I don't know why I even bothered enduring more of this director's abstract pretentious drivel but it's one (Magnolia) two (There Will Be Blood) three strikes (The Master) you're out Mr. Paul Thomas Anderson! For Christ sake's learn to write a coherent story that isn't so mundane and open-ended that we aren't bored out of our minds and left to wonder what the hell it all means. It's a damn shame that the talents of great actors and actresses are wasted on inconsequential films such as The Master.
Last edited by lcbaseball22 on April 2nd, 2015, 5:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
lcbaseball22 wrote:I don't know why I even bothered enduring more of this director's abstract pretentious drivel but it's one (Magnolia) two (There Will Be Blood) three strikes (The Master) you're out Mr. Paul Thomas Anderson! For Christ sake's learn to write a coherent story that isn't so mundane and open-ended that we aren't bored out of our minds and left to wonder what the hell it all means. It's a damn shame that the talents of great actors and actresses are wasted on inconsequential films such as The Master.
I'm serious, it's not an accomplishment to create films that are so abstract and devoid of answers that people can read into them whatever the hell they want. Critics and film watchers alike give this dude waaay too much credit; I question that PTA himself even knows what the hell he's trying to say, what message he wants to convey, etc. So it is though with artsy fartsy types who are drawn to this b.s.
Last edited by lcbaseball22 on April 2nd, 2015, 5:50 pm, edited 3 times in total.
lcbaseball22 wrote:I'm serious, it's not an accomplishment to create films that are so abstract and devoid of answers that people can read into them whatever the hell they want. Critics and film watchers alike give this dude waaay too much credit; I question that PTA himself even knows what the hell he's trying to say, what message he wants to convey, etc
Reducing art to a "message" probably gets close to missing the point of art in the first place.
lcbaseball22 wrote:I'm serious, it's not an accomplishment to create films that are so abstract and devoid of answers that people can read into them whatever the hell they want. Critics and film watchers alike give this dude waaay too much credit; I question that PTA himself even knows what the hell he's trying to say, what message he wants to convey, etc
Reducing art to a "message" probably gets close to missing the point of art in the first place.
-Vader
Well I'm afraid directors such as PTA, Malick, and others have taken the notion of "art" as it pertains to film a bit too far. They would do well to construct films that are more focused and perhaps have a relevant message such as those of Frank Capra, a truly great director. Instead they are style without substance, let alone a cohesive story/plot. Being artsy is fine so long as it isn't at the expense of the story, plot structure, pacing and rythym, relevance of the film, etc. Nolan is a modern filmmaker who combines art and storytelling well, not losing sight of what is important in the making of a film.
lcbaseball22 wrote:
Well I'm afraid directors such as PTA, Malick, and others have taken the notion of "art" as it pertains to film a bit too far.
if filmmakers weren't allowed to experiment and push the boundaries of the medium, it would never evolve and we'd be stuck watching shit like this
and we both you don't want that
Umm, I'm referring to something completely different than simply the progression from silent to talking pictures. Color features, Digital, IMAX, 3D, etc those sort of things have more to do with the evolving of technology than pushing the boundaries of "art", though I do reject the 3D movement as it often makes the visuals paramount to storytelling. Case in point Avatar. Certain directors have done worse though.
lcbaseball22 wrote:
Umm, I'm referring to something completely different than simply the progression from silent to talking pictures. Color features, Digital, IMAX, 3D, etc those sort of things have more to do with the evolving of technology than pushing the boundaries of "art", though I do reject the 3D movement as it often makes the visuals paramount to storytelling. Case in point Avatar. Certain directors have done worse though.
I'm pretty sure he was too. By the way, most people who know a lot about movies classify visual storytelling as the peak of cinematic art.
lcbaseball22 wrote:
Umm, I'm referring to something completely different than simply the progression from silent to talking pictures. Color features, Digital, IMAX, 3D, etc
so the only difference you can spot between that short and modern films is that it's silent and black & white?
For Christ sake's learn to write a coherent story that isn't so mundane and open-ended that we aren't bored out of our minds and left to wonder what the hell it all means. It's a damn shame that the talents of great actors and actresses are wasted on inconsequential films such as The Master.
