The very many questions-not-worth-their-own-thread question thread XXV

[Dachs]

Did you hear his New Hope commentary? He doesn't spend the entire movie rambling about how amazing it is; he points out plot holes and questionable acting wherever it is.

IMHO he actually gives the prequels too much credit, but whatever. Critics of the reviews tend to obsess over little details without picking at his real criticisms.

I'm not a "critic of the reviews"; people kept bugging me to watch them, so I did, fairly reluctantly, because I don't enjoy watching reviews of anything. And I wasn't overly impressed, like I said. That's it. I didn't give enough of a damn to nitpick what he had to say. I noticed some things that were legit, some things that weren't, and came away from the whole thing annoyed at wasting my time.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

"Ignore it if you like cause it's all contradictory and probably didn't happen" isn't less dumb than anything, sorry.

That's not quite a fair characterization.

 

[Dachs]

That's not quite a fair characterization.

With the Abrams movies out now, it's broadly true.

 

[sophie]

And so "entertainment is subjective" is your grand rebuttal? Of course entertainment is subjective- with enough psychedelics you could watch Mark Hamill scratch his head for three hours and have a blast- but art, by human standards, is objective, and your enjoyment of the prequels doesn't change or alleviate their utter failure in the slightest.

Art really isn't objective at all. It's why this

and this

and this

can all be equally moving to me, when to some the first and second are trash, and to others the third might be rote and dull.

 

[Mouthwash]

Art really isn't objective at all. It's why this

and this

and this

can all be equally moving to me, when to some the first and second are trash, and to others the third might be rote and dull.

No, it means that you've really gotten the good stuff.

 

[Camikaze]

can all be equally moving to me

I'm curious, as someone who appreciates and likes looking at art, but doesn't find it at all 'moving', what does that mean? What sort of emotions does art move?

 

[Hygro]

I'm curious, as someone who appreciates and likes looking at art, but doesn't find it at all 'moving', what does that mean? What sort of emotions does art move?

All I can say is go to more galleries and museums. I wouldn't try to get an answer for your question, or you render more of yourself to your verbal processing center.

 

[Camikaze]

I've been to dozens all over the place, but still don't quite understand what people mean when they say they are moved by art, as opposed to appreciating it. I dunno if it's just another way of describing the same experience I have, or if it's something else entirely.

 

[Hygro]

I've been to dozens all over the place, but still don't quite understand what people mean when they say they are moved by art, as opposed to appreciating it. I dunno if it's just another way of describing the same experience I have, or if it's something else entirely.

If you don't know it, you haven't felt it yet. But there is the kind of appreciation that you've probably felt that later feedbacks into being emotionally moving. But yeah, there's a feeling, it's intense.

 

[Mise]

Yeah, I'm not "moved" by paintings/sculptures/etc either, Camikaze. I'm moved by the way people describe their own emotions about a particular work, but I could never get that emotive about a work myself. I'm moved by music, I'm moved by great prose, and I've moved by movies, but I'm just not that fussed about art galleries. NLP folks would say I was low on the "visual external" scale.

 

[Yeekim]

Yeah, I'm not "moved" by paintings/sculptures/etc either, Camikaze. I'm moved by the way people describe their own emotions about a particular work, but I could never get that emotive about a work myself. I'm moved by music, I'm moved by great prose, and I've moved by movies, but I'm just not that fussed about art galleries. NLP folks would say I was low on the "visual external" scale.

That's me, pretty much.

 

[bhsup]

For what it's worth, Owen, I rather like that second one, and obviously the third one is lovely. That first one, however....

 

[timtofly]

It reminded me of the twin towers, and if that recollection does not move you, you may not be an American. Just saying not making any judgment calls nor trying to put any thoughts in any one's head. I apologize if my thoughts created any negativity or hard feelings. My second thought was math.

 

[Farm Boy]

Yeah, I'm not "moved" by paintings/sculptures/etc either, Camikaze. I'm moved by the way people describe their own emotions about a particular work, but I could never get that emotive about a work myself. I'm moved by music, I'm moved by great prose, and I've moved by movies, but I'm just not that fussed about art galleries. NLP folks would say I was low on the "visual external" scale.

I'm mostly the same, but it does mostly register if I can actually watch somebody craft, say, a fine piece of woodwork. But going in later to the gallery? Yea, a pretty boring way for me to spend a day pretty much. And from what I can tell the one in Chicago is at least half decent.

 

[sophie]

I'm curious, as someone who appreciates and likes looking at art, but doesn't find it at all 'moving', what does that mean? What sort of emotions does art move?

Moving as in the first time I saw a Rothko it actually brought me to tears. Getting to see that Botticelli in person was a pretty powerful experience too.

 

[bhsup]

Music can easily move me like that, but I cannot really think of an instance where still visual art (paintings, sculptures, etc) has. Well, unless you consider nature to be God doing art. I've been massively moved by some landscapes.

 

[Camikaze]

I find it really interesting to hear that Owen, because it's such a foreign concept to me. I understand being moved by music or a movie or something, but getting that from art isn't something I can imagine. Goes to show that people experience stimulus in different ways, I suppose, and highlights the intersubjectivity, rather than objectivity, of critical standards for art, music, film, etc..

 

[Phrossack]

I can't comprehend being moved by art, unless someone knocks me off my feet with a well-aimed bowling ball depicting Mediterranean scenes or something. Movies? Yes. Music? Yep. Books? Sure. But art?

Of course, this is just, you know, like, my opinion, man.

 

[sophie]

I find it really interesting to hear that Owen, because it's such a foreign concept to me. I understand being moved by music or a movie or something, but getting that from art isn't something I can imagine. Goes to show that people experience stimulus in different ways, I suppose, and highlights the intersubjectivity, rather than objectivity, of critical standards for art, music, film, etc..

Well it's all art, just different media and applications. Watching the first 10 minutes of 2001 (as in the cinematographic aspects of it) can leave me in literal awe just as surely as this Bill Monroe piece:


Link to video.

Just as surely as Great Gatsby does.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

With the Abrams movies out now, it's broadly true.

Touche.