In Reply to: Are all movies inherently cosmetic and sugar coated? posted by Troy on January 16, 2004 at 09:16:17:
I am not sure where you are going with this.First, a beautiful photography is neither cosmetics nor sugarcoating, in my view, all by itself.
Second... you tried to define the cosmetics... but your definition is deficient. Consmetics is also used to enhance the beauty, and... to create ugliness too.
As such, I do dislike the word cosmetic here, I would much rather use something along the lines of painting.
And sugar coating? Is your goal simply to find some similarities, however small, in both good and bad films so you could then say they both have it? What is your point here?
I think life will be easier for all of us if we simply point at obvious sugar coating where it is objectionable - say, in Virgin Suicides, where it is dripping with it.
On the other hand to suggest that Wild Strawberries also has it, simply because it is put on film... well, I dunno.
Or maybe I am missing your point entirely.
Looking at your title, I think it sez it all - whether or not all films ARE, depends on your perception. If you are inclined to see it in every film, then perhaps you will find it.
Like the proverbial hammer.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- No... - Victor Khomenko 14:16:28 01/16/04 (5)
- Yes - Troy 09:23:01 01/18/04 (0)
- Re: No... - patrickU 07:45:51 01/17/04 (3)
- Re: No... - Victor Khomenko 10:08:32 01/17/04 (2)
- Maybe . . . - Troy 09:28:41 01/18/04 (0)
- Re: No... - patrickU 10:19:57 01/17/04 (0)