(October 14, 2019 at 1:51 pm)Alan V Wrote:(October 10, 2019 at 10:31 pm)EgoDeath Wrote: How do you differentiate between the tactics authors use from the tactics directors use, outside of the obvious difference in medium?
And how does that affect the seriousness of the message?
Reading creates a kind of intellectual distance which is not easy to maintain watching a movie, with all of the in-your-face techniques a movie employs.
So movies are better for emotional impacts and books are better for details and intellectual content. To me that means whatever serious content a movie might have tends to be undermined by the methods employed to convey it.
(October 10, 2019 at 10:31 pm)EgoDeath Wrote: I think all forms of art can be entertainment and still convey a serious message, if done correctly.
That said, I don't think there's anything wrong with The Avengers... but to call it art? I'd say that's a stretch.
These days, I am more inclined to define efforts as "art" in accordance with their methods rather than their content. Art is about applying attention to attract attention from others. That is done through a variety of methods, including the display of talent, spectacle, action, emotion, color, contrast, texture, story-telling, empathy, and so on. Whether something succeeds as art is measured by the attention it attracts, including long-term attention. That's why it's so hard to judge art in the present, but much easier from the past. Better quality art gets sorted out over time by what people continue to find interesting.
Heh, give me a good physics or math book and I will devour it. I don't understand art. I went to a museum the other day with a friend and she said that painting was a "dead nature" (some fruits in a basket etc).
Yep, art is not my thing. But I enjoy a good movie. I haven't used money for those CGI cinema thinguies. What happened to comics?
