Cascadia’s Response to First Comment Ever…besides *sigh*
The comment can be found all here bottom
Ah, but the rant was filled with vigor, rather than just, you know, spout.
I am not in defense of I Am Legend. In fact, I agree in every sentiment that it is a convoluted, utter failure just by sheer prediction and current Hollywood trend. And your example of instinctively avoiding cuts and bruises is quite to point, they want to take the same recipe that worked well enough to be force fed in large quantities, tweak it just enough and with as little effort, and see if it works. Like you said, with subtle changes, they don’t depart too much from the crowd, and don’t have to spend the time and energy or risk of being radical.
The point not taken into consideration is an open ban on art, and more importantly for the purpose of SALES to more than likely an EQUALLY crappy, yet more economically stimulating to a select few. I would have no problem if the movie was banned because it fails/will fail/failed cinematically. In fact, I view a lot of the noise I hear about this, (moreso with other scenarios), as further proof to some individuals of China’s scary policy as a state. While this rings true with censorship, and many people are up in arms over the sheer censorship aspect of it, this is not my total position.
My position is that censorship of any form of art for economic gain is perversion.
Not only does it bring to light the frail and usually unsatisfying nature of the art being “pushed”, but the fact that the society where the piece is banned is involved in a kind of sculpting of the mind. Sometimes this is necessary, and beneficial, but necessary and beneficial are personal relativities, and when a dictatorship has grown out of touch with its subservient populous, the dictatorship can no longer claim under any circumstance that it’s actions are for the good of the people. Whether it continues to do so or not, (an usually it will), is obviously their choosing, however as a universal hotshot of logic; when the patient has a myocardial infarction and you give him/her chemotherapy, a lot of things can happen…usually none of them range into “pretty good”.
While I don’t agree with the majority of cinema, nor many artistic productions out of –my- taste for intellect or perspective value, I am not the eyes of the world. Poetically, yes. Philosophically, we are all the eyes of the world. However, though I know in my heart something is right, it is not in my place to force everyone to adopt my view, as well as limit the options for another human being to travel down an alternate, and possibly wrong and perilous, course.
It is, however, my position and right to act and produce in the manner I view as right, and present some sort of productive, working alternative that exists in the physical world. If I think I can do better, I should. Not only do bad movies inspire me to write better stories on an airy state of self-improvement, but it appeals to me as an animal.
As an animal of writing, for that is my disposition, I am aware that I am not perfect, but aware that I am an animal and subject to the laws of my environment. One law is the one you state with wolves. Eat the weak. If something fails, I will prey upon it by producing a blatantly better piece, per perspective, and take claim and fame as an emerging leader in that corner of my world.
It is my choice to decide whether I have the time, abilities, virtue, persistence, and cold face to beginner’s criticism, to produce my own piece. Whether I do or do not rests on no universal responsibility, but personal choice, as it is to not see a piece of crap film.
It’s the same argument as banning smoking, gun ownership, and so forth. Each of those have personal intricacies of their own. The complex component of this specific situation is that the primary motivation is directly stated as economic benefit, and also on a very possible false logic that people will get their quota of art somewhere else. By taking the step to ban art so others will buy the other is not only morally wrong, but a very large assumption.
My revolt is that art is taken so mechanically. Yes it is easier to stick with the pack. Yes, the pack likes shitty movies right now. Yes, no fast movements.
However in art, like most things, motivations of calculated and daring risk can produce greater results than uncalculated rash greed. These things typically make leaders. We call them entrepreneurs. For them to entrepreneu…to slaughter language for my amusement…firstly there must be a weakness in the current structure to be exploited.
This, my friends, is 21st century mainstream art. Exploiting, thusly exploitable. If the wolves don’t like Legend, as I likely won’t, they won’t bite too long. It’s the same as the Godfather.
How many people put up posters in their dorm of the successful “two-parter” featuring Joey Zasa. Who?
Godfather 3? Is that a terrorist ring or something?
Leave a Reply