Tweet
Come on out and say it: there are certain works of "art" that everyone admires which you think are crap. This is your thread, let it all out.
Of course many here know about my hatred of Citizen Kane. I know it's technically brilliant, I know it's daring, I still think it blows. Why? Because the main character is staggeringly uninteresting. In order to be a tragic hero there has to be something heroic about a character, and he's got nothing. But he's not nasty enough to revel in his destruction either. You might say he's too hateful to pity and too pitiful to hate. He's just some privileged schmo shooting himself in the foot over and over again, and by the second hour I was sick of watching.
Yes, many people think it's a fascinating movie, but the same is true of The Da Vinci Code and Survivor. This is just a different crowd of people with bad taste. The only time I was even remotely entertained by this movie was when my community college film professor told me "rosebud" was William Randolph Hearst's nickname for his mistress's clitoris. That, I admit, was funny, though you have to wonder if Welles had a death wish or what.
Next, Catcher in the Rye. I know I'm not alone on this one. Plenty of other people who read it were inclined to cheer when the pimp beat Holden up, made him cry and took his money. Whiny little smeg deserved it. In fact, he deserved more. Maurice should have blackened both his eyes, emptied his wallet and left him bawling, to teach him not to waste prostitutes' valuable time. And not to moan about how "phoney" everyone else is. What a douche.
Fight Club is not cool or witty. It's what would have happened if, instead of shooting up Columbine, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold had grown up into pretentious college hipsters at film school. Fight Club or something very like it would have been their joint senior thesis. Pointless nihilism and misanthropy plus smug self-satisfaction do not make a good movie.
Finally, I never could appreciate Picasso. I'm sorry, but it just looks ugly and brutish to me. I accept that it's just a difference of opinion, but I see nothing worthy of notice in his later works, at least. I rather like the withered old musician from his blue period, though.
Of course many here know about my hatred of Citizen Kane. I know it's technically brilliant, I know it's daring, I still think it blows. Why? Because the main character is staggeringly uninteresting. In order to be a tragic hero there has to be something heroic about a character, and he's got nothing. But he's not nasty enough to revel in his destruction either. You might say he's too hateful to pity and too pitiful to hate. He's just some privileged schmo shooting himself in the foot over and over again, and by the second hour I was sick of watching.
Yes, many people think it's a fascinating movie, but the same is true of The Da Vinci Code and Survivor. This is just a different crowd of people with bad taste. The only time I was even remotely entertained by this movie was when my community college film professor told me "rosebud" was William Randolph Hearst's nickname for his mistress's clitoris. That, I admit, was funny, though you have to wonder if Welles had a death wish or what.
Next, Catcher in the Rye. I know I'm not alone on this one. Plenty of other people who read it were inclined to cheer when the pimp beat Holden up, made him cry and took his money. Whiny little smeg deserved it. In fact, he deserved more. Maurice should have blackened both his eyes, emptied his wallet and left him bawling, to teach him not to waste prostitutes' valuable time. And not to moan about how "phoney" everyone else is. What a douche.
Fight Club is not cool or witty. It's what would have happened if, instead of shooting up Columbine, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold had grown up into pretentious college hipsters at film school. Fight Club or something very like it would have been their joint senior thesis. Pointless nihilism and misanthropy plus smug self-satisfaction do not make a good movie.
Finally, I never could appreciate Picasso. I'm sorry, but it just looks ugly and brutish to me. I accept that it's just a difference of opinion, but I see nothing worthy of notice in his later works, at least. I rather like the withered old musician from his blue period, though.
Comment