Bala,Quote:
Originally Posted by Bala (Karthik)
Rosenbaum's ambivalent take on the film in case you've not read it before. An excerpt relevant to this discussion:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosenbaum
Printable View
Bala,Quote:
Originally Posted by Bala (Karthik)
Rosenbaum's ambivalent take on the film in case you've not read it before. An excerpt relevant to this discussion:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosenbaum
As always, an excellent writeup by Rosenbaum. Thanks for Posting, Equa. Trademark critique on mainstream criticism. Yes, he does go overboard sometimes, but it's a good read nevertheless. :)
This is vintage Rosenbaum on American audience:
"I thought there was something obscene about audiences’ delighted fascination with the evil and brilliant lunatic Hannibal Lecter gleefully killing without a shred of compunction, especially since some of those audiences seemed indifferent to the slaughter of innocent Iraqis that was going on at the same time. I couldn’t blame Demme or the story he was filming for that obscenity, since he wasn’t responsible for the delight with which his movie was received or the time at which it was released. Mystic River is too depressing to fill audiences with delight, but it does seem to validate questionable attitudes, especially an indifference to the suffering of innocent people and a willingness to shoot first and ask questions later."
The premise of the argument is mostly based on that conversation, & I'm unmoved by it. I thought of it as solace provided by Jimmy's wife, and he is fully aware of unredeemed nature of his act. But it could be perceived differently like Rosenbaum, who explores the overall vision of this creation as he sees it. I'm not exactly sure if it's the intention, but by Rosenbaum's rules of film canonization, it has to be explored regardless. In a trademark fashion, he uses it to arrive at the inference of mainstream audience & critics. I love such voices of criticism (of criticism), but at times, it's often prone to slackly judge the audience. I'd argue a reasonable audience is a lot less stereotypical, and not a mere cardboard cut-out that Rosenbaum often conjures them to be. That remains my criticism of his critiquing technique.
Thanks Equa. I remember reading a response to this in which the responder criticizes Rosenbaum's "moral" anger.Quote:
Originally Posted by equanimus
Thirst for unconditional revenge is one thing (which is the focus of Rosenbaum's criticism) but the last couple of scenes not only signify that but my problem is that i didn't see it coming and like i said i'd been set up all along. It's odd, doesn't "fit" :lol:Quote:
Is this tragic inevitability or misogyny?
And why does virtually every movie involving a cop have to show a woman and some "problem" or "conflict". Take way that character of Sean's wife and what do we miss?
Isn't this one of the criticisms of Thevar Magan?[/b]Quote:
Maybe he’s telling us we’re wrong even when we’re right, but he’s made it too easy to read that message in reverse
Exactly opposite. I rate it in between 'very good' and 'excellent'.Quote:
Originally Posted by P_R
:shock: thoongittEn. erichal erichalA vandhuchuQuote:
Originally Posted by Bala (Karthik)
Erichal vantha eppadi toonggurathu? But why erichal? The pace?Quote:
Originally Posted by VENKIRAJA
I was irritated by Tim Robbins. Sean Penn was my only hope and the climax, to me was very ordinary. Expected a great film the way it started, but :oops:Quote:
Originally Posted by groucho070
Family Guy digression
Tim Robbins on an info message
Hi, I am Tim Robbins. Most of you know me as Susan Sarandon's son. I am actually her husband.
:rotfl: Poor guy, forever overshadowed by his wife's bossomic talent.
One of the most popular dialogues in the history of hollywood.......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0-oi...eature=related
Any one has seen the movie The bridges of Madison county?
it is one of under rated eastwood movies.....