-
*I'm certainly not saying that it's easy to define one's own taste. I had to do a lot of thinking to come up with those statements.
*I was trying to avoid mentioning any directors. I felt I had to mention Antonioni and Kiarostami to illustrate the term "unfinished cinema" because I don't think it's become part of the lingo.
*I posted those statements only after I tested their ability to explain why I chose the films that made my Top 10 Favorites of 2003. They go a long way towards explaining why I like what I like, but I consider them a "work in progress". For instance, I probably need to add a paragraph about "emotional impact", or a film's ability to induce strong emotions, to "hit you in the gut", to "put a knot on your throat". You like examples, let's try...Magdalene Sisters made me feel such deep feelings of empathy and compassion towards these women (including the nuns themselves). I felt that something happened to me in that theatre, I wasn't exactly the same person that had walked in. That is something I value in cinema that my post does not address. Sometimes films meant to be "moving" or "touching" make me snicker, Magdalene disarmed me.
Liv Ullmann stated during her tribute tuesday that what she values most about cinema is its ability to sharpen your sense of who you are and your place in the world. My "personal disclosure" post is an attempt to put into words my sense of who I am as a moviegoer.
Last edited by oscar jubis; 02-10-2005 at 10:50 PM.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Bookmarks