I went to this movie on the off-chance. While it was not in anyway narratively interesting, I am stunned by its visual impact. I don't give a flying fuck about its story, in fact. I just want to experience it again. Interestingly enough, the movie does destroy the possibility of narrative and takes it right down to the personal, visual experience.
Wonderful set-pieces here. Stunning movie.
Stunning.
I like the idea of a popular movie destroying narrative but keeping it all the same. I know that makes no sense, but you have to experience the movie to understand, I fear.
Now, that said, I think I was compelled by this movie, because it tried to establish a story (and that silly purpose remained throughout) but what really became important was how the visual becomes the sole purpose.
To me this movie was a very expensive art movie that someone got away with it.
That stuns me.
Analysis hat is on tight. Stay tuned for some pop-culture analysis.
Monday, February 11, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Things ain’t what they used to be
A flute Some woodwinds An announcer A fifteen year old Pianist What is
-
The trio vs. the pirate-ladyman Recently lis opined that no native Utard remembers Lighthouse 20, the kid show that was broadcast on UHF cha...
-
This should help you out with your next TV script: Television Tropes & Idioms . Don't forget, if you are doing a love story, your ...
-
I've been thinking about this for a few Hours My sternum turned to bone All of a sudden I knew a cat With a similar Condition Sternum pr...
No comments:
Post a Comment