 | | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
|
|
(...) Agree with everything you say in that paragraph. But a film can still be low quality in my eyes even if there was a lot of time and money spent on it, and the technicians knew their craft. Consider "Waterworld". Conversely, a film can be high (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
|
|
Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote in message news:37BF2A50.B6DC18...ger.net... (...) Quality takes time and effort. You can't just throw something together and have it be quality, unless you're some kind of genius. In films, quality can be (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
|
|
(...) Sometimes I'm not so sure Lucas is motivated purely by money. He could make a mint right now if he released the first 3 movies on DVD, then PM next year, but he won't. He isn't going to release them till they're all done. Will he make a (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
|
|
Mike Stanley <cjc@NOSPAMnewsguy.com> wrote in message news:slrn7rvvio.5kv....UTK.EDU... (...) So now it's not just money, it's ego? Is that better? Jesse (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
|
|
Who cares what motivation was behind George Lucas movie making attempts? I like them, I found them entertaining, and if he profits from that, good for him. I am just glad that he made TLG make real sets again! Scott S. (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
|
|
(...) Why does Lucas *need* to do that? (Or anything else for that matter?) Isn't what you really meant to say instead: that you personally would be happier with Lucas's movies if he spent less time pandering to the audience and weaving racist (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
|
|
(...) Dunno. I'd be personally happier if Lucas would be a nice greedy person and take my $100 or so for the first 4 SW movies right now instead of in 2005 (or whenever it is). I'd rather him be motivated by money in this than by his need to control (...) (25 years ago, 23-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
|
|
(...) I would argue that. I would also say that while the market _is_ what should determine what gets made, it's not the same as an objective quality metric. It's a popularity metric. Due to preferences and finances and whole slew of other (...) (25 years ago, 27-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
|
|
Christopher Weeks <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote in message news:37C6AA90.8AAC20...pse.net... (...) Here's the million dollar qustion: how can the general public be competent enough to be an adequate judge of movie quality (or of political (...) (25 years ago, 30-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
|
|
(...) I would say that they are an adequate judge of both. They may spend their cash on each as they see fit. And they're wrong on both counts. --Chris (25 years ago, 31-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
|
|
(...) Because it's an opinion, and thus subject to polling (in the form of box office receipts), rather than proving or disproving (...) Ditto, although I'd say right now the system is rigged so the GP doesn't get a fair chance to say what they (...) (25 years ago, 31-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
