Subject:
|
Re: How to decide what art is worth (was Re: Extropianism
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 22 Aug 1999 05:41:08 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
(lpieniazek@novera)antispam(.com)
|
Viewed:
|
857 times
|
| |
|
|
Jesse Long wrote:
>
> Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote in message
> news:37BF2A50.B6DC182E@voyager.net...
> >
> > I'll grant that they may well have changed the endings. But what of it?
> > Who is to say that the ending they chose is "lower quality"? How do you
> > define quality in this context?
>
> 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 seen through lots of things, like proper use of lighting, the right
> type of film, actors who can act, a plot that is coherent, solid cultural
> and historic ties, a powerful message, etc.
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 quality without these. Would you argue
that "Casablanca" is low quality? It has poor production values, some
continuity errors, and conveys a heavy handed message. Nevertheless it
is on my personal top ten list. I consider it high quality. (yes, I know
it doesn't have a happy ending.)
Are you arguing that the endings were lower quality because you feel
that they were not true to the character development that preceded them?
Your perogative, but it may or may not be the opinion of others. Or are
you arguing that the endings were lower quality because they had lower
production values? Nope...
> The new endings were lower
> quality because they specifically sacrifice character development, character
> depth, and some ultimate truths about life for the sake of a buck.
I'm just not sure how to debate this point without you accusing me of
raising straw men, or misinterpreting what you say. Suffice it to say
that I'm not convinced that the new endings are necessarily the way you
characterise them.
> Lucas isn't wrong for pandering to the masses, he's just less of a
> filmmaker. He's obviously in it for the buck, not to be a great filmmaker.
Well, what does it mean exactly, to be a "great filmmaker"? How do you
judge, if not by how much the film is valued? And the objective measure
of its value is the gross. You can have an opinion of your own, and
that's fine, but you can't use it as anything more than a metric of your
own taste. What is wrong with wanting to be pandered to? (1)
> 95% of today's teens know
> who Brittney Spears is, but probably have never heard of Dvorac,
If you mean the guy who penned "Slavonic Dances" c /Dvorac/Dvorak/
> or
> Beethoven, or even John Williams. Does that make Spears' work higher
> quality?
By one measure, yes. Let's take another data point in 100 years and see.
> Value and quality are two different things. If everyone woke up tomorrow
> and decided that they didn't want their Bach, would he become a low-quality
> composer? I don't think so.
That would never happen, but if it did, I would think that the GP
perceived him to be of low quality even if you and I didn't.
> Quality, to a large degree, can be measured.
By what? I know quality when I hear it, certainly. And my own taste is
what matters most to me. But I shan't be so bold as to say that because
I've decided something is admirable that everyone else should be forced
to admire it as well. Not that you're saying that. But you're aligned in
your thinking about what quality is with those who do. Watch out, that's
a slippery slope. That's all I'm saying here. Really.
1 - I gotta be careful here, or I am going to be defending the WWF! Ack.
--
Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com http://my.voyager.net/lar
- - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ Member ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to
lugnet.
NOTE: I have left CTP, effective 18 June 99, and my CTP email
will not work after then. Please switch to my Novera ID.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
49 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
