Elephant triggered Art Rant
polycounter lvl 18
Hey, somewhat of a rant, but I'm interested in hearing some of the opinions from people on here.
I recently watched a movie called "Elephant" with my girlfriend. It was recommended by a buddy of mine, who is one of those people who tends to like to really act up the artist persona, so I knew it'd be an "artistic" film. I'm fine with that, I love art, and so does my girlfriend. However, it turned out to be the worst movie I've seen to date. And I mean worst, it is a very BAD movie. It has no story, the cinemetography, acting, what little writing was done, were horrible, etc...
It's all bad.
Despite this, it won awards at film festivals and got decent reviews for being so "artistic".
Now, the reason this bugs me so much is that the movie literally followed around high school students in their "average" day. Which included things such as a camera following the back of a students head as he walked through the school for 10 minutes.
Obviously boring, and worse, that is what the ENTIRETY of the movie was. THere was absolutly no story or character development, no moral, nothing it was just following around the most boring people I've never wanted to know about through everything they did. THen, some kids went and in the absolutly worst excuse for a climax shot the school up. There was no real back story given for this. No reason for it, no opinions shown. They just killed a few people, then the movie ended. It was not touching, tragic, or even action packed. Absolutly emotionless.
So, what this makes me wonder is how in the hell does that pass as art. It is in truth nothing but a lazy ass director jacking off cinemetographically. The only way you can say you enjoyed it is if you are trying to prove you are "artistic".
This brings me to my point in all of this. How is it that bull shit like that is seen as artistic? From all of my studies of art and everything I've heard from any artist I have ever respected, the point of art is to convey a message to an audience. That message can be anything, even just "This picture is pretty", so long as a message is conveyed. Yet despite this, decent movies are often passed over by critics and the "art" community as commercial and non artistic, even though these movies have set points that the makers try to get across, and do so successfully. But no, those movies are not artistic, this movie, in which the director/writer gave no opinion, created no story, and conveyed no message, is raved over by idiotic assholes who are nothing more than pretensious wannabe artists.
So, am I the only one who is annoyed by this, or is of this opinion?
I recently watched a movie called "Elephant" with my girlfriend. It was recommended by a buddy of mine, who is one of those people who tends to like to really act up the artist persona, so I knew it'd be an "artistic" film. I'm fine with that, I love art, and so does my girlfriend. However, it turned out to be the worst movie I've seen to date. And I mean worst, it is a very BAD movie. It has no story, the cinemetography, acting, what little writing was done, were horrible, etc...
It's all bad.
Despite this, it won awards at film festivals and got decent reviews for being so "artistic".
Now, the reason this bugs me so much is that the movie literally followed around high school students in their "average" day. Which included things such as a camera following the back of a students head as he walked through the school for 10 minutes.
Obviously boring, and worse, that is what the ENTIRETY of the movie was. THere was absolutly no story or character development, no moral, nothing it was just following around the most boring people I've never wanted to know about through everything they did. THen, some kids went and in the absolutly worst excuse for a climax shot the school up. There was no real back story given for this. No reason for it, no opinions shown. They just killed a few people, then the movie ended. It was not touching, tragic, or even action packed. Absolutly emotionless.
So, what this makes me wonder is how in the hell does that pass as art. It is in truth nothing but a lazy ass director jacking off cinemetographically. The only way you can say you enjoyed it is if you are trying to prove you are "artistic".
This brings me to my point in all of this. How is it that bull shit like that is seen as artistic? From all of my studies of art and everything I've heard from any artist I have ever respected, the point of art is to convey a message to an audience. That message can be anything, even just "This picture is pretty", so long as a message is conveyed. Yet despite this, decent movies are often passed over by critics and the "art" community as commercial and non artistic, even though these movies have set points that the makers try to get across, and do so successfully. But no, those movies are not artistic, this movie, in which the director/writer gave no opinion, created no story, and conveyed no message, is raved over by idiotic assholes who are nothing more than pretensious wannabe artists.
So, am I the only one who is annoyed by this, or is of this opinion?
Replies
look, i know it's a world-beating statement, but ... *gasp!* ... it's all about aesthetics, personal taste and what you take from it. Simple. Some may like it, some may not. I don't see anyone putting up a post about hearing how much people rave about anal sex, so they gave it a go, and it wasn't at all worth the effort and frankly stung something rotten, and therefore feel like ranting about it in public ...
So anyway...I've never seen the Elephant movie nor Lost in Translation...but I can totally understand your frustration.
I don't think this movie is really about esthetics anyways ahem. And I didn't see any artsy vibe in it either...
What version are we talking about here? The original, or the reamake with the boy in a yellow Tshirt? I saw the recent one and the beginning of the original.
With the mention of the Life aquatic, I love All of Wes Anderson's films. I know a lot of people who think they're boring as hell and have stupid dialogue and have no real point. But I think they're funny as hell and I love the almost surrealistic dialogue.
As I'm getting older I've just come to terms with things like taste. That doesn't mean I'm not aloud to bad mouth it to my friends and act like I have some divine authority over the matters of what's good and what isn't.
The definition of what constitutes art has such a grey area among people that damn near anything can be called art.
[/ QUOTE ]
artfully said
The only way you can say you enjoyed it is if you are trying to prove you are "artistic".
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I find that a good deal of these indie films are all hype and considered "artistic" by a bunch of pretentious farttards that think any movie with a budget higher than a couple thousand bucks is crap.
[/ QUOTE ]
I know I might sound crazy but bear with me: maybe people say they enjoyed a movie because they actually enjoyed it.
However,"art" aside I thought "Elephant" was one of the worst non-movies I've ever seen. Its like someone carried a camera around for part of a day and didn't realize it was on....Then I saw "Last Days" by the same director. It's nominally about the Last Days of Kurt Cobain. As far as being a non-movie it totally kills Elephant. Theres probably 15 minutes of dialog in the whole damn movie, non of which establishes, explains, or does anything at all for the narrative. The rest is just obnoxiously loud foley sounds. If I remember correctly theres a several minute long segment of "Kurt" walking through the woods, and the only sound is annoyingly loud dry leaves rustling as he walks through them. Then he's in a house wandering around and the only sounds are loud ass boot squeaks on the floor That seems to be a trend nowadays though, movies about people being awkward in relationships, or feeling alienated...lots of sitting in rooms where no one is talking and whatever they are fidgeting with is REALLY LOUD. I understand its an effective tool to make the audience feel the awkwardness, but a whole movie of that stops being awkward, and just becomes annoying. The only way I can think that would be amusing is if a minute from the end of this movie of awkward silences and really loud foley sounds everyone and everything around them just exploded...that would be satisfying
On a positive note, a recent "indie" movie about modern relationships and society that I thought was really good was "You, Me, and Everyone We Know" Check it out.
))<>((
hehehe
That seems to be a trend nowadays though, movies about people being awkward in relationships, or feeling alienated...lots of sitting in rooms where no one is talking and whatever they are fidgeting with is REALLY LOUD.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree it's getting to be a cliche but one movie I thought did this really well was "Bubble" - a slow-paced crime drama in a slummy Ohio town, did anyone see that? It didn't use this technique nearly as excessively as what Cthogua mentioned about Last Days so when it did, it was very effective. I remember it distinctly when the main characters were on their lunch break not talking and you just heard the sound of ice cubes in their disgusting McDonald's-bought soda cups rattling around. it felt so tense and awkward! and gross!
hahah yeah that was a nice touch