Author Topic: putting Walter Hill on the same step as David Lynch  (Read 3195 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

SoNowThen

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 4536
  • Respect: +9
    • 24/30 Cinema
Re: putting Walter Hill on the same step as David Lynch
« Reply #15 on: October 28, 2008, 12:10:11 PM »
0
Agree with all of the above except for the rose-tinted picture of Europe as a haven for art filmmaking.

European producers always wanted big return for their money, but when they were funding guys like Fellini or Antonioni to go off and masturbate to whatever they wanted (which I'm not knocking, cos I love) they knew they would get most of their cash back because those were different times where a superstar director put asses in seats.

Look at the state of european art cinema today; sure there's some good films now and again but most of it is utter forgettable shit. Subsidized filmmaking by the state is woeful at best, and only works if by some freak chance of nature a truly talented filmmaker gets on the inside (real, real fucking rare). And even in the case of good filmmakers getting funding it is usually only a portion coming from that trough and more coming from private funding and again based on the director's star status.

For a look at where govt subsidy gets cinema, see Canada. Suck-fucking-tastic. I've been pretty content knowing American cinema will always produce good stuff since they are caught in the grip of filmmaking as a business, for the most part. It means when we get good films they are of quality, and when we get real indie films they are hungry enough to do some startling and wonderful work.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy