In reading this review, I feel like the writer has a very different definition of the words, "inscrutable," "boring," "pretentious," and "film." Which is fine, but it makes me wonder if he's actually SEEN any of Jarmusch's work, as in, actually looked at what is on the screen, rather than what he expects to be there. Jarmusch is a very instinctual director, that much is true; but by following film traditions that date from before the birthday of the average PSU student does not make him boring, or inscrutable for that matter. (I might be willing to give you pretentious, provided a dictionary is used for the sake of specificity in future such usages.) Jarmusch's work has a life and vitality to it that ignore American standards of film making, and tries to incorporate the styles and forms of the long and rich history of the medium. Just because his new movie doesn't "Kick Ass" the way Ghost Dog did, doesn't mean it's meaningless or dull; more than anything, it just means the reviewer might want to check out something other than the typical Regal Cinemas fare more often than he has been.
“Prolix Logorrhoea, and how!”
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Say What?
Kids these days, they have no taste. No style. No sense of cool, or even a sense of sanity. I saw this article dissing Jim Jarmusch yesterday, and really felt the need to say something. If I don't take it upon myself to educate the youth of America, who will?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
hell yes! i support you fully! dead man, coffee and cigarettes, down by law... all unbelievable.
ReplyDelete