|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, and we're reminded once again that there's no accounting taste.
|
|
|
|
|
Bah, I'm not into summer movies. I'm waiting for fall with new films coming from Fincher, Paul Thomas Anderson and, cross my fingers, Malick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Too bad fisch doesn't report the upcoming films in international, non-Hollywood cinema. There's just waaaaay too many sequels, prequels, robots, and super-hero garbage out there, but since 98% of this board--and moviegoers in general--absorb the stuff like they would life-giving nutrients, I don't see it changing anytime soon. When is the next Woody Allen Film? Also, I'm glad Twilight Time has his 'Radio Days' coming out in Blu ray soon, I can see that one over and over.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jun 30, 2014 - 7:44 AM
|
|
|
By: |
Thor
(Member)
|
Well, I think you're talking about two different things. Although we would always prefer things to be as good as possible, I think there's a definite need for "bad" blockbuster fodder too. Even if it's idiotic, it provides a certain form of entertainment, whether through visuals, individual setpieces or whatever. It's a release valve in many ways. The second concern you seem to be talking about, however, is the lack of critical sense in the public at large. This is the old "Frankfurter school" of cultural criticism, whereby audiences swallow up the lowest common denominator, thus setting the bar at a disproportionately low place. That can be a problem, but it's somewhat of a different issue. Ideally, we should all be critical individuals who know what we're being served, and judge it accordingly, but that doesn't mean everything should be high-brow art films, or even clever blockbuster films. We need the bad, and it's sometimes healthy to find a certain form of satisfaction in the bad. That's my view, anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|