RIP Morbius

[Grendel_Khan]

Interesting in that, for the most part, the TTRPG community has been different than the culture at large ... and certainly not populist nor anti-intellectual.

We have met the enemy and he is us.

It seems like the sense that there's a mini culture war between film critics and nerd culture isn't going anywhere. Definitely a bummer for lots of reasons, but now that nerd culture is the dominant strain in all pop culture there are a lot of opportunities for us nerds to be aggrieved. And again, when nerd culture properties get critical acclaim, apparently that doesn't factor in. But when the critics come for Snyder? Let's kick some ass in super slo mo!

I also kind of love it, though. Very exciting to see people beclown themselves talking about Scorsese only doing gangster movies.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Well there's anti-intellectualism, and then there's dislike for movies that treat the audience as beneath the auteur. I like amovie that makes me think, but ultimately they are a form of entertainment. I'm not5 looking for something that will require a 10,000 word essay to unpack.

There's nothing wrong with watching something for entertainment; there is something distinctly wrong with characterizing film that is "going for more" as treating the audience poorly.

Look, like what you like. But if someone tells me that paintings are just purty decorations, and anyone who doesn't love them all the Thomas Kinkade, because all those difficult artists don't care about the audience ... eh. That's anti-intellectual. You don't have to partake in something. You don't have to like it. But to disparage because it's trying for more isn't my cup of tea.

 

[payn]

Careful, you're steering right into Scorsese's blasphemous MCU-as-amusement-park-ride comment, which is probably the most accurate thing anyone's ever said about the MCU, from someone who's about as far from being a snob as any well-known director could be.

And I'm sorry for minimizing your take on non-financial factors in movies. I was just trying to tear that one bit to shreds, to be honest, since I personally don't think it belongs in the movie-quality calculus, and feeds into the exact kind of anti-intellectual takes we're now talking about.

It's all good. I might agree (partially) with Marty on his MCU take, but I also think he is quite overrated himself. There are two sides to the critical coin, movies are an experience and they can just be fun. I think the Ebert quotes are pointing to that and wish more critics weighed the experience with the critical eye. Everything doesn't have to be so divisive, but as they say, misery loves company.

It seems like the sense that there's a mini culture war between film critics and nerd culture isn't going anywhere. Definitely a bummer for lots of reasons, but now that nerd culture is the dominant strain in all pop culture there are a lot of opportunities for us nerds to be aggrieved. And again, when nerd culture properties get critical acclaim, apparently that doesn't factor in. But when the critics come for Snyder? Let's kick some ass in super slo mo!

I also kind of love it, though. Very exciting to see people beclown themselves talking about Scorsese only doing gangster movies.

I think Marty and a lot of film folks are missing the forest for the trees here. That old cultural cinematic experience that sets the standards and pushes the boundaries has moved onto the little screen. Cinema is not dead, it's a live and well in the series today!

 

[Ryujin]

There's nothing wrong with watching something for entertainment; there is something distinctly wrong with characterizing film that is "going for more" as treating the audience poorly.

Look, like what you like. But if someone tells me that paintings are just purty decorations, and anyone who doesn't love them all the Thomas Kinkade, because all those difficult artists don't care about the audience ... eh. That's anti-intellectual. You don't have to partake in something. You don't have to like it. But to disparage because it's trying for more isn't my cup of tea.

You seem to be creating a rather sharp line of demarcation. There's a huge palate between "mindless fun" and "intellectually engaging." I watch a movie to be entertained and to be made to think, to varying degrees, at various times. What I don't like is when a movie seems to be looking down its nose at me, telling me that I'm not smart enough for it. Maybe I'm not? Maybe it's just pseudo-intellectual crap?

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

You seem to be creating a rather sharp line of demarcation. There's a huge palate between "mindless fun" and "intellectually engaging." I watch a movie to be entertained and to be made to think, to varying degrees, at various times. What I don't like is when a movie seems to be looking down its nose at me, telling me that I'm not smart enough for it. Maybe I'm not? Maybe it's just pseudo-intellectual crap?

Ugh. No. I'm not trying to be argumentative or dismissive, but that's the rallying cry of anti-intellectualism.

It's not my fault I'm not engaged with that. It's because of those snobby smarty pants that are looking down on me!

I just watched Drive My Car last night. It was a great film. It was based off of a Murakami short story. It has a very strong through-line to Chekhov and Uncle Vanya. It's three hours long. But it's not "pseudo-intellectual crap."

Making movies ... it's hard. You know that (I know you do). The people that do that aren't doing it because they are "looking down" on an audience- it's because they are trying to communicate something. Sure, maybe it's, "Look at all these 'sposions! Pay me some money!" But sometimes it's personal. It's meaningful.

It's not pseudo-intellectual crap to them. If you don't want to engage with it, because you want to watch the gladiators off each other, cool for you! Really. Sometimes that's all I want in life, too. But sometimes I do want to be challenged. I do want to be forced to think. I do want to engage beyond the surface level. And that's good too.

 

[James Gasik]

Well yeah, even if we go into the summer blockbuster knowing we'll be entertained by the same old same old for the thousandth time, we can still agree that Michael Bay is the worst thing ever.

 

[Ryujin]

Ugh. No. I'm not trying to be argumentative or dismissive, but that's the rallying cry of anti-intellectualism.

It's not my fault I'm not engaged with that. It's because of those snobby smarty pants that are looking down on me!

I just watched Drive My Car last night. It was a great film. It was based off of a Murakami short story. It has a very strong through-line to Chekhov and Uncle Vanya. It's three hours long. But it's not "pseudo-intellectual crap."

Making movies ... it's hard. You know that (I know you do). The people that do that aren't doing it because they are "looking down" on an audience- it's because they are trying to communicate something. Sure, maybe it's, "Look at all these 'sposions! Pay me some money!" But sometimes it's personal. It's meaningful.

It's not pseudo-intellectual crap to them. If you don't want to engage with it, because you want to watch the gladiators off each other, cool for you! Really. Sometimes that's all I want in life, too. But sometimes I do want to be challenged. I do want to be forced to think. I do want to engage beyond the surface level. And that's good too.

As do I. I enjoy films that engage my intellect. I enjoy films that discuss the nature of being. I don't need action in order to enjoy a film and am the only person I know who enjoyed the film "GATTACA." Many of my friends jokingly ask me, "Which Kurosawa film did THIS movie rip off?" To me, there just seems to be a class of film makers who are making their movies for a very specific and narrow audience of navel gazers, though. That's not me.

 

[Ryujin]

Well yeah, even if we go into the summer blockbuster knowing we'll be entertained by the same old same old for the thousandth time, we can still agree that Michael Bay is the worst thing ever.

"OK, which robot's foot was THAT?"

 

[Grendel_Khan]

You seem to be creating a rather sharp line of demarcation. There's a huge palate between "mindless fun" and "intellectually engaging." I watch a movie to be entertained and to be made to think, to varying degrees, at various times. What I don't like is when a movie seems to be looking down its nose at me, telling me that I'm not smart enough for it. Maybe I'm not? Maybe it's just pseudo-intellectual crap?

This really reads to me like the textbook definition of anti-intellectualism, which is a term that's needlessly charged--sure sounds like being called dumb. But I don't think that's what anti-intellectualism is about. It's more complex, but it some ways it comes down to a pretty simple question: Why would any piece of art make you feel defensive, or attacked? If you don't like it, you don't like it. No one's required to like a French New Wave movie because critics have written a million books about it, just like you aren't required to like James Joyce novels. Literally no art is telling you that, if you don't like it, it's because you don't get it.

Take David Lynch, for example. A lot of people find his movies awful, just try-hard nonsense arthouse puzzles that are missing most of the pieces. But he's said himself that his work isn't really supposed to make sense. It's abstract. It's expressionistic. It's weird as hell. And there's usually nothing to "get," except the associations you bring to it. You like it or you don't.

But here's my main issue feeling defensive or attacked by so-called intellectual art: All it does is risk limiting the art you consume. Because the people who are digging into those high-fallutin' movies are also watching The Real Housewives or Daredevil or Jackass Forever. Now imagine if those pointy-headed arthouse enjoyers felt looked down on by popular entertainment, that anytime they weren't into a mainstream show or movie it's because the people making it despised them? They'd be missing out.

 

[Grendel_Khan]

Well yeah, even if we go into the summer blockbuster knowing we'll be entertained by the same old same old for the thousandth time, we can still agree that Michael Bay is the worst thing ever.

Don't sleep on Pain & Gain though. That movie rocks.