Just one more thought in the slow-moving glacier of my mind. I'm a great believer in the idea that it isn't enough to see the Great Works to understand what is going on. You've got to see the good stuff, the mediocre stuff, the bad stuff, the ignored stuff, the disdained stuff. Not only are some great movies ignored, but you can only understand why a movie is really great in the context of its own genre. Looking at a lot of Sennett without having seen the Griffith shorts they mocked make them meaningless hash.boblipton wrote:Mike Gebert wrote:I take no responsibility for anyone who has already seen an Aronofsky film and disliked it, seeing mother! As I said, there's an Aronofsky film I have repeat-watched... and this isn't it.
But I do have a certain taste for "stretch" movies. Ones which try to blow my mind, man, take me into the infinite and the ineffable. Movies are pretend dreams and I like people trying to push that as far as it can go, sometimes, into the ecstasy-dreams that used to get you sainted like St. Theresa. 30 years ago I saw Stalker, found it interminable and ludicrous; it came to the Music Box this summer, went to it with my older son, and we loved it. Russians trying to get right in God's face to ask him questions, and possibly being poisoned by the regime in the process in real life— now that's a movie! At least the audience this time was as enraptured as we were. So yes, I do "enjoy" that.
mother!-wise, I just watched the '39 Cat and the Canary, which is about a woman who has an old house in the middle of nowhere, into which lots of strangers and a certain amount of terror come. Close enough!
That's the answer I was looking for. I like to stretch my mind occasionally. I'll see how the week goes and what my mood is.