 
|
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: OK, Andrew T, you've done it again posted by Victor Khomenko on February 03, 2002 at 12:05:23:
Hello Victor,So sorry, but if you check my earlier post, I never once said that I liked Fallen Angels ( :-)!
I too was extremely disappointed when I saw it, and felt it was a step down from Ashes/Chungking.
However, due to the fact that it is one of his most popular films in the West, I didn't think it my place
to not include it on the list...I don't only recommend films I like, so my apologies for the misunderstanding.Besides, you may wish to anticipate your wife's mood the next time you show her something from WKW...
I can't blame her for not wanting to watch it after a bout with the 'flu... a film about an itinerant killer and
his middleman/woman played to a triphop soundtrack with bits from Tricky and Laurie Anderson
isn't exactly what I'd consider cinematic ' chicken soup' .It may be best that I tell you what the other storylines are about, with the hope that the next film you choose
may prove to be more propitious for the occasion.I believe that most, if not all, of WKW's films are brief explorations/dissertations about time, space and memory,
our ( or the character's ) personal and individual reactions to them, and when those personal 'worlds' intersect.
Each film he puts out is a fragment of that idea, and is often open ended, and is uncomfortable with the notion
of and end ( Days of Being Wild, for instance, ends just as another story begins...although one has to remember
that these decisions are not always consciously made, or made for 'artistic' reasons...budgets in the dog eat dog
world of HK filmmaking have as much to do with them ) Thus one gets the feeling that the films are constant
works-in-progress. That may be why many critics have been comfortable with the notion that he is more often
about mood, than about plot.' Happy Together' which won the Palme d'Or, is about a relationship ( it really is quite irrelevant that it is between
two men ) between two people who really can't get along. It is about regret, with a positive note at the end.'In The Mood' is about a relationship between two people who get along, but for other reasons cannot be together.
It is about regret, without the positive note at the end.'Ashes of Time' is probably his strongest statement about time and memory, in that two swordsmen drink from
the same 'magic' bottle of wine, said to erase memories, to different effect. One, who believes that memory is the fount
of all human misery begins to forget everything soon after, while the other, believing that the only true way to
hold to anything in this world is in one's memory, finds the drink ineffectual. It is about regret, plain and simple.Does your wife read French? I can send you copies of the Cahiers article to read for background, if you'd like.
Hope the other films don't disappoint!
Regards,
A.
Follow Ups:
Thank you Andrew, I am sure now that I gave her a good dose of Frenchness she will be inclined to take chances again... perhaps by the weekend. Appreciate your being patient with her... :-))))No, she doesn't read French.
To be sure there were memorable moments in the Angels too. But the overal impression was that of a cheap (intellectually) cult film, and for that we are getting a bit too old, I guess. So i don't regret myself, but then I am more inclined to forgive than she is, more willing just to grab some small seeds if any at all are present. But she's got that uncanny eye that I lack, and if you think I don't like wasting my time on substandard stuff, you shoud see her in action...
Anyway, in the meantime our store is transforming and is adding films - good films, I mean, not mass kaka - like crazy. Too bad we are now falling 'behinder and behinder' in our ability to find time.
Their new arrivals shelf is swarming with Asian titles, so I shall be making progress through it.
Hello Victor,Sounds like your 'better half' has good taste.
If any titles happen to catch your eye in the Asian section, I'd be more than pleased
to tell you what I know about it if you could jot down the titles or something.I have found in the past that the best thing to do is simply mention a few titles,
and let whomever's viewing make up their minds, taste being so subjective and all...
after all there have been more than a few acknowledged classics, and good films
all, which I've never warmed to!Anyway, do tell me what titles which have caught your eye, and we can takes it from there.
Have you seen Oshima's 'Gohatto'? How about Ichikawa's 'Makioka Sisters'?Regards,
A.
***Sounds like your 'better half' has good taste.She does, she married me... I know, I know, trivial comeback.
***If any titles happen to catch your eye in the Asian section, I'd be more than pleased
to tell you what I know about it if you could jot down the titles or something.I will do that. Thank you for being this helpful.
***I have found in the past that the best thing to do is simply mention a few titles,
and let whomever's viewing make up their minds, taste being so subjective and all...
after all there have been more than a few acknowledged classics, and good films
all, which I've never warmed to!
What can I say, tastes ARE subjective, but I have learned to believe in education and learning. All too often those who don't knwo simply say: Ah, OK, but I like THIS and this is simply the matter of taste! This is often used to mask ignorance. It goes without saying that I don't include you in this category, so I am not even mentioning it.But my point is that the statement about the personal nature of taste has been abused, used as a shelter by the ignorant way too often. In movies just like in all other art forms the education keeps moving you.
***Anyway, do tell me what titles which have caught your eye, and we can takes it from there.
Have you seen Oshima's 'Gohatto'? How about Ichikawa's 'Makioka Sisters'?No to both, but I shall dutifully write these down. My wife is usually against doing a particular director or a country too much, so I need to mix these things with good old world treasures. That way it goes down easier.
Thank you again.
Hello Victor,Completely my pleasure! Always fun to talk film with someone else,
particularly someone who obviously makes the effort to watch
as many good ones as possible.I agree wholeheartedly with your statement that too much has been
inflicted upon our good sense in the name of 'subjectivity'..;-)!
I believe someone in the Music Asylum once had a good rant about
its analogue in music...but the grevious body piling he suffered after
was something to see indeed ( I think it was Felix ). I tend to subscribe
to the notion that we won't necessarily like all things 'good'; nor are all
the things we like automatically 'good', myself. In other words, taste is
subjective, but what is deemed 'good' is more 'objective'. But, given
our finite resources of three score and ten, I suppose a good case could be made
for not wasting too much of one's time on trash. ;-))I think your wife's strategy is a good one: no reason to OD on one country or director..
after all, there is an embarrassment of cinematic riches to be had out there.Since Ichikawa and Oshima are japanese, that should break the tedium. I have been waiting
for Criterion to release the DVD of 'Makioka Sisters' for a very long time...their
LD release was beautiful, although alas, without much by way of extras. The oft
adapted story was given the royal treatment by Ichikawa, and the final scene,
with 'ombra mai fu' from Xerxes playing is flat out and out beautiful. If you like his style,
then you may enjoy 'Tokyo Olympiad'.The Oshima piece may be more of an acquired taste...after all he made In The realm of The Senses.
How about Mizoguchi's 'Ugetsu Monogatari'? Now there's a ghost story for you.
Regards,
A.
Thank you Andrew, the fun is all mine. Always appreciate the guidance in the areas in which I am not to advanced. Although I am not entirely new to Asian cinematography, I have to admit that it is definitely a very rich area that deserves more attention on my part.On that taste issue, it is often the matter of education. When you see someone praising a particular weak work, it is often true that that individual is not too familiar with the volumes of great work that has been produced in all kinds of genre in many, many countries around the world. So you end up with an American teenager who has seen every sequell to Friday the 13th and not much more.
This is true of any art form - paintings, music, dance or anything else.
This is not a phenomenon unique to America. But unfortunately the American situation is aggravated for two reasons. One is its isolation and the mostly justified self-pride. That self-pride often leads to the idea that one should only be concerned with the local production.
And the second - the inescapable fact that Hollywood has created and developed to the highest degree the art of making movies just for revenue. I don't think there is any doubt that the American movies generate the largest cash flow, while at the same time being on the steady decline in the areas of their artistic content.
They tend to adress the simpler and simpler and yet simpler emotions, the most superficial ones at the expense of more deep and fundamental.
Just how many times can you recreate the silly story about a lovable underdog attaining a competely undeserved wictory at the final moments of the boring film? Some of that is deeply rooted in the American phyche and probably shall continue being with us forever.
Anyway... what is YOUR take on the In The Realm of Senses? Did you find it artistic in the unique sense, or just plain gratuitously vulgar?
Hello Victor,Agreed. Taste is pretty much a function of one's upbringing, education being a primary component
thereof. I guess much of the vitriol and enmity which gets stirred up during discussions about
things which have a strong subjective component to them is when one confuses or blurs the distinction
between what they 'like' and what is 'good'. I tend to think of it as food..candy/treats = 'bad' ,
veggies/5 food groups =' good'( at the risk of oversimplification). I like both, but would be hard pressed
indeed to justify ever calling candied treats good for me! But. human nature being what it is, I guess
people just don't like hearing what they like categorized as trash.... the implicit assumption being
that they're being called stupid. Probably gets most everybody's goat.The American filmmaking industry is an interesting animal. Some of my (US)friends have in fact insisted that
the popularity of American films is proof positive of their inherent superiority ( as films, that is)! This
is probably where it gets tricky...so much being dependent on one's definition of such. As vehicles
of mass communication to reinforce a certain conformist idea ....I guess they are second to none.
But as 'art'...obviously you would disagree;-).I agree that corporatism is one of the ills of mainstream American filmmaking. But I think the constant progression
toward very basic, unsubtle, overly simplified films is also a function of US popular culture. I don't believe, for instance,
that one makes a film with anything other than a domestic audience in mind ( with the exception of a few 'internationalists',
who intentionally pitch their films at international 'art house' audiences ). Most audiences are typically culturally
homogeneous, with shared references, histories etc.. thus there isn't the need to have to put everything in bas relief
or underline every theme. The US demographic audience however, is probably more diverse than most other places.
It is no wonder then that the films, in order to reach as many people as possible, are designed to appeal to the lowest
common denominators : sex, violence, feel good, triumph of the underdog type stories. The films are designed specifically
for easy consumption, to not be challenging, which would otherwise alienate its primary constituency."
Just how many times can you recreate the silly story about a lovable underdog attaining a competely undeserved wictory at the final
moments of the boring film? Some of that is deeply rooted in the American phyche and probably shall continue being with us forever. "LOL!!
Re: In The Realm of The Senses...well, now you've opened a can of worms ;-). While I realize that Oshima's purpose
is to incite indignation in the audience ( I believe one japanese critic called his films ' provocations directed at the spectators ' ),
and in the context / milieu , his aggressive and graphic films work as protest, I have to say that I never warmed to the film.
But then perhaps I was never meant to?Regards,
A.
***I agree that corporatism is one of the ills of mainstream American filmmaking. But I think the constant progression
toward very basic, unsubtle, overly simplified films is also a function of US popular culture.Sigh....
It looks like Oshima was doing to the Japanese public what Pasolini was doing to the Italians... shock, and if they complain - shock them more.
But I don't think the Realm has risen even close to the level of the best Pasolini works.
Hello Victor,Re the quote...just to clarify: I did not mean it in the popular usage of the term 'pop culture', but rather
literally as the more prevalent culture. No elitist nose-raising was implied.Regards,
A.
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 ]
