’m sure hte money made a bazillion dollarbucks regardless, but Disney aren’t happy because it didn’t make 2 bazillion dollarbucks. I know you’ve (BMO) have explained it to me before, but I just can NOT understand how the Hollywood money system works. It’s not that I don’t want to understand it, or that I think it’s just dumb, it literally makes no sense to me whatsoever.
The whole only caring about first weekend takes in the US makes my brain melt. It suggests no film has any life over a two day period. What other business looks at their products that way? (Well, maybe games, actually.)
I love films, but the business behind them is run by vile, insidious, Trump-worshiping ingrates.
3 Likes
I joined the dark side and set up a Letterboxd account if anyone want to follow along. I have 0 friends there so one or two would be nice
5 Likes