Quote:
Originally Posted by OutOfTheCube
Ultimately, we go to be entertained, and I found the events of Whiplash, regardless of their plausibility, to be far more entertaining than a realistic alternative.
|
So you'd be onboard with the terrorist sub-plot in Whiplash? I mean, it would entertaining as hell, wouldn't it?
And realism vs entertainment is not a zero-sum game, or a binary state. Movies can be plausible, logical, and entertaining (or plausible, logical, and unentertaining). And there are degrees of realism. I hold serious dramas to a higher standard of character motivation and believability than I do sci-fi action movies or raunchy comedies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
Good lord, I can't imagine what your reaction would be to reading Kafka or something.
|
So Whiplash is meant to be a surreal allegory? At times it was so absurd that it shaded into the surreal. A a drummer staggering bloody from a car crash directly onstage onto a prestigious music competition with nary an eye batted seems pretty surreal to me. But I honestly don't think surreal allegory was the filmmakers' intent. This isn't Luis Bunuel (now there was a surreal filmmaker).
I think we all have limits to our credulity. It's a matter of where those limits lie for each of us. I'm finding my credulity not only stretched but irreparably broken more and more when I watch movies, and I'm suggesting that it's movies that are changing, not me.