In Reply to: Re: Ok posted by patrickU on March 20, 2004 at 12:35:42:
The Mona Lisa is a piece of crap. Art critics have kept that painting alive because they are fascinated by the man NOT the work. Jackson Pollack is a prime example. I could vomit on canvas and produced his mess...yet he's a famous painter. Why? Cause he was a drunken fool who dod something different. People assume different is better - it's not. It can be but different itself is nothing.Wine is a food. Lots of very smart people out there who don't drink...It's doubtful they could tell the difference between a $4.00 red or a $150.00 bottle...or at least wouldn't know which would be considered better.
Bottom line is Jaws is a masterpiece. Because you don't like it or don't think it should be so doesn't change the fact that it meets all of the criteria. On lots of critics top 100 list and has survived 30 years...it's part of the canon of film and influenced the summer blockbuster like no other film. At that time it did what it did better than any other film in history...some would argue that it has yet to be surpassed for what it did...and the other film that one could argue surpassed it was by the same director - Raiders.
I don't get why Casablanca is considered a masterpiece I give it ***/*****. The fact is though it has done what Jaws has done(IMO to a lesser degree) but nonetheless it meets the criteria. I'm not wrong--there is no right or wrong.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Yes all ART ALL OF IT is subjective. - RGA 11:33:17 03/21/04 (2)
- Calling the Jaws a "masterpiece" cheapens the whole scale - Victor Khomenko 12:02:29 03/21/04 (1)
- WTF? - RGA 20:03:54 03/21/04 (0)