version

Well-known member
Scrooge-Mc-Duck-Money-Bin.jpg
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
None that jump out as obvious choices. That said, I do think there are benefits to watching them, benefits that largely fall outside the sphere of aesthetic appreciation.
I don't disagree at all. Of course, the reason that we're all here (other than loneliness and boredom etc) is cos we want to say more about films/books/music etc than "I like x, I don't like y" - and there is no doubt that it's fascinating to think about how films and books and so on reflect the person who made them, the audience they were made for and the world that created that audience and so on... but every now and again we need to reiterate one thing we all know which is "How well something reflects the world and its times, and how interesting that world and its time is, is a different thing from how good the film is" - and basically we need to be clear that just cos Big Brother or I'm A Celebrity (or whatever the fuck is the latest of that kind of thing is) reflects our world better than Vegetable Empire, it doesn't automatically make it a better work of art (although in that case it probably is).
 
Last edited:

version

Well-known member
Iron Man, the first of the MCU films, appeared a few months before the financial crisis really hit in '08 and the rest of the films have been released in a world still grappling with the consequences of that crisis.

The crash ruined a huge number of people, resulted in worldwide austerity measures and a decline in living standards, shook people's confidence in a lot of things and the poor handling of the fallout birthed all sorts of issues and resentments in the mind of the public; they became more distrusting than ever of bankers and Wall St. and felt that the political class were more interested in them than the people and they couldn't understand the crash, it was too big and complicated and there was nothing they could do about it, so they started to turn to "strongmen", people who would swoop down and save them and beat back the people they thought responsible, hence an almost insatiable appetite for superhero films; big, dazzling, entertaining films where superhuman characters work together to battle a clear enemy and save the world.

There's a book I haven't read called From Caligari to Hitler which sets out the idea that the roots of what would arise in Germany in the 30s and 40s were visible on-screen in the films of the Weimar-era, perhaps the roots of Trump were right there on the screen the whole time. The inner desires of the public manifested on the screen before they even knew it was what they wanted.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
I mean it doesn't mean it's bad either. Presumably the total "goodness" or whatever of a film or such is made up of loads of things, and sometimes the way it cunningly reflects the world which allowed it to be exist and be good is a bonus, but sometimes the way it evades that and chooses not to do that is a bonus. That's the problem of understanding what makes something good - sometimes doing x is a strength and sometimes it's a weakness, depending on how it combines with loads of other elements.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
For me, you should never lose touch of what you just like. Long ago I used to go out with a girl who was doing her phd on philosophy and aesthetics or something like that at Oxford and so I got embroiled into lots of discussions of those topics. Both with her colleagues and with other people. And there were times when people would really explain types of art and how and why they were bad and I would totally agree, not just swept along, but totally feel that they had said something I agreed with. And I would think, I am totally bored of x type of art, I've always been bored of it, and now this person has come along and explained why it's boring and it makes total sense and the theory agrees with my experience, it all fits together. And then one day I would go to a gallery and you would see something of that kind and it would be really good and I would think that, that's so surprising cos I knew from experience I didn't like it and now I had a good reason to think I was right not to like it... and yet it hit me and I liked it. And so... what? I dunno.
I remember someone on this forum arguing that guitar music was dead, and of course it is and was and so on. But then one day you hear a new thing with guitars and it hits you hard and it's just good.
I guess what I'm saying is, remember that theory is to explain what you experience. If reality doesn't fit into the theory then your theory is probably wrong. No point pretending you like something or don't cos that's what your idea of what you're supposed to like predicts. Well there are lots of reasons for doing that, you'll make good points and maybe win arguments on dissensus but you won't know what music you like any more and you won't be happy.
 

luka

Well-known member
3. Craner - I like to watch films and interpret them sure, but I also tend to prefer good films to bad films
This is a fundamental misreading of the Craner canon. His entire thing is liking not just bad films but the very worst films which have ever been made. Films so bad you can scarcely believe your eyes.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
This is a fundamental misreading of the Craner canon. His entire thing is liking not just bad films but the very worst films which have ever been made. Films so bad you can scarcely believe your eyes.
The main bits were the lines about you and I - the rest was just filler (I mean, I wrote what I assumed to be true but it was really just to bulk up the main point).
 

luka

Well-known member
it's like the terminator thread. If you're thinking about what are the best films of the eighties please no interesting film makes the cut. The best films all star Arnold Scharzenegger. Everybody accepts this obvious fact. All the best films of th 21st century feature men in capes.
 

woops

is not like other people
The basic problem with this thread is that people are arguing at cross purposes. Or less colloquially, at positions that never really meet or challenge each other.
1. ConEsc - these films are good and worthwhile and together they are more than the sum of their parts - and they tell you about the world
2. Luka - good/bad/whatever - these words no longer matter, these films are huge and you need to watch them cos their hugeness reflects the world that makes them huge
3. Craner - I like to watch films and interpret them sure, but I also tend to prefer good films to bad films regardless of which tells you most about the world
4. Rich - a kinda sexy dilettante who drifts between worlds and, when it comes to films, is more interested in the aesthetic (and other value judgment type qualities) of the thing than how much it is rooted in the tedious mundanity which it must have, by definition, sprang from.

I guess the biggest contrast there is between the earthbound luka viewpoint - it came from the world and it must be of this world and so we must study it - and the opposite which is more akin to; perhaps magic is possible and perhaps it's not but, over the years, there have been some people who tried to find out by digging for that magic or, almost like Prometheus, firing themselves as far as they could into the sky to try and drag back whatever they found.... in simplest terms this debate is media studies vs art. And Luka writes very persuasively in terms of media studies but we all know that's not what he believes in.

somehow i never feature on these round ups which is maybe a good thing at times but not this time

5. woops - an unambiguously sexy dilettante who has recognised the illusory veil between mundanity and aesthetic pipe dreams via intensive immersion in both and transcends this undergraduate argument
 

craner

Beast of Burden
This is a fundamental misreading of the Craner canon. His entire thing is liking not just bad films but the very worst films which have ever been made. Films so bad you can scarcely believe your eyes.

 

mvuent

Void Dweller
1. iron man
2. iron man
3. iron man
4. iron man
5. iron man
... (you get the idea)
17. iron man
18. deadpool 2
19. doctor strange
20. whatever other ones i've seen

but yeah iron man was a great movie because i was really into bionicles at the time
 

luka

Well-known member
@Matthew what are your top twenty Marvel films ranked in order and am I right in saying you did a lot of the computer graphics for them?
 

mvuent

Void Dweller
This sounds wicked. Is the forum still going?

Bionicle (/baɪˈɒnɪ.kəl/) was a line of Lego construction toys marketed primarily towards 8-to-16 year-olds. Originally a subsidiary of Lego's Technic series, the line launched in Europe and Australasia in 2000 and in the Americas in 2001. Over the following decade, it became one of Lego's biggest-selling properties; turning into a franchise and playing a part in saving the company from its financial crisis of the late 1990s. Despite a planned twenty-year tenure, the theme was discontinued in 2010, but was rebooted in 2015 for a further two years.

Bionicle
Bionicle2015Logo.png
Parent theme
Lego Technic (2000–2003)
Availability
2000–2010, 2015–2016
Official website
Unlike previous Lego themes, Bionicle was accompanied by an original story told across a multimedia spectrum. It depicts the exploits of the Toa, heroic biomechanical beings with innate elemental It depicts the exploits of the Toa, heroic biomechanical beings with innate elemental abilities whose duty is to maintain peace throughout their universe. Bionicle's success prompted subsequent Lego themes to utilize similar story-telling methods.
 
Top