Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Controversial Opinions Thread: The R.E.M. Thread for sensible people who are also idiots

13468952

Comments

  • it's strange when people shit on video games because they're perceived to not be artistic endeavors at all, yet when they try to branch out and tell compelling stories people shit on em for not being simple games.
  • I guess I gotta get over the idea that people are playing video games instead of watching Persona, Double Indemnity or Dancer in the Dark.

    I mean logic follows that if they weren't seeking that kind of stuff out in the first place, they weren't going to enjoy it anyway,
  • Video games are an expression of creativity, therefore they are art.

    that's how it is.
  • edited September 2015
    i wouldn't say ALL video games are necessarily art because some franchises can certainly be taken over by the desire for profit, turning games into mere products (not that having profit in mind discounts art--but profit taking over to the expense of creativity does). for those franchises, it's tantamount to calling transformers art just because it's a movie 

    that said, a lot of video games are art & deserve recognition as such. the last of us is a great example.
  • edited September 2015
    nah nah homie, whenever people try to make distinctions as to what is and isn't art in a certain medium it's always a bad conversation.

    Grown Ups 2 is a piece of art inasmuch as Boyhood is, it just so happens that the latter is great and the former is a cinematic war crime
  • edited September 2015
    sure, i'm not here to start a debate on what art is. but i do disagree. a movie made for profit alone has as much art to it as the mcdonald's big mac--it's cold, calculating, and driven by the consumer (rather than the artist)

    i don't think a movie has to be good to be art--not at all. it could be the shittiest thing ever--worse than grown ups 2--and still be art as long as it's driven at least in part by creative vision. the distinction for me lies in whether the movie is a mere cash grab (which itself is difficult to define, but grown ups 2 belongs there), pandering completely to consumers
  • an entry into an art form is automatically art no matter the intentions (Leni Reifenstahl wasn't exactly motivated by unbridled creative vision yet her work is still taught in film schools)
  • edited September 2015
    Until Dawn is an example of why narrative driven games work. As a movie it'd be a fairly derivative teen slasher with a ton of genre troupes and character archetypes. As a game it's branching paths is exhilarating even if the story is this intentionally mediocre thing.
  • edited September 2015
    and that's an entirely respectable view, perhaps one that i'll come around on. it's kind of a "letter of the law" vs. "spirit of the law," and i fall in the latter camp
  • So what about a film like The Avengers? Even though it's a big budget film made with a bunch of bankable superheros, it got critical acclaim.

    Is there a line where cash cow becomes art? is it critical praise?
  • edited September 2015
    building on nick's point A lot of the greatest pieces of art were commissioned works, do they not count as "real art" because they didn't have whatever bullshit purity of creativity or whatever you think is a prerequisite to making "real art"
  • what about Hollywood films put out for Oscar season?

    They're apparently meant to be art, but damned if the film bombs. 
  • I would argue that there is an art to B-movies it's just a distinct art from high concept films
  • I don't game much any more, but I remember Red Dead Redemption's story being better than most movies I've seen this decade.
  • Films like The Theory of Everything or The Imitation Game (or I'll go out on a limb and say the fucking Eddie Redmayne playing dress up movie) are made with as much cold cynical calculation as disney's marvel films (and the soon to be star wars avalanche)
  • @nick: did you even read my post? where i said a movie could be extremely shitty and still be art? or did you just assume that i was deferring to critical praise as my judgment of art?

    @robby: nope. i never said there had to be "purity of creativity" or anything like that.

    and i don't know why you're getting so heated, calling my criterion bullshit and such. i don't think it's that hard to understand that a movie made *only as a product* could possibly be thought of as not art. maybe no movie fits that measure, but if one does (perhaps grown ups 2), i'm not sure i would call it art. something like this movie might fit that narrow criterion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Passions (as it was made exclusively to promote FIFA as an organization, essentially using the film format as one big ad)

    and i could totally come around to your point of view--i'm not committed to this idea. but it would be nice if you could take my position at face value rather than dismissing it as bullshit immediately, if only out of respect
  • The only movie that's not art is Empire.

    (I don't actually mean this, but seriously fuck Empire so much)
  • I mean surely there's a line somewhere though, right? If I just filmed an hour an thirty minutes of me flinging my dick in a circle like a helicopter, would that be art?
  • i actually wasn't really heated but i apologize, using "bullshit" was probably an improper word
  • I just don't think that what is and is not art is not subjective because then you're setting up parameters which are hard to define.
    How do you know something was or was not driven by a creative vision?
    All films in some aspect are driven by a creative vision.

    You also talked about a work pandering to an audience, what if a film maker has 4 films of a similar style and has built an audience, and then releases a fifth which is in a style like the others. 
    The audience wants what is being delivered, and the film maker knows of the audience that they have built, but chooses to release a film of a similar style anyway.

    Like with Wes Anderson, such a distinct style that we expect and want from each film. On some level he must know that we expect something, is he simply giving us what we want or is he being true to his artistic vision?
  • @toon_malk the line is Empire
  • I think art needs intention. intention can be to get money, it just needs to want something
  • Everything that humans make is art imo. This sentence is art. A shovel is art.
    Exceptions:

    Direct Observations are not art
    Chronologies are not art
    Run the Jewles is not art
    Equasions are not art
  • edited September 2015
    what was your issue with RTJ again? I assume it's just bad taste but I forget. :bz
  • Oh actually wait im in total agreement with moontalk
  • Well actually if accidentally make a song ur really into by strumming a chord wrong then is that art?
  • I guess when you contexualize almost anything as art it becomes art tbh
  • @shooty yea i think in that case, the art wouldn't be in the chord but it would be in the act of releasing it as is because that's where the statement is
Sign In or Register to comment.