389-390 WR: Mysteries of the Organism and Sweet Movie
- Lino
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:18 am
- Location: Sitting End
- Contact:
- Nihonophile
- Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:57 am
- Location: Florida
- Contact:
- denti alligator
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:36 pm
- Location: "born in heaven, raised in hell"
- Barmy
- Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 3:59 pm
Hmm, Sweet Movie vs. WR? Apples and oranges. Sweet Movie is very dated, and a bit trashy, but a lot of fun. Of course, my fond memory of it is enhanced by the fact that I saw it at a museum and two people had brought a kid to the flick. They lasted until Pierre Clementi whipped out his wiener for a piss.
- Jean-Luc Garbo
- Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 1:55 am
- Contact:
-
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:23 pm
I'll just post what I wrote in my blog about it 3 years ago:denti alligator wrote:Tell us about it, please. On the basis of WR I'm very tempted by Sweet Movie.
"Utterly retarded. The kind of film that hipster college sophomores "discover" and declare as brilliant social satire while they pretend to find meaning in the most inane non-sequiturs. Cheap gross-out tricks and dime store symbolism. But worst of all, pervaded with a philosophy of "look at me, I'm so different! I dare to BREAK THE RULES!" A willingness to break rules is always an asset, but when that's your raison d'etre, then you're just as much a slave to the rules as anyone else, just in a different way. And let's get one thing straight: I don't hate this film because I think it's "shocking". It's not shocking, for the same reason that G.G. Allin, Marilyn Manson, and John Waters aren't shocking... because it's such a blatant attempt to shock that it becomes pathetic. At least John Waters is funny, though, something that Makevejev desperately tries to be and fails completely at."
Last edited by mteller on Fri Mar 16, 2007 3:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Cinephrenic
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:58 pm
- Location: Paris, Texas
- toiletduck!
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 5:43 pm
- Location: The 'Go
- Contact:
I am so sold on this one.mteller wrote:"Utterly retarded. The kind of film that hipster college sophomores "discover" and declare as brilliant social satire while they pretend to find meaning in the most inane non-sequiturs. Cheap gross-out tricks and dime store symbolism. But worst of all, pervaded with a philosophy of "look at me, I'm so different! I dare to BREAK THE RULES!" A willingness to break rules is always an asset, but when that's your raison d'etre, then you're just as much a slave to the rules as anyone else, just in a different way. And let's get one thing straight: I don't hate this film because I think it's "shocking". It's not shocking, for the same reason that G.G. Allin, Marilyn Manson, and John Waters aren't shocking... because it's such a blatant attempt to shock that it becomes pathetic. At least John Waters is funny, though, something that Makevejev desperately tries to be and fails completely at."
...and that's not meant to demean your view at all, mteller, but I know your type as well as you know my type (although I'm somewhat disgruntled towards the hipster line) and this is exactly the sort of response that usually ends up attached to something I enjoy. WR was great, but Sweet Movie has had my curiosity since I first read about it on this forum last year.
-Toilet Dcuk
- Tribe
- The Bastard Spawn of Hank Williams
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 7:59 pm
- Location: Toledo, Ohio
- Contact:
He's not called Toilet Duck for nothing!toiletduck wrote:and that's not meant to demean your view at all, mteller, but I know your type as well as you know my type (although I'm somewhat disgruntled towards the hipster line) and this is exactly the sort of response that usually ends up attached to something I enjoy. WR was great, but Sweet Movie has had my curiosity since I first read about it on this forum last year.
-Toilet Dcuk
Tribe
- sevenarts
- Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 7:22 pm
- Contact:
Agreed. Contrary to mteller's comments, I think there can be a great deal of inherent value in art that simply strives to break rules and push boundaries and shock. Not least because it can be really fun to watch. This film also sounds like a kind of comedic spiritual descendent of the Vienna Aktionists, another group of artists who were "just" out to shock and break rules. So I'm pretty excited for this one.toiletduck! wrote:I am so sold on this one.
...and that's not meant to demean your view at all, mteller, but I know your type as well as you know my type (although I'm somewhat disgruntled towards the hipster line) and this is exactly the sort of response that usually ends up attached to something I enjoy. WR was great, but Sweet Movie has had my curiosity since I first read about it on this forum last year.
-
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:23 pm
I didn't expect anyone to agree with my Sweet Movie opinion on this forum, I was just throwing it out there.
No, actually, I don't know your type at all, but I don't read these forums that much. What is your type? I am also DYING to know what my type is.toiletduck! wrote:I know your type as well as you know my type
- bkimball
- Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 12:10 am
- Location: SLC, UT
I'm with mteller on these. I'll have to see them first, but the idea of breaking rules just for the sake of breaking rules is much too simplistic for my tastes. Ken Park anyone?
I kind of get the sense these films might have a lot in common - in terms of presentation - with Godard's Weekend. Can anyone confirm or deny?
I kind of get the sense these films might have a lot in common - in terms of presentation - with Godard's Weekend. Can anyone confirm or deny?
- toiletduck!
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 5:43 pm
- Location: The 'Go
- Contact:
Great comparison -- and all the more reason to watch!sevenarts wrote:This film also sounds like a kind of comedic spiritual descendent of the Vienna Aktionists...
You see, this is why I say things like "And that's not to demean your view at all." I'm assuming that we are taking the capitals = mockery approach and you really have no interest in what I meant. "But correct me if I'm wrong."mteller wrote:I am also DYING to know what my type is.
But back on topic, Sweet Movie, hells yeah!
-Toilet Dcuk
- Jean-Luc Garbo
- Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 1:55 am
- Contact:
- denti alligator
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:36 pm
- Location: "born in heaven, raised in hell"
- Jean-Luc Garbo
- Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 1:55 am
- Contact:
- The Fanciful Norwegian
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:24 pm
- Location: Teegeeack
Given that it's based on his book, it should be wide-ranging and a lot of fun, although I'm concerned about the delivery.
-
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:23 pm
No, I really want to know what you think my type is, especially since it seems like you're writing off my opinion based on that perception.toiletduck! wrote:You see, this is why I say things like "And that's not to demean your view at all." I'm assuming that we are taking the capitals = mockery approach and you really have no interest in what I meant. "But correct me if I'm wrong."
- blindside8zao
- Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 4:31 pm
- Location: Greensboro, NC
- godardslave
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 4:44 pm
- Location: Confusing and open ended = high art.