Posts Tagged ‘Cinema of the United States’

The Bigger Picture: Lay Down Your Arms

c-water[1]“Filler” is a term often used by music fans to describe songs that sound like they were quickly put together to take up space on an album in order to “fill out” the running time. Though  filler can often be quite good, snobbier music fans sometimes use it as an excuse to turn their noses up at others. Ironically, this attitude can be just as annoying as the people the snobs want to put down.

I make my living as a Photoshop retoucher. Much of the work I do is celebrity related, and often involves those showy magazine spreads where a B-list celebrity shows off his or her home. It’s MTV Cribs for older generations (in other words, those who still read). What I often find in the photos are startling similarities in artistic taste.

Seemingly every one of these celebrities has the same coffee-table book collection, including books on Picasso, jazz, and Man Ray. It’s as if the photographer carries a satchel of the same books to each celebrity’s house simply for the automatic class boost they provide.

It seems impossible to me that so many people actually have those books because they enjoy the artists’ work. A friend of mine brought up the cynical idea that this is what you get when you allow the masses access to art — great works often become, in effect, filler. The coffee-table book industry is, in many ways, a seller of white noise, used by individuals who hope to give their home an aesthetic boost.

(more…)

The Bigger Picture: The Big Three, Part One

shitfuckpisscrapIf you read this column last week, you might think from reading the headline that I’ve decided to only discuss the economic situation. In truth, I’m not referencing the “big three” U.S. automakers, but rather what I consider to be the “big three” taboos in American cinema and our love/hate relationship with them.  This week’s column is part one of a three-part series.

The first involves dialogue, namely the use of profane language. Before one criticizes the modern age for its use of profanity, one must consider that such coarse language has always existed. Perhaps I am too young to judge whether or not today’s culture is more profane than that of previous generations, but I do know by studying history that vulgar expressions have always existed within art. If one disagrees, he ought to read the works of Shakespeare or Chaucer.

Time seems to dull the impact of even the most shocking works of art. Often, the language seems to seep into our consciousness. Consider the “Quarter pounder with cheese” conversation from Pulp Fiction. That particular scene is so famous that often people who haven’t seen the movie are at least familiar with it. It is a scene laced with the very same profanity that appears in the rest of the film, but one barely considers the coarseness of the language because the overall inanity of the conversation entertains.

There is, however, an unfortunately negative side to profanity in film scripts. Auteurs such as Tarantino have spawned mimicry. I have a general rule about scripts, in which the dialogue must drive the plot forward. Tarantino, in the earlier part of his career, managed to break this rule fairly successfully. I might argue that he has started to become a parody of himself, if a film like Death Proof is any evidence. The dialogue in that film was not only asinine, it was boring and poorly paced.

Some might argue that there was indeed a time when movies employed a cleaner style of language. This is undeniable, though if one considers the overall spectrum of art in human civilization, it probably only exists as a tiny blip. However, often one must take a closer look at cinema’s “Golden Age” to see that things aren’t quite as they seem. Quite often, things are referred to in a more creative manner. (more…)