 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
  | 
CommentsRe: Best of Burque’s worst band
I was willing to give this band a chance on pure kitsch value alone. Then I remembered kitsch requires a healthy dose of self-aware satire, rather than BC's self-indulgent myopia. Couldn't bring myself to watch the third video, but the first two show a distinct fuzzy bear theme. In order to somehow justify Brokencyde's existence, I am now theorizing that they are espousing bestiality, given that no woman in her right mind, even drunk as a skunk, could possibly be attracted to them. Furry animals beware! Last edited [12/6/12 4:14 PM]
Lawrence, Lawrence, Lawrence - you sad little man! Apparently on the bizarrely out of touch planet you just descended from to honor us with your brilliance and deep social commentary you are adamant that: A) Women have no idea what is good for them or their bodies, only men can tell them - perfect men like Lawrence. B) Men are all honorable and loving and don't beat their wives or impregnate them and then leave. C) On your planet there are only “responsible” women who can pick and choose when and how they have sex. They are not forcibly raped, or drugged by irresponsible men who then have sex with them when unconscious. Or sell them into prostitution at very young ages and force them to abort so as not to lose clients. D) And on your planet contraceptives are not even necessary - women just get pregnant “voluntarily” when they want to and with the perfect spouse with the perfect job and the perfect life. It's all just so "voluntary" with you, isn't it Lawrence? E) Credible studies on our planet have shown that children in abusive households do best when the parents separate rather than staying together "for the sake of the children" and then taking their anger out on, or in front of, the children. But of course on your planet all marriages are perfect and equal and perfectly, equally responsible. Why don't you just go back to that perfect planet and leave us poor stupid women to make all our “voluntary” mistakes, such as not having safe affordable access to sex education and contraception and responsible men who won’t beat us, rape us, or get us pregnant? And family planning clinics where we are not in danger of being harassed or bombed just for getting breast exams, pap smears and contraceptives? And if you choose not to, then how about adopting some of the hundreds of thousands of unwanted children born into our “voluntary” world that so desperately need a stable home just like the one you described? Or are you just too perfect for the likes of them? You are certainly too perfect for the likes of me, victim of both rape and incest. Go back to your intolerant, arrogant planet Lawrence, and leave us poor inferior women alone! We have a hard enough time as it is. Last edited [8/8/12 11:09 PM]
I will - I promise! Although we lost at least one Martian in our last battle, so maybe I can claim some form of expertise! Do Alderaanians count? Last edited [3/9/12 11:31 AM]
Back to what you do best Devin - thanks!
I truly appreciate your response, and the blurb reads better to me now that you have added some clarification. I hope it will put the the situation in perspective for others as well, as I am not the only one who was bothered by the wording.
It seems very misleading to me, to see in Alibi's Reel World column that uPublic is poised to take control of Channel 27 from Quote Unquote. As far as I can tell, the Cable Board just voted eloquently and unanimously to recommend that the Mayor continue to honor Quote Unquote's contract through 2017, so how is that uPublic taking control? Your wording seems very suspect. Do you know something about back door deals with the Mayor or something? I'm confused, and I suggest you refrain from such subjective statements in further notices. The tour sounds interesting, but has nothing whatsoever to do with whether uPublic has taken control. BTW, the 3 minute encapsulation of the Cable Board's decision in this matter is up on the QUQ site, and it is quite powerful.
I'll keep both you aliens posted as to how I liked the film in 3-D. Meanwhile, don't leave the planet until I can say goodbye!
Hey Martian! Thanks for landing! That explains Devin's lack of earthly reality - he is not from this planet! I will keep that in mind in further communications! Last edited [2/17/12 4:13 PM]
Your review, by its very nature, was exclusionary. You were establishing clear parameters about what type of audience might go and see it, thus by your own wording excluding more mainstream theater-goers. You did not challenge your readers to step out of their comfort zone and give it a chance, you basically told them not to bother. But I agreed with you about the insularity of the potential audience, and felt that consequently a dance critic would have been a better choice, because you clearly have no expertise on the subject of dance filmmaking and the mutations of its art form that would have lead to such a film being shot in the way that it was by Mr. Wenders. A dance aficionado would have understood immediately and not been so troubled by what you considered to be transgressions of the documentary form. Clearly you have watched few, if any, dance documentaries, which are often extremely experimental in nature. Dance has always been the big challenge for both cinematographers and filmmakers, because there is that proscenium arch dilemma - do I give the audience the stage eye view, or do I pull them into the more limited but powerful minutiae of the human body striving for irrational perfection, sweat and dirt and all. Either way there is a tremendous level of compromise, and many groundbreaking camera techniques have been utilized to overcome that dilemma in a visually stimulating way for decades now. To audiences who have followed the art of filming dance over long periods of history, there is much to be said for Wenders approach. He is taking all the challenges that have gone before and solving them in an even more groundbreaking way. There is a distinct lineage and history to this that you are clearly ignorant of. To you there is only spinning heads bewilderment, which merely serves to prove my point - you should not have been reviewing this. As to your reading of my assessment of you physically, that is your story and not mine. As I stated clearly I DON'T EVEN KNOW YOU! But I still happen to believe you are a skilled film critic in general, and have acknowledged that numerous times. I am truly looking forward to seeing this film! (And PS backatcha! The Pina info was not up when I first looked, which is why I was so confused. Thanks for the tip on upgrading times)
It is not a documentary! That is just a category they use for distribution purposes. It is a high-tech, Wim-centric tribute to the passing of a great artist. My point, which you have done nothing to invalidate, is that people who don't know anything about dance should not be critiquing it, just as people who don't know anything about film should not be film critics, which I am sure is a pet peeve of yours. You are clearly, from the volume of your writings, a sedentary person. At least that is my initial prejudice, BECAUSE I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT YOU! That's why I wouldn't be a good person to critique you if I were a paid columnist. But my suspicion is that you have little or no background or history with much of anything physical, including Dance, MMA, Football, Triathlons, or Snowboarding, to name but a few of the more challenging physical professions. That's why you generally stay away from writing about them. A documentary is a window into the seemingly objective reality of a specific subject, and Pina's world was very much as enigmatic and evasive as what you saw in the film. I know because I studied with several of her dancers in NY. Thus Wim's approach was even more truthful than a standard bio-pic would have been, and much more what she would have wanted, rather than what some intelligent but befuddled film critic with all his rules and expectations found acceptable. And as for your insistence on defining what a truly great documentary is, there is no such definition. How do you explain Powaqqatsi? That was as successful as any documentary had ever been up to that point. Still is, as a matter of fact. All I'm asking is that you do what you do best my friend, which is writing clever, sometimes biting columns from the recumbent safety of your office chair about film and film making, and leave the dance to dancers and dance aficionados. (PS. Thank you for the info on where to see it, but I am still not seeing where it is listed. Can you clarify?) Last edited [2/16/12 1:10 PM] | 
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
