― JesseFox (JesseFox), Thursday, 3 July 2003 16:45 (twenty years ago) link
― JesseFox (JesseFox), Thursday, 3 July 2003 16:46 (twenty years ago) link
i agree of course. and part of my point was that since i dont particularly distinguish between "pop" and "art" in my own viewing i have notice a peculiar double standard in the way people approach pop films vs. self consciously artistic films. seeing as how i dont find hypertextuality or metatextuality very interesting in either case i dont know what i would make of CA2.
Adaptation, however, is not that great but it DOES do more interesting things by being metatextual than just the standard Godardian "hey i'm a movie" stuff.
― ryan (ryan), Thursday, 3 July 2003 17:40 (twenty years ago) link
Despite this, I liked it, though not as much as the first one even though McG's finally realised he's directing a MOVIE and not a bunch of music videos connected only by ass-shots. But his very competence is part of the problem - the very fact that there's some attention to narrative flow (and even occasional ill-timed realism)this time means there's less room for the out-and-out goofiness of last time - now when Cameron dances it's all stylised instead of silly, and with Cameron silly is funnier.
Also don't think the references resonate in any way - the Hammerdance should be hilarious but is only amusing because it's not adding any new blood to an old joke.
Soundtrack is terrific, though.
― b.R.A.d. (Brad), Saturday, 5 July 2003 02:30 (twenty years ago) link
― PVC (peeveecee), Wednesday, 27 August 2003 22:30 (twenty years ago) link
― erik, Monday, 1 September 2003 17:15 (twenty years ago) link
― Pete Scholtes, Thursday, 11 September 2003 18:14 (twenty years ago) link
― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Friday, 12 September 2003 14:15 (twenty years ago) link