how on eaRTH ARE B MOVIES DEGENERATING THE ART OF CINEMA?? (dam caps so close to the a key) these days a low budget movie is 9 mill. the original dawn of the dead (which had a powerfull social statement for the time) was shot for a fraction of that and made a powerfull statement about capitilism. predating mall culture quite effectivly. and the remake (though made for the fraction of the cost of res evil) has some amazing cinematogrophy exspcially the inro sequence. its pretty amazing and very powerfull playing on the idea that the time we live in now is the end times of biblical prophecy.
then you have 28 dAys layter (cost 9 mill res evil 20 mill) which plays on the fact that no matter how advanced medical science is there could always be a virul mutation that medicall science couldent handle. and the script is actually good.
what about trainspotting? surly art is a reflection of the people, not just beuty but the dARK SIDE OF OUr nature. i think in the future trainspotting will be litriture. tolkien is litriture. why? why is herbert not?
i know that dawn of the dead (orig) has been remebered long after other films have faded from peoples imagination.
i think when people look back (if there are any left) 100 years from now they will see (early 21C, lit) as being very dark. its just we cannot predict now what will be our *legacy of litriture* to future generations.
more of them will study movie scripts, but then that happened a while ago. modern movies are as valid as some ultra arty film from time back.
what about tetsuo the iorn man? that is the most poserfull (and powerfull) cinemtographic representation of modern car culture i have ever seen.
|