![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Feb. 25th, 2003 05:23 amIt's somewhat typical since I work the midnight shift alone, but I'm in a really great mood and there's no one around to share it with. I'm too ready to start spending time beyond doors and windows, but the weather is miserable and confining. I've been watching a lot of movies lately and reading to pass the time until spring, and my seasonal job at the golf course begins again today. Jeanne ordered The Restraint of Beasts by Magnus Mills and Charles Bukowski's Post Office and Ham on Rye for me from Amazon as a Valentine's Day gift of sorts. (She's great!) The Restraint of Beasts is the funniest book I've read in a long time, and I put off everything I could while trying to finish it in one sitting. I just started Ham on Rye, but I've been distracted...
I watched Blue Velvet yesterday for the first time. My co-worker Bill and I once had a conversation about the worst movies we've ever seen, and he said that Blue Velvet is so bad that he has watched it several times thinking that it SHOULD get better. I didn't think it was bad. I initially thought that any of the plot or acting's artificial misgivings were offset by the bipolar theme and performances of Dennis Hopper and Sam Rockwell, and that Lynch's 'ode to B-Movies approach' is a diverting vehicle for substance. I found an article here that defines the film as a post-modern masterpiece... "simultaneously hyper-realising and decentering narrative is what Blue Velvet is about." and "the fearful knowledge that what most of us consider our deepest and strongest desires are not our own, that our dreams and fantasies are only copies, audio and video tapes, of the desires of others and our utterances of them lip-synching of these circulating, endlessly reproduced and reproducible desires." I think I am enjoying reading what the film is supposed to represent more than I did watching it. What I didn't enjoy about the movie, the artificiality, is apparently a key metaphor. While that is interesting to think about, I think that intellectual metaphors can be induced by the viewer to guard their ego when they fail to understand or appreciate something an artist is conveying. I do it (especially if I'm stoned) and it makes films and literature cognitively rewarding, but I also wonder if the artist has delved his own imagination deeply into these fabrications or if critical acclaim and intuitive-ego invent in his stead.
"Consider the daffodil. And while you're doing that, I'll be over here, looking through your stuff." - Jack Handy
Now I understand what the Anthrax song "Now It's Dark" is about...one of my favorite songs when I was a young teenager. It's strange now how it has taken on new meaning.
Maybe I should watch Blue Velvet again, but I can easily recommend One Hour Photo or Bowling for Columbine with more confidence in praise. ...not that I have any shortage of time on my hands.
I watched Blue Velvet yesterday for the first time. My co-worker Bill and I once had a conversation about the worst movies we've ever seen, and he said that Blue Velvet is so bad that he has watched it several times thinking that it SHOULD get better. I didn't think it was bad. I initially thought that any of the plot or acting's artificial misgivings were offset by the bipolar theme and performances of Dennis Hopper and Sam Rockwell, and that Lynch's 'ode to B-Movies approach' is a diverting vehicle for substance. I found an article here that defines the film as a post-modern masterpiece... "simultaneously hyper-realising and decentering narrative is what Blue Velvet is about." and "the fearful knowledge that what most of us consider our deepest and strongest desires are not our own, that our dreams and fantasies are only copies, audio and video tapes, of the desires of others and our utterances of them lip-synching of these circulating, endlessly reproduced and reproducible desires." I think I am enjoying reading what the film is supposed to represent more than I did watching it. What I didn't enjoy about the movie, the artificiality, is apparently a key metaphor. While that is interesting to think about, I think that intellectual metaphors can be induced by the viewer to guard their ego when they fail to understand or appreciate something an artist is conveying. I do it (especially if I'm stoned) and it makes films and literature cognitively rewarding, but I also wonder if the artist has delved his own imagination deeply into these fabrications or if critical acclaim and intuitive-ego invent in his stead.
"Consider the daffodil. And while you're doing that, I'll be over here, looking through your stuff." - Jack Handy
Now I understand what the Anthrax song "Now It's Dark" is about...one of my favorite songs when I was a young teenager. It's strange now how it has taken on new meaning.
Maybe I should watch Blue Velvet again, but I can easily recommend One Hour Photo or Bowling for Columbine with more confidence in praise. ...not that I have any shortage of time on my hands.