Jump to content

callee

Member
  • Content count

    2
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About callee

  • Rank
    Member
  1. he does over-simplify, but that is to be expected (and excused, imo) in a 5 minute video. I think he does miss a lot of the "why" though: why did objective artistic standards suddenly decline? Of course, they did so in conjunction with (and as a reflection of) a broader trend in all of society to question and undermine objective standards (i.e. postmodernism, etc.). In that context, modern art offers just as many strengths as the modern (or post modern) version of any subject - and there definitely are strengths. My own field of theology, for example, has made many of what can only be called advancements in reaction to the challenges of post-modernism, and post-modern theology is in many way superior to its pre-modern counter-part (and vice versa). In other words, I couldn't accept wholesale his rejection of modern art - I'd give the standard baby and bathwater response to that. But he does nevertheless make a good point about how art must be something more than merely self-expression. I don't see how "art" as a field, however, could be renewed outside of a general renewal of all of society. That, and I'm glad this thread wasn't about the 2009 Jonathan Parker film "Untitled"
  2. Spring Breakers

    I finally watched this last night. I hadn't planned to. When I saw the advertisements back when it came out, I dismissed it as one of those shallow teenybopper movies filled with annoying music, needless t&a, and over-filled with the latest cool trends - with the added bonus in this case of a couple former disney stars trying to shed their squeaky clean images. Not my kind of thing. Then I happened to read a couple reviews - the NY Times comes to mind - which suggested that there might actually be some substance to it. Interesting, but I still was persuaded to run out. But when I found a copy in a bargain bin for a couple dollars, I finally decided to take a chance. What did I think? Way too early to say for sure. My hamster runs slowly, it will take me a while to process my thoughts fully. I can say a few things though. First, I was right that it was filled with annoying EDM, so unless that's your thing, be prepared to keep turning the stereo down. Second, I was also right that it was filled with a ridiculous amount of gratuitous nudity, as well as many other forms of bona fide debauchery. If you're the type of faith person who will count up and catalogue such occurrences and condem a film solely on their presence, then this one is definitely not for you. But I was wrong that it was a shallow, meaningless teeny-bopper flick. There was most certainly substance to it. What, I can't yet say, but this film defintiely challenged me to think about something, it confronted some perspective I thought I was comfortable with. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it was some mind-blowing derrida tome set to film, only that this was most certainly a movie that - as some other guy might say - had things that meant things.
×