Had an argument with a friend ~ she's into all em artsy indie low budget movies but has never seen the classics (Im thinking Maltese Falcon, Citizen Kane, Usual Suspects, that sorta thing) ~ told me to go see Antichrist (the 2009 Willem Dafoe one)
Dunno how many of you sawr it but aside from the awkwardly graphic and very disturbing scene where "she" (yeah, she, thats the name of the character) cuts her clitoris off with a pair of rusted scissors and an equally graphic slow-mo shower sex scene that has the same artistic integrity as art-porn, the movie is garbage (except for the 'demon faces stuck in the tree' scene, for those of you who saw it)
I myself like exploitation movies as well as old school horror flicks (Beneath the Valley of the Ultra-Vixens and Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! are two of my favorites, along with stuff like Motel Hell, Evil Dead and Child's Play, but I'd never consider em to be art in anyway)
My question is this ~~ what makes something (be it movies, music, paintings, books) art? I don't regard photography as art because any 15 yo with a three grand nikon and a room littered with cardboard boxes and torn sheets can take a photo rivaling what you'd see at your run of the mill art gallery)
I'm asking this because as far as I know you can't really attribute a numerical value to art in order to estimate its quality ~~ and her argument was "if you didn't like the movie you didn't understand it ~~ it's art, you don't get art" - am I really unable to "get" art if I didnt enjoy an otherwise critically acclaimed 2 hour piece of nonsense?
More so, when did movies and books become more than just plain escapism?
Dunno how many of you sawr it but aside from the awkwardly graphic and very disturbing scene where "she" (yeah, she, thats the name of the character) cuts her clitoris off with a pair of rusted scissors and an equally graphic slow-mo shower sex scene that has the same artistic integrity as art-porn, the movie is garbage (except for the 'demon faces stuck in the tree' scene, for those of you who saw it)
I myself like exploitation movies as well as old school horror flicks (Beneath the Valley of the Ultra-Vixens and Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! are two of my favorites, along with stuff like Motel Hell, Evil Dead and Child's Play, but I'd never consider em to be art in anyway)
My question is this ~~ what makes something (be it movies, music, paintings, books) art? I don't regard photography as art because any 15 yo with a three grand nikon and a room littered with cardboard boxes and torn sheets can take a photo rivaling what you'd see at your run of the mill art gallery)
I'm asking this because as far as I know you can't really attribute a numerical value to art in order to estimate its quality ~~ and her argument was "if you didn't like the movie you didn't understand it ~~ it's art, you don't get art" - am I really unable to "get" art if I didnt enjoy an otherwise critically acclaimed 2 hour piece of nonsense?
More so, when did movies and books become more than just plain escapism?
