offoffoff film
 RELATED PROJECTS

      







 ADVERTISEMENT













Site links
  • OFFOFFOFF Home
  • About OFFOFFOFF
  • Contact us

    Get our newsletter:
     
    Search the site:
     

    Film section
  • Film main page
  • Film archive
  • Audio index
  • Film links


    Top 10 lists


  • Top 10 films of 2004
    (Andrea, David, Joshua, Leslie)
  • Top 10 films of 2003
    (Andrea, David, Joshua, Leslie)
  • Top 10 films of 2002
  • Top 10 films of 2001
  • Top 10 films of 2000
  • Top 10 films of 1999
  •  All of our top 10 lists, 1999 - 2004

    Current movies


  • Afterschool
  • Antichrist
  • Babies
  • Broken Embraces
  • Dare
  • District 9
  • The End of Poverty?
  • Fix
  • Food Beware
  • The Men Who Stare at Goats
  • Pirate Radio
  • Precious
  • Red Cliff
  • The September Issue

    Festivals


  • Brooklyn International Film Festival
  • Human Rights Watch Film Festival
  • New York Film Festival

    Archive


    Complete archive

    Recent reviews:
  • (500) Days of Summer
  • Anita O'Day: The Life of a Jazz Singer
  • The Art of the Steal
  • The Beetle
  • Blessed is the Match: The Life and Death of Hannah Senesh
  • Boy A
  • Brideshead Revisited
  • The Brothers Bloom
  • Burn After Reading
  • Cold Souls
  • The Duchess
  • Elegy
  • Enlighten Up! A Skeptic's Journey Into the World of Yoga
  • Five Minutes of Heaven
  • Flame and Citron
  • Frozen River
  • Happy-Go-Lucky
  • How to Lose Friends & Alienate People
  • The Human Condition
  • Hunger
  • Inglourious Basterds
  • King of Shadows
  • The Lemon Tree
  • Lorna's Silence
  • A Man Named Pearl
  • Man on Wire
  • Memorial Day
  • Mister Foe
  • Morning Light
  • My F├╝hrer
  • My One and Only
  • Paris
  • The Pervert's Guide to Cinema
  • Peter and Vandy
  • Police, Adjective
  • Pray the Devil Back to Hell
  • Profit Motive and the Whispering Wind
  • Rachel Getting Married
  • A Secret
  • Sleep Dealer
  • St. Trinian's
  • Thirst
  • Throw Down Your Heart
  • Valentino: The Last Emperor
  • What's the Matter with Kansas?
  • Wild Grass
  • Jay DiPietro

  •  READER COMMENTS

    Reader comments on

    Subject: Re: Terrible, but . . .
    Date: Feb 25, 2001
    Sender: makingitupPrevious | Next

    Your points are all well taken. I had no intention of personal criticism - you clearly have a qualified opinion. My point was, if 'it' is art, 'it' is not done primarily for money (not a 'product'). Judgements such as 'terrible', or 'great' seem more appropriate for products, don't you think?. So, for example, it seems (IMHO) inappropriate to say of a Pollock painting one didn't like that it is 'Terrible, but...'? (One certainly MAY say this, of course.)

    Dogme95 exists to reinvent cinema, much as the atonality of Schoeberg, Webern and Berg meant to reinvent music. The influence of atonal works such as 'Lulu' and 'Wozzeck' is much greater than their appeal, and I feel the works of von Trier and disciples will have the same fate. As you can probably tell, I am in awe of what is trying to be done and fascinated by the results.



    Previous: Re: Terrible, but . . . | Next: Re: Terrible, but . . .

    Respond to this message | Return to original article:



    Response to this comment:
    Re: Terrible, but . . .

    Having recently spent a couple of weeks at the Sundance Film Festival, I have some appreciation for the difference between a film and a movie. While I was there, I saw something called "Scotland PA". It was described as the "white trash version of McBeth". It was both entertaining and stayed true to Shakespeare. Is it a movie or a film? Is it also true there are only two kinds of people in this world - those who put everything into categories and those who don't?

    I completely agree "film" is an artistic endeavor. However, if a "film" is entertaining, will it be disqualified as art and downgraded to just being a "movie"? Does merely being "artistic" necessarily make it great art? If art is successful when it merely provokes, then Dancer succeeds by definition. But is "provocation" enough? Does Dancer say anything new or profound about the human condition? Is Dancer great art?

    To me, Dancer is a pretty good musical comic book created by some very talented people. It works in some ways, but for the most part, it misses the mark. It could have been so much more.






    Comment index:

  • loved it   from nathalie, Nov 6, 2000
  • [no subject]   from Ponet, Dec 3, 2000
  • Terrible, but . . .   from Craig, Jan 1, 2001
  • Re: Terrible, but . . .   from makingitup, Feb 21, 2001
  • Re: Terrible, but . . .   from Craig, Feb 24, 2001
  • » Re: Terrible, but . . . «   from makingitup, Feb 25, 2001
  • Re: Terrible, but . . .   from Craig, Mar 28, 2001
  • Re: Terrible, but . . .   from Erin, Jan 18, 2004
  • my two crowns...   from Odd Harry, Mar 4, 2001
  • Bjork is great   from George McKinney, Mar 20, 2001
  • Re: Bjork is great   from Craig, Mar 30, 2001
  • loved it   from nathalie, Nov 6, 2000
  • [no subject]   from Ponet, Dec 3, 2000
  • Terrible, but . . .   from Craig, Jan 1, 2001
  • Re: Terrible, but . . .   from makingitup, Feb 21, 2001
  • Re: Terrible, but . . .   from Craig, Feb 24, 2001
  • » Re: Terrible, but . . . «   from makingitup, Feb 25, 2001
  • Re: Terrible, but . . .   from Craig, Mar 28, 2001
  • Re: Terrible, but . . .   from Erin, Jan 18, 2004
  • my two crowns...   from Odd Harry, Mar 4, 2001
  • Bjork is great   from George McKinney, Mar 20, 2001
  • Re: Bjork is great   from Craig, Mar 30, 2001