Films/DVD Asylum

Re: No mud, and brief

198.202.162.100

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display All Email ] [ Films/DVD Asylum ]

In Reply to: No mud, and brief posted by Victor Khomenko on January 28, 2004 at 08:42:09:

Thank you for the very polite response, Viktor ... I'd be interesting in talking about what we each consider historical achievements in the art of movie making. (Although, I'm sure we won't agree on them.)
I am the prototypical consumer of mass market entertainment, I suspect ...! But I've learned that it's not necessarily a bad thing, and it's what makes me happy. I attempted to be highbrow and literary early on in my career, but I got over it. (And my sales went up when I did.)
Thanks for the opportunity to contribute ...
Roxanne

Follow Ups:

Re: No mud, and brief - Anya Khomenko 07:31:39 01/29/04 (0)
Hi, Roxanne,
Thank you for letting me into your inner world! I can see that we are judging Lord of the Rings from different angles and am hoping that you will not misconstrue my reply as anything but sincere.
By my temperament I am a critic, and you are a creator. My mother who is an artist says, that without my opinion and critique she would not be able to paint. Let her statement be what it may - pure and unadulterated motherly love, but it is true that any work with a claim for success should be able to withstand a good amount of "red pencil" editorials.
I deeply respect a creative spirit and wish I could get as excited about my own insignificant work as I see all the time in my mother. I tend to immediately see all the weak sides of any work rather than concentrate on the achievements. I am guessing that you have the same excitement and passion that you put in the act of creation as my mother. Please, do not regard this as patronizing, for I am very sincere in this admiration.
Perhaps, I was expecting too much from LOTR as an independent work (I think any screen adaptation should be viewed as such, and not mere a transfer of the book to the screen.) It may also be that having not read the book, in my mind I was not surrounded by the world created by the author, and therefore, was unable to keep that fascination for the movie, which I regarded as an original fantasy and, unfortunately, still see as some sort of Disney animation, which is not a bad thing, but not the type of art that I was hoping to see.
Be it what it may, we can agree that this movie will delight a lot of viewers. As far as I am concerned, there are many movies which I hope will delight me for many years to come.
Who knows, maybe years later I will look at it with a warm nostalgic feelings, that time always brings to us, and... even like it.
Anya
Re: No mud, and brief - Victor Khomenko 06:24:55 01/29/04 (3)
A polite response? I am afraid to think of what AuPh has been telling about me all this time... :-)
The historical achievements? I am a rather conventional guy with mostly classical tastes, so in terms of what I consider the great achievements, it is mostly the works of the directors that AuPh has listed in his post... there are a few other, fringe type, less known, but the majority of what I consider references come from the great masters, and we all know who they are. It is things like Cabiria, Bicycle Thief, Persona, Wild Strawberries, The Seventh Seal, Paths of Glory, Grand Illusion, Barry Lyndon, Ivan the Terrible, The Discrete Charm, and many like these that truly define the scale of the absolute values, plus some modern directors like Claire Denis and even more obscure Lavinia Currier.
So nothing really special there, but I believe one must know the classics and fundamentals before rendering his judgement. And I don't mean you in this case, as there is little doubt you and AuPh have covered most of that, it is just that you decided to take a different direction from there. A somewhat nihilistic direction, in my opinion, but that is your choice.
I also strongly disagree with you when you say all modern art is garbage. While we all have seen such cases (there is a broken snow shovel on display in the Phily Art museum...) the modern art is rich with talents - too many to mention, really. Needless to say, all great movie directors could arguably be considered modern artists.
There is another notion one hears often. It goes along the lines of "Oh, you don't really like Bergman, you simply say you do because you are supposed to!"
While some of that undoubtedly exists, I can assure you that I never force myself to love something... I am too old for that, so I allow myself to simply absorb the work and go with my skin reaction, and if it turns out I don't like a particular work of a great master (enter Satyricon), then so be it.
- Re: No mud, and brief - patrickU 06:48:21 01/29/04 (2)
  Did you like " Casanova " ?
  I did not. But I have it seen only once, would you give it another try?
  There was something terribly wrong in it for me, the actor maybe?
  - Re: No mud, and brief - Victor Khomenko 06:56:04 01/29/04 (1)
    I never saw that one... it is generally not available here, but I saw it on ebay, and will try to get it.
    - Re: No mud, and brief - patrickU 06:58:30 01/29/04 (0)
      I was full of promesses as I so much like his memoirs..The film did fail short...I you have it, let me know, of course.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

The Cable Cooker

You can not post to an archived thread.