In Reply to: Re: Citizen Kane, Rashomon: am I missing something? posted by RGA on December 14, 2005 at 19:19:13:
I can find points of agreement for both sides. Many forms of art necessitate background knowledge for full appreciation. But more often than not (call me boring and mundane), I prefer to have a movie which can be understood without any additional knowledge. Don't get me wrong: I like movies that make you think. However, I'm not sure about movies that make you think AFTER having mapped out the entire history of film until (and after) the point when that particular film was made...
Cheers,
Chris
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Interesting thoughts. I can understand both points of view... - TopPop 19:43:39 12/14/05 (6)
- Re: Interesting thoughts. I can understand both points of view... - RGA 23:38:17 12/14/05 (5)
- It was based on William Randolph Hearst. - Revolver66 09:25:43 12/15/05 (4)
- Re: It was based on William Randolph Hearst. - RGA 10:25:12 12/15/05 (3)
- Re: It was based on William Randolph Hearst. - Revolver66 11:12:34 12/15/05 (2)
- Re: It was based on William Randolph Hearst. - RGA 15:48:38 12/17/05 (1)
- Re: It was based on William Randolph Hearst. - Revolver66 07:40:05 12/19/05 (0)