As for Schrader's essay not being "A MOMENT in film culture." I agree, it fails. (We might fail similarly in our early 60s -- maybe that'll be yr comeuppance, Eric Amberson Minafer.) But the questions intrigue me. Do wejust to continue to stack Spielberg next to Jenni Olson next to Apichatpong Weerasethakul without knowing why?
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Friday, 17 November 2006 17:46 (seventeen years ago) link
― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Friday, 17 November 2006 18:06 (seventeen years ago) link
I think lit-crit has more agreed-upon canonical criteria than film-crit, but since I don't read much of it that could be a delusion.
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Friday, 17 November 2006 18:09 (seventeen years ago) link
― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn (Alfred Soto), Friday, 17 November 2006 18:22 (seventeen years ago) link
― benrique (Enrique), Monday, 20 November 2006 12:58 (seventeen years ago) link
― jhoshea megafauna (scoopsnoodle), Monday, 20 November 2006 13:02 (seventeen years ago) link
― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 20 November 2006 13:13 (seventeen years ago) link
pdf of the whole essay here:
http://www.m31films.com/?p=8
Schrader on morality, for jhoshea (as mayb you shouldn't snicker at the word, but how he defines its role in his aesthetic):
I'm reluctant to introduce the oldest (and hoariest) artistic criterion, morality, a criterion that streches from Plato... to Ruskin and Leavis (every great work is a great moral work). It's not that I feel moral arguments have no place in the discussion of art, just that they are better implied than spelled out... It makes sense that great films have great moral resonance. I just don't see the aesthetic value of setting one moral resonance against another. Leni Riefenstahl's Nazi documentary Triumph of the Will is arguably the quintessential motion picture, the fulcrum of the century of cinema ...of course, it's a work of moral resonance. Good or bad resonance? Most everyone would agree it's evil, but that's beside the point. The point is that no work that fails to strike moral chords can be canonical.
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 20 November 2006 15:01 (seventeen years ago) link
― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 20 November 2006 15:07 (seventeen years ago) link
― benrique (Enrique), Monday, 20 November 2006 15:08 (seventeen years ago) link
xpost
Tracer, the Schrader quote? or asserting that the collage/Corleone analogy is funny?
We can "fuck" L.R. all we want (and why not), but the grammar of film was altered permanently by her.
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 20 November 2006 15:14 (seventeen years ago) link
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 20 November 2006 15:15 (seventeen years ago) link
― benrique (Enrique), Monday, 20 November 2006 15:16 (seventeen years ago) link
― jhoshea megafauna (scoopsnoodle), Monday, 20 November 2006 15:23 (seventeen years ago) link
following Leni: Frank Capra? Kenneth Anger? David Fincher?
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 20 November 2006 15:25 (seventeen years ago) link
which is curious, i note idly, given that tarantino can be very funny, and warm, while michael corleone is famous for his punishing absence of either
anyway, it's hard to talk about this either way, since i imagine very few people have read his thoughts and reasons behind his criteria, which i gather is the only thing up for discussion (since you don't want to debate the list and i don't blame you)
that said, i am suspicious of his criteria, given how many titles on his list are predictable "what a movie critic would like" movies; i am suspicious of "repeatability" (i have had very little desire to see any movie twice, ESPECIALLY my favorites); suspicious of the idea that there is a firmament of great movies
― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 20 November 2006 15:25 (seventeen years ago) link
― jhoshea megafauna (scoopsnoodle), Monday, 20 November 2006 15:26 (seventeen years ago) link
― benrique (Enrique), Monday, 20 November 2006 15:31 (seventeen years ago) link
Dude, this is just damn weird (and I buy DVDs with reluctance and infrequently, as I don't believe in endless rewatchings).
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 20 November 2006 15:36 (seventeen years ago) link
― Euai Kapaui (tracerhand), Monday, 20 November 2006 15:38 (seventeen years ago) link
― benrique (Enrique), Monday, 20 November 2006 15:44 (seventeen years ago) link
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 20 November 2006 15:46 (seventeen years ago) link
The trouble with building a canon of films today is that the art is so new that no one knows what will last or why. Certainly, mere technical excellence or innovation are not useful criteria. Longevity in maintaining an audience is not yet established. As a result, far, far too many films will be listed and only a handful of these are likely to interest more than a few academics in 2100.
― Aimless (Aimless), Monday, 20 November 2006 18:25 (seventeen years ago) link
― Eric H. (Eric H.), Monday, 20 November 2006 18:47 (seventeen years ago) link
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 20 November 2006 18:54 (seventeen years ago) link
In any case, this year's detrius thread may be diminished significantly if the VV doesn't do their poll. (I hear Lim is trying to coordinate a reasonable alternative, though I haven't heard anything about which venue he wants to use ... NYT?)
― Eric H. (Eric H.), Monday, 20 November 2006 19:03 (seventeen years ago) link
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 20 November 2006 20:04 (seventeen years ago) link
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Monday, 20 November 2006 20:18 (seventeen years ago) link
― Eric H. (Eric H.), Tuesday, 21 November 2006 08:28 (seventeen years ago) link
-- Aimless (aimles...), November 20th, 2006.
"The rule of thumb for literature has long been that, if a signifigant number of people (not merely a few academic specialists) still read a book with pleasure and interest 100 years after it was published, then it qualifies as a classic."
old farts like harold bloom would disagree.
"Certainly, mere technical excellence or innovation are not useful criteria."
no? james joyce does ok on these grounds
"The trouble with building a canon of films today is that the art is so new that no one knows what will last or why."
this has been true of literature also. but people do think they know why things wil survive -- eg because it belongs to a tradition. that's how eng lit canonistas roll, anyway.
"Longevity in maintaining an audience is not yet established."
more so than with literature!
― benrique (Enrique), Tuesday, 21 November 2006 09:31 (seventeen years ago) link
I hate to get all Godfrey Cheshire on yo ass, but the art is on its deathbed.
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 21 November 2006 14:23 (seventeen years ago) link
im (re?)reading this
he sure makes some odd claims
like pauline kael's 'trash art and the movies' is 'the most influential article in the history of film criticism'
really dude? really?
idk
i guess there's no such thing rly
― letz talk abt (history mayne), Wednesday, 7 April 2010 11:21 (fourteen years ago) link
influential = lots of non-critics read it
― filling the medicare donut hole with the semen of liberal (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 7 April 2010 11:24 (fourteen years ago) link
Matt Zoller Seitz is murdering the classics! You can too...
http://www.salon.com/life/slide_shows/index.html?story=/ent/movies/film_salon/2010/09/10/movie_heresy_slide_show
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 11 September 2010 17:44 (thirteen years ago) link
Gran Torino is a classic?
― Fig On A Plate Cart (Alex in SF), Saturday, 11 September 2010 17:54 (thirteen years ago) link
maybe this guy can put together the Kill Your Idols of cinema!
― da croupier, Saturday, 11 September 2010 17:56 (thirteen years ago) link
can't wait to find out what the cinematic equivalent of Paul McCartney's Ram is
The Science of Sleep.
― Gucci Mane hermeneuticist (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 11 September 2010 17:59 (thirteen years ago) link
Good thread revives all around today, Morbs. I was just thinking about starting that "Make your own S&S '12 ballots" list thread this afternoon.
― Eric H., Saturday, 11 September 2010 17:59 (thirteen years ago) link
if he wanted to take down an eastwood movie he should have gone with unforgiven
― buzza, Saturday, 11 September 2010 18:39 (thirteen years ago) link
or, given its surprisingly unimpeachable status among cinephiles, Bridges of Madison County
― Eric H., Saturday, 11 September 2010 18:43 (thirteen years ago) link
is that unimpeachable? i always thought it was on the lesser end of his critical adorations. could be mistaking Anthony Lane with general consensus.
MZS right about Gran Torino. Unforgiven is great fuiud.
― a cankle of rads (Gukbe), Saturday, 11 September 2010 19:21 (thirteen years ago) link
Unforgiven realy did not break new ground, even Clintwise, as was claimed.
I had Madison Co on for the first 15 mins on TCM last week and myGgod, they hadnt even gotten to Clint and Meryl yet. Never seen, but I will skip the first reel if I ever do.
― kind of shrill and very self-righteous (Dr Morbius), Saturday, 11 September 2010 20:37 (thirteen years ago) link
Not necessarily about breaking new ground though is it.
Madison County is pretty tedious.
― a cankle of rads (Gukbe), Saturday, 11 September 2010 20:41 (thirteen years ago) link
Streep and Eastwood are excellent together; it's still one of her best.
― Gucci Mane hermeneuticist (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Saturday, 11 September 2010 20:44 (thirteen years ago) link
just wanted to pop in and say I caught Blue Collar on cable last night, had seen it before, but damn that is a good movie.
― Richard Nixon's Field of Warmth (Shakey Mo Collier), Wednesday, 10 August 2011 22:12 (twelve years ago) link
I've only seen it once, but thought it was good--best after Affliction for me, being a director I don't usually care for.
― clemenza, Thursday, 11 August 2011 00:18 (twelve years ago) link
i totally want to build a film cannon, to shoot film critics with
― ice cr?m, Thursday, 11 August 2011 00:22 (twelve years ago) link
I was talking about Light of Day with a friend this morning. Schrader misjudges (typically) how good Joan Jett is.
― a 'catch-all', almost humorous, 'Jeez' quality (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 11 August 2011 00:25 (twelve years ago) link