Quote:
Originally Posted by Traditional_Ale
I don't have a problem with computers, its that people seem to think that stuff made on it, no matter how stylistically peculiar, is anything other than just another really nice looking Big Mac.
Saying something is a leap forward when it isn't is disingenuous. I saw the movie, and I did feel like I lived through a comic book. And it was "cool" and that is it. It didn't feel particularly "impressive", which would be the most milquetoast of adjectives for something being heralded as a "leap."
It came out of his body on an instrument that is depicted in hieroglyphics dating as old as 1400 BC. Western music is made up of 12 notes, regardless of genre. So yes, Hendrix was a great big giant effing leap forward. But to be fair, he benefitted greatly from being 14 years old when the electric guitar was invented. Right guy in the right time for a metaphorical musical gold rush. Kind of like with computing power and the original Matrix (and all the crazy innovative camera work and everything else that movie invented that became entirely mainstream).
|
I think we agree on a lot. I have a lot of respect for Spiderverse personally. I think it will be looked back at as a transition in how animation is done. The computer entering the game is the same as the electric guitar. It's a new tool. Some will find a way to utilize it in a way that is innovative and interesting. People have been drawing for as long as there have been people, no different than music. A few people innovated with it, while some people just did the same crap but louder. Maybe you think Spiderverse is same crap but louder. I disagree. Lord and Miller themselves come from 2-D animation as comic artists, then Clone High and have basically not missed with the quality of their feature films, it's not like they're chumps. It didn't make you feel like it made me feel. It's art it's not going to hit everyone the same and that's okay. People can love Beethoven and hate Hendrix, or enjoy a Van Gogh painting while thinking Picasso sucks.
I both agree and disagree with the whole premise of this thread. Certainly things are super saturated, and there' a lot of crap. To your point, access to these tools makes it so really anyone can make a movie, given time. That's a beautiful thing in my opinion. It will ultimately give more voices more opportunity. But it does make it harder to sift through the bad because there's so much of it, because while anyone can technically make a movie, not many people are actually artists with something to say. But I also think it means that there may be gold where you don't expect. Spiderverse, I wasn't even going to see it. I thought the title sucked, I didn't need more Spiderman or multi-verse. I went to it with a friend who had an extra ticket and found myself blown away. I enjoyed that feeling. And I feel like some people won't give it a chance to be something genuinely interesting simply because it's a Spiderman movie and I think that's wrong. I don't think it's "the end of great films". Just like I don't think it's the end of great music or art or whatever. I don't really think that's possible. What people think is great may change though, especially as new tools allow new explorations. This Is America would have been considered just noise to a lot of people. So would Comfortably Numb. David Letterman purely shat on basically the creator of computer music saying no one would ever listen to it. Well, he or you or I might not overly love all of it, but it's undeniably part of music. I hate most computer-based music, but f*** if Daft Punk isn't rad. People connect with different forms of art at different times for a whole host of reasons, usually to do with our society's circumstance at large.
Anyways, you aren't a fan. I enjoyed it and if it inspired my own creative aspirations, well that's enough for me.