What are we reading?

Started by edison, September 21, 2003, 11:20:03 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 ... 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 ... 112
User actions

The Perineum Falcon

#1185
October 25, 2008, 05:07:51 PM
What a wonderful book!

It's the only Murakami I've read so far, though I'm looking forward to reading his others (more specifically: Norwegian Wood and A Hard-Boiled Wonderland and the End of the World). I read it years ago, but some of the imagery remains as strong and compelling as the day I read it.
We often went to the cinema, the screen would light up and we would tremble, but also, increasingly often, Madeleine and I were disappointed. The images had dated, they jittered, and Marilyn Monroe had gotten terribly old. We were sad, this wasn't the film we had dreamed of, this wasn't the total film that we all carried around inside us, this film that we would have wanted to make, or, more secretly, no doubt, that we would have wanted to live.

Bram

#1186
October 26, 2008, 10:54:05 AM
I've read both Norwegian Wood and Hard-Boiled, which are brilliant, in their own strange way. Norwegian Wood emotionally tops Hard-Boiled in every way, but the last one is so hard to describe and understand that it's really worth the trip. And just when the final act comes in and the book makes you understand a bit more of what is going on, you'll feel more thrilled than the rest of the read. The thing is that it's the two-story-technique that makes it this wonderful, Norwegian Wood just blows you away with every sentence.

At least, that's how I've experienced it.

Slick Shoes

#1187
November 05, 2008, 10:05:42 PM


I'm reading this beautiful book.

Slick Shoes

#1188
November 05, 2008, 10:19:14 PM



Also this. I bought and got it signed for my friend for his birthday, which is still several weeks away.

Chest Rockwell

#1189
November 07, 2008, 08:42:55 AM

And also, a collection of all of Carl Barks' Donal Duck and Uncle Scrooge comics.

The Perineum Falcon

#1190
November 07, 2008, 08:23:53 PM
Just finished Truffaut's The Films in My Life, and just begun:

We often went to the cinema, the screen would light up and we would tremble, but also, increasingly often, Madeleine and I were disappointed. The images had dated, they jittered, and Marilyn Monroe had gotten terribly old. We were sad, this wasn't the film we had dreamed of, this wasn't the total film that we all carried around inside us, this film that we would have wanted to make, or, more secretly, no doubt, that we would have wanted to live.

hedwig

#1191
November 08, 2008, 12:15:41 AM
what's filmosophy about, falcon?

aw man. i'm in miami for the weekend but i'm leaving sunday and won't get a chance to hit up the miami book fair, which is full of so many AMAZING authors this year... art spiegelman, gore vidal, scott mccloud, cornel west, brian greene and zillions of others. :doh:

The Perineum Falcon

#1192
November 08, 2008, 07:56:48 PM
Well, simply put, filmosophy proposes that cinema is made up of two-parts: the filmind and film-thinking. That cinema, and the film itself, has it's own intelligence, as a "film-being," and the film form is the film as it's thinking of the characters, objects, etc. It suggests that approaching a film with philosophy isn't the best way, but instead to experience film philosophically. In essence, Film is its own philosophy and way of thinking.

It sounds a bit out there, but really it's just suggesting that this may be an easier (better) way of experiencing and (more importantly) understanding a film instead of breaking it down in technical terms and completely ignoring the cinematics of the film while focusing only on the plot.

Does that make sense? I can't really go much further into it, since I just started and haven't gotten much past the introduction (where the above was explained).
We often went to the cinema, the screen would light up and we would tremble, but also, increasingly often, Madeleine and I were disappointed. The images had dated, they jittered, and Marilyn Monroe had gotten terribly old. We were sad, this wasn't the film we had dreamed of, this wasn't the total film that we all carried around inside us, this film that we would have wanted to make, or, more secretly, no doubt, that we would have wanted to live.

matt35mm

#1193
November 08, 2008, 08:46:21 PM
(shrug)  Kinda sounds like what I already do, so it doesn't seem very radical based on that bit.  But I'd like to read it.

Other philosophers have already done some work on how cinema is a new and unique way to understand the world around us (i.e. do philosophy) and is thus important to "serious" formal philosophy.  Stanley Cavell is good to read on this, and Terrence Malick studied with Cavell, which I assume has had something to do with shaping Malick's approach to filmmaking and the structure of his films...?

At least this is the way that I've decided to blend film and my philosophy studies, rather than the relatively boring film-as-illustration-of-moral-dilemmas.  If you find Filmosophy interesting, I'd recommend reading some Cavell and maybe trying to find some texts on philosophy and theatre.  Thinking about the differences between theatre and film has been a very helpful way (for me anyway) of figuring out what cinema is and is not.

Anyway I'm still reading We Need To Talk About Kevin, which I started like 4 months ago.

Chest Rockwell

#1194
November 10, 2008, 01:12:54 AM
Quote from: The Perineum Falcon on November 08, 2008, 07:56:48 PM
In essence, Film is its own philosophy and way of thinking.
Hmm.... I'm not sure I buy this part, but let us know more about the theory when you finish the book. I guess I should know what exactly he means by "philosophy". I do agree that film should be looked at on its own terms as opposed to literary terms (plot) as you mention; most writers since the Cahiers guys have looked at film like this, though.

The Perineum Falcon

#1195
November 13, 2008, 03:35:35 PM
Certainly, there's a history to this kind of thought and approach to cinema, and Frampton isn't trying to hide that. I'm still in Part 1, so I haven't gotten to his particular theories just yet, but he's already mentioned Cavell and Deleuze quite a bit, along with plenty of others. He's going over their theories and the history and at points mentions that, perhaps, this kind of thinking hasn't gone far enough yet.

So, Part 1 is more of a history lesson, giving some kind of context for Part 2, which is the "manifesto" of Filmosophy (I'd avoid using that word if weren't on the cover).

As I said, it's still too early to tell if this will all add up to much in the end, but so far I'm enjoying it (and have planned on picking up philosophies of the past).

I'll let you guys know how it turns out.
We often went to the cinema, the screen would light up and we would tremble, but also, increasingly often, Madeleine and I were disappointed. The images had dated, they jittered, and Marilyn Monroe had gotten terribly old. We were sad, this wasn't the film we had dreamed of, this wasn't the total film that we all carried around inside us, this film that we would have wanted to make, or, more secretly, no doubt, that we would have wanted to live.

Stefen

#1196
November 13, 2008, 03:59:22 PM
Well, now you're just showing off.
Falling in love is the greatest joy in life. Followed closely by sneaking into a gated community late at night and firing a gun into the air.

The Perineum Falcon

#1197
November 13, 2008, 07:06:59 PM
If I were showing off, Stephen, I'd flip my hair.
We often went to the cinema, the screen would light up and we would tremble, but also, increasingly often, Madeleine and I were disappointed. The images had dated, they jittered, and Marilyn Monroe had gotten terribly old. We were sad, this wasn't the film we had dreamed of, this wasn't the total film that we all carried around inside us, this film that we would have wanted to make, or, more secretly, no doubt, that we would have wanted to live.

Stefen

#1198
November 13, 2008, 08:17:34 PM
touche.
Falling in love is the greatest joy in life. Followed closely by sneaking into a gated community late at night and firing a gun into the air.

ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ

#1199
November 15, 2008, 11:30:56 PM
I'm not exactly a Bruce Campbell fanatic, but my theater is getting My Name Is Bruce, so we're carrying his books.  I picked one up and it's a lot funnier than I had imagined it would be.  Maybe I should've started with If Chins Could Kill, but whatever.  I'll get that one soon, I imagine.

"As a matter of fact I only work with the feeling of something magical, something seemingly significant. And to keep it magical I don't want to know the story involved, I just want the hypnotic effect of it somehow seeming significant without knowing why." - Len Lye
Print
Go Up Pages 1 ... 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 ... 112
User actions