 |
| |
|
|
Elok
|
 |
Land of Ramen Dragons
Mar 2003
time: 00:30
|
|
Which, in your opinion, is a greater technical accomplishment, speaks more to the universal human condition, shows greater innovation and daring, and/or is generally a better movie?
Citizen Kane:
-Pioneered new camera and storytelling techniques, such as ultra-low-angle shots of characters to convey power and height.
-Made a point about the yearning for lost innocence and human contact felt by a wealthy man, and by extension the sorrows of all who succeed.
-Was supressed at first, still loved by many, but is really a pretty stupid movie if you sit down to watch it.
On the other hand, Jackass:
-Pioneered many new techniques of a very different kind. It can safely be said, for example, that never before in the history of the fine arts has a man been filmed while voluntarily inhaling a large clump of Japanese horseradish through his nose.
-Focused on the theme that it is highly amusing when people deliberately seek pain and humiliation for the entertainment of others.
-Was supressed at first, still loved by many, but is really a pretty stupid movie if you sit down to watch it.
Discuss.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
molly bloom
|
 |
Lundenwic
Oct 2001
time: 15:30
|
|
Umm, the Eloked version of 'Hamlet'-
boy is depressed, 'cos he thinks his new stepdad killed his father who was also his stepdad's brother. And boy may have hots for his mum. Can't make up his mind what to do, kills an old scrote accidentally (who also happens to be his on-off girlfriend's dad), eventually stops whining, kills his ex-girlfriend's brother, his mother dies and his stepdad is killed. Oh, and his dad's ghost comes back and tells him to avenge him, which starts the whole thing off. I mean, why not just get counselling for his oedipal issues? And either finish the degree, or get a proper job.
'Hamlet' or 'The Young and the Restless'- which is the best soap opera?
'Oedipus Rex' or 'Coronation Street'?
'Phedre' or 'Chateauvallon'?
'Faust' or 'Kommissar Rex' ?
It's easy to trivialize any work of art by reducing it to its supposed 'message' - I mean, why didn't Michelangelo just write in real big letters 'read the Bible' instead of painting all that eyewash....
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Elok
|
|
Land of Ramen Dragons
Mar 2003
time: 00:30
|
|
No, Hamlet addresses something-several themes, actually- that are relevant to people from all walks of life and not hackneyed and overdone even for the time it was made. E.G. finding the greater truth in a world of lies, dealing with the uncertainty of all knowledge and the moral dilemmas inherent in life without sure definitions...and those are just the ones that really sounded with me. Charles Foster Kane is just a silly ass who, so far as I can recall, gets precisely what he deserves. If you can cite me an instance in which his misfortunes are not ultimately his own doing, please do. It's been a few years since I saw it, and I'm figuring that, having seen it about three times in my life, and coming to the conclusion that it was stupid each time, it would not become worthwhile from a fourth watching. I'l find out in a few weeks anyway since I HAVE to watch it for film class...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
molly bloom
|
|
Lundenwic
Oct 2001
time: 15:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Elok
Okay, so he's tragic. He's also a sleazewad, so what makes him a hero? |
Hamlet's a prince who is unable to sh!t or get off the pot- why should we care about an aristo who had everything handed to him on a plate, and is just unable to make up his mind?
Richard III is a sleazewad psychopath who kills one prince then marries that man's widow. And has his own brother's children killed. I mean, how low can you go?
You miss the point- Kane isn't a sleazewad as a child. The film examines what makes a man the man he is- and how does he appear to himself and to other people? He transforms himself after being taken from the secure childhood of the sled and the family home and sent to boarding school into the press tycoon and political fixer- and yet his marriage collapses and he sacrifices everything for love of a mistress.
'Kane' is hardly reducible to a plot synopsis or an inaccurate character demolition- the film is more than just those two things.
The image of 'Rosebud' the sled is a symbol used in much the same way that Shakespeare used repeated thematic imagery in his plays, images of melting and transformation in 'Antony and Cleopatra', blood, night and death in 'Macbeth' and opposites in 'Othello': it doesn't explain the film any more than the vivid imagery explains the plays, but it serves as a hook to draw us in and to lead us through the fractured chronology of 'Kane'.
I could go on about the photography of Gregg Toland, the acting of various cast members, the script, the revolutionary use of fake newsreels, experimental use of dialogue and sound effects, etc, etc. But if you think 'Citizen Kane' the film, depends simply on the alleged character of its chief protagonist, then why bother?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30.
Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
01-09-2003 18:23
I thought this thread was a joke when I first saw it. Citizen Kane, a film regarded by many critics as one of the greats, and praised by many people, against a few kids beating each other up and jumping off things. Yeh Jackass is funny, but it's not a great film by any stretch of the imagination, IMHO. Are people actually serious in comparing it to Citizen Kane? I can understand the new boundaries thing, but Titanic broke boundaries, and I hope we're not going to hail that as a great film?
|