Consider this a criticism on those that would call the use of ultra-violence in films, “Good Art”. I’ll use the film Hostel as my example.
Some would say that Hostel is merely a subversive commentary on Capitalism; its perversion of those who have amassed great wealth through it and those who are abused by its disparities.
If I really want to see the absolute disparity that capitalism causes, I don’t need to pay $9 to watch grotesque brutality preceded by soft porn - I’ll just take a walk down my street.
And since when did ‘good art’ include women having their eyes ripped out of their face and blow torched?
Eye on the the TV
'Cause tragedy thrills me
Whatever flavor it happens to be, like...
"Killed by the husband"
"Drowned by the ocean"
"Shot by his own son"
"She used a poison
in his tea...kissed him goodbye"
That's my kind of story
It's no fun 'til someone dies
Pre-emptively I would say that sensational journalism has aestheticized violence, but then I would be kidding myself. I mean the human race has always thrived on tragedy. Think about it: during the Roman Era, slaves were forced to fight to the death in the middle of a Coliseum full of bloodthirsty spectators. During the Middle Ages, women purported to be witches were burned alive in front of approving audiences. Public lynchings weren’t outlawed in the United States until 1918. When they hung Saddam Hussein, how many of you googled it?
I need to watch things die... from a good safe distance
Vicariously I live while the whole world dies
I used to like scary movies. No really, I did. I mean, what 15 year old girl doesn’t love a great excuse to bury her face in some guy’s arm?
But then I saw tragedy, horror, death with my own eyes, in my own life happening to people I care about and suddenly watching movies with all those things seemed like an insult to the true pain I had witnessed – a profane imitation of real life events that only serves to upset me to see it. So I choose not to watch those things.
But for all you people out there who really do honestly dig horror flicks, don’t feel too bad. You’re just following the lead of every generation that has come before you. Just don’t parade your basic desire to see explicit violence and tragedy as an appreciation for good art, and don’t judge me for not joining the masses.
Why can’t we just admit it… we all feed on tragedy.
Vicarious – 10,00 Days, Tool
Parts Per Billion 2014 cz dubbing film download etelka [720p] celý český
titulky
-
🎞️ Parts Per Billion blu ray cz celý film hd 2014
*jak sledovat filmů Parts Per Billion online cz dubbing stream onlinee csfd
2014*
Parts Per Billion 20...
4 years ago
7 comments:
I feel the same way.
Art imitates life. Life includes...but is not limited to...violence. To avoid art simply because of violence is to increasingly narrow oneself.
What the seeker of good art must do is discern all facets of art. If there is going to be violence, then it should be done tastefully. The same goes for sex, love, comedy, tragedy, and the mundane. But taste is subjective. Subjectivity is the beauty of freedom.
And what of the fact that sometimes violence is grotesque? What of the fact that sex sometimes is awkward or that true love is sometimes anticlimactic? To portray these things as they are isn't always an insult. Sometimes it is a testament.
But no one should ever push a preference.
There's a blurry line between art and sensationalism. Some of the most renowned art in the world is sensational, i.e. Manet painting nude prostitutes in the style of the old masters, or Damien Hirst's stuff. We can't say that something is not art simply because it titillates or shocks the viewer.
However, that being said, there are artists and filmmakers who handle strong subjects like violence much better than others. And if you can't do it well, why even go there, you know? Amateurs always try to go for the glory — just stick to what you do best. I haven't seen Hostel, but I do have a severe aversion to violence-for-the-sake-of-violence because it's usually just a cover-up for poor filmmaking skills ... throw in some violence and sex and the viewer will feel like they experienced something, if only empty titillation.
I love the movie History of Violence. It's one of the most shockingly violent movies I've ever seen — but the violence is purposeful and expertly handled. It's well-made art, and beautiful.
I watched no country for old men last night. I kind of liked it, but it also kind of was boring, and I was fighting hard to stay awake towards the end.
but I find most movies to be pretty boring. I think most of them should be about 30 minutes shorter. at least 30 minutes shorter.
but I did like it when the dude dressed in black shot people with his special weapons. that was pretty cool.
Brian, I loved! No Country For Old Men, but I think it was because I read the book just a few days before I saw the movie. That made all the difference, because then it wasn't about waiting to see what would happen (it's not that sort of story). I could just sit back and enjoy the characters. And the dialogue.
e.g.
- Where’d you get the pistol?
- At the gettin’ place.
I totally agree that most movies should be at least 30 minutes shorter. This is true.
clint - to avoid pain in real life is to narrow yourself. to avoid art because it causes you pain is simply a preference.
ck - i agree with everything you said... i was more driving the point home that not all shocking and violent art qualifies as good art and that using those techniques can be, like you said, a cop out because it caters to our basic human nature of desiring stimulation.
btm - do you like any movies?
I like everything is illuminated. I think I am the only person in the world who likes this film.
Post a Comment