Larrok

I do not agree with labeling those who criticize the film as snobbish, using the argument that one should just let go and enjoy the fun, because the concept of entertainment varies from person to person. Some people find more enjoyment in riding roller coasters, while others find it more entertaining and fulfilling to read a book. I dislike the reasoning that flattens the concept of entertainment to what major distribution companies define as such. Just as I cannot stand the rigid schematism that differentiates serious films from light-hearted ones; it is not always the case. A film with an excellent script and without major special effects can be just as entertaining as the latest Avatar.

Yes, the credit goes to the programmers and the technicians, but I believe the directives on what to do were given to them by the director... at least I want to hope so, also because if he had limited himself only to the script, his work would be confined to two or three trivial little things.

Jack, either you put on contact lenses or you wear the 3D glasses over your regular glasses, and be careful not to break them because they charge you an arm and a leg for them.

As if being a convicted corrupt official, confirmed by final judgments, isn't a political issue... it makes me smile that there are people who think such things, even columnists from prestigious newspapers. Anyway, we are talking about the Prime Minister who, in the '80s, was not responsible for a shortfall, but for the gaping hole in our country's public debt; he truly deserves a nice plaque for that, doesn't he?

Bilquis, I realize the effort and brilliance that went into the technological aspects of this film, and I assure you that I appreciate these efforts and the attempt to visually innovate cinema. However, in the end, if we judge a film based on its final result, that is, how it actually appears to our eyes, we cannot avoid conducting an analysis that considers every aspect of a work. Among the various aspects are the construction of the plot and the development of the characters, and for this, I refer to my comment 77.

bought last Saturday, I will enjoy it soon

I watched Avatar in 2D and it’s already spectacular enough as it is; I can only imagine that the 3D experience amplifies that quality quite a bit. However, I have no intention of shelling out more money to see this film again, which, despite its visual magnificence, ultimately has a character dynamic structure that is thoroughly stereotypical. The positive protagonist who initially belongs to the bad guys, but then switches sides to join the oppressed upon coming into contact with the alien civilization; the classic “villain,” his direct antagonist, who wants to annihilate and wipe out everything beautiful and magical shown in the film due to greed; the inevitable love story with a Disney-like conclusion; the protagonist’s relationship with secondary characters (the colleague who goes from being rude to loyal and wise, the envious romantic rival who later becomes a brotherly friend, etc.); the fall of the “good guy” followed by his resurrection with an epic speech on a hill that stirs the spirits “Braveheart-style,” appealing to the aliens’ patriotic pride; the final triumph. Of course, I expected something like this, so I’m not overly complaining, especially in a Cameron film, which has always aimed at the sublimation of the most classic archetypes of cinema. But no matter how crazy the special effects and technical genius employed for this film may be, I will never appreciate it much because, for my personal taste, dialogues and originality in character development are the two elements that are almost entirely lacking here.

I’ll skip the shameless comparison between Tortoise and Zwan (I get chills just thinking that Pajo participated in such a vomit-inducing project...), anyway, I believe kraut and glitch are not meaningless labels; it’s just a matter of knowing what these terms conventionally refer to... I assume you know what krautrock is and what its peculiar characteristics are, including sound and noise experimentation. Glitch is a term coined in the last decade and refers to exploiting the sound defects typical of digital recordings within an arrangement or even in the composition itself. I agree that emotion cannot be explained since it is a subjective element, but in my opinion, it is possible to explain the context in which a work is created and the assumptions that drive a particular artist to express themselves in one way rather than another.

As you wanted to demonstrate, you no longer hear about this group after a few years; they are temporary fads, useless groups inflated by the media as if they were something great, and as soon as you stop advertising them everywhere, they fade into oblivion, unless RCA decides to revive them to make a few more bucks... it's been 4 years since they've disappeared.

"Besides rock, I also listen to a lot of progressive"...it's a bit like saying "besides pasta, I also eat a lot of rigatoni."