 
|
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: Back to Social Realism? posted by Victor Khomenko on November 24, 1999 at 06:27:12:
"Shall we say it is a realistic presentation of an extrem case of gratuitous use?"Or an extreme presentation of realistic gratuitous use.
I shouldn't have used the term realistic. As a parody, everything in the movie is over the top. Still, its one of the funniest movies I've seen in years. Definitely not for everybody though. One of those movies I find to be intelligently written yet others would consider "trash" :-)
"Needless to say, many realistic things hardly deserve to be shown on the screen."
Couldn't agree more. Gore and blood come to mind, although as with "Fear" I make an exception for Braveheart. A very gory movie, yet well done.
"Unless it is the Social Realism - then it is few nothes below that."
Showing my ignorance - I'm not sure what you mean by this
Whatever. The official Communist Party sponsored school of art. Basically, the only allowable form for several decades.Amazingly, some artists managed to remain artists even during that era. But mostly many stupid paintings of Lenin and Dzerzhinski in a long menacing coat, workers hammering steel, proletarians fighting capitalists... Trash... you didn't miss much.
.
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 ]
