Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Severian
I'm sorry, but I must respectfully call bullshit here. There are many Batman stories that are just as high in literary merit as violence, and the two are fully comparable. The lack of a cape and cowl on a main character does not make the story higher in literary merit.
|
I wasn't comparing comic to comic, only movie to movie. Noisefield made a straw man argument that Cronenberg's criticism wasn't valid because of the source for his screenplay. I mistakenly bit with "Sandman" in mind (which has nothing to do with either, only with the potential beauty of the graphic novel).
Bottom line is that Cronenberg has made more and consistenly much more interesting movies than Nolan (except for the ones i haven't seen haa haa). Cronenberg just isn't as successful because his stuff is not dumb enough for a rollercoaster ride theme. I'm not blaming Nolan per se, he showed lots of promise at the start, but shit, you know how many movie executives have a hand in the sort of stuff he makes?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Severian
I just think his criticisms show a surprising lack of insight, and a very narrow view on hits part. Which is disappointing since the guy is such a great filmmaker. Not that anything he's done has shit on Inception or the Dark Knight trilogy.
|
the dark night trilogy is a series of above-average summer blockbusters that only blow the minds of the highly impressionable. it can be great fun, but it's not "great art," and wanting to hype it as some sort of supreme achievement of the human spirit just makes me want to tear it apart (translation: fanbois are ruining my fun).
i know i often come across as a patronizing cunt (i don't try to, i'm just wired that way), but i'm not saying this out of snobbery-- i love trashy stuff, but i love trashy stuff that doesn't pretend to be something else. e.g.-- spartacus blood and sand is about sex and gore and i gave it 5 netflix stars because it does what it promises very well. it doesn't provide you with the meaning of life or questions about what it means to be human, and it doesn't provide you with complex moral dilemmas-- it gives you tits, ass, and chopped-off heads, plus some cheesy effects that make you go "yeaaah!!". the same way for example a pb&j is yummy but it's not a french pastry, and calling it "classic American cuisine" isn't going to add subtle layers of exquisite flavor to it.
for my money, avengers was better than batman this summer, and then 3 summers ago or whenever that was, iron man was better than the joker movie. if the joker guy hadn't ODed before his movie i don't think the hype would have been so huge. hype loves a tragedy.
okay, to be fair, i haven't seen inception, but netflix predicts i'll only give it 3 stars, and that shit knows me so well it's usually pretty accurate within 1/2 star. so i'll watch it, but i'm not expecting anything great, and the trailer stinks and it stank when it came out which is why i didn't see it in the first place. do you think it will be better or more revolutionary than "Videodrome"? i'll find out i suppose. on the other hand, netflix expects i'll give "13 assassins" and "the black power of mixtape" 5 stars each.