KlonyIlony

postapo

GITS

_

No word comes easier or oftener to the critic's pen than the word influence, and no vaguer notion can be found among all the vague notions that compose the phantom armory of aesthetics. Yet there is nothing in the critical field that should be of greater philosophical interest or prove more rewarding to analysis than the progressive modification of one mind by the work of another.

It often happens that the work acquires a singular value in the other mind, leading to active consequences that are impossible to foresee and in many cases will never be possible to ascertain. What we do know is that this derived activity is essential to intellectual production of all types. Whether in science or in the arts, if we look for the source of an achievement we can observe that what a man does either repeats or refutes what someone else has done—repeats it in other tones, refines or amplifies or simplifies it, loads or overloads it with meaning; or else rebuts, overturns, destroys and denies it, but thereby assumes it and has invisibly used it. Opposites are born from opposites.

We say that an author is original when we cannot trace the hidden transformations that others underwent in his mind; we mean to say that the dependence of what he does on what others have done is excessively complex and irregular. There are works in the likeness of others, and works that are the reverse of others, but there are also works of which the relation with earlier productions is so intricate that we become confused and attribute them to the direct intervention of the gods.

Paul Valéry, Letter abou Mallarmé, cit. Gerold Bloom - Kabbalah and Criticism

Deník Guardian zveřejnil kompilát sedmi krátkých analýz filmů, jednu redakční a šest dalších od současných filosofů: Christine Korsgaard (Harvard University), Ursula Coope (University of Oxford), Peter Singer (Princeton University, University of Melbourne), Susan Haack (University of Miami), Kenneth Taylor (Stanford University) a Slavoj Žižek (Birkbeck Institute for the Humanities). Analýzy ukazují, jak každý z filmů vede diváka k elementárním filozofickým otázkám, k existenciálním dilematům našich vlastních životů. 

http://blisty.cz/art/77131.html

2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuNS66GiH3Q

3 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Mu6f6nICKE

4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=to7zb6q6qPI

Here, Hartley, longtime partners (Donovan, Posey), key "Henry Fool" figures (Thomas Jay Ryan, James Urbaniak) and newcomer Aubrey Plaza discuss the making of a classic American cinema trilogy.

"You can't put a fence around a man's soul."

The East Village of Manhattan in the mid 1980s was teeming with rebel artists in bands, performance troupes. Hartley, just out of college (SUNY Purchase, where Burke, Falco, and Posey also went), opted to cede the streets to the likes of Jim Jarmusch and take the LIRR home instead to shoot his first films.

HAL HARTLEY: I was living in New York City but I went back to Lindenhurst often to see my family and friends. I knew I had a good base there. That was an environment that I could control. It was a practical thing. also remember feeling at that time the American suburbs and people who rub up against the status quo the wrong way there wasn't anybody making movies like that. Stories about outsiders in the suburbs were not really being made. I thought 'Well, perhaps that's something I can bring to this?' I felt very much connected to the Island.

Hartley put together "The Unbelievable Truth" budget (about $60,000 dollars) and set about casting Burke as an ex con, and discovering via a headshot, the petite, blonde Shelly who would play Audry, Burke's love interest, a high school student obsessed with the bomb ("Why are you two concerned about my college education? The world is going to blow up any day now," she asks her hapless parents).

HAL HARTLEY: A lot of friends around me were saying 'We don't think this is right. We think you're making a mistake with this girl.' I said, 'I don't think so. I know she's shorter than a model. But I think there's something really special about her look and she's funny in a way that she might not even be aware of yet. She was very young.

http://www.salon.com/2015/04/03/hal_hartleys_epic_oral_history_the_henry_fool_trilogy_parker_posey_and_the_real_sage_of_90s_indie_film/

"Artists may be classified as meteors, planets & fixed stars. A meteor makes a striking effect for a moment. You look up & cry There! & it is gone for ever. Planets & wandering stars last a much longer time. They often outshine the fixed stars & are confounded with them by the inexperienced; but this is only because they are near. It is not long before they must yield their place; nay, the light they give is reflected only, & the sphere of their influence is confined to their own orbit — their contemporaries. Their path is one of change & movement, & with the circuit of a few years their tale is told.

Fixed stars are the only ones that are constant; their position in the firmament is secure; they shine with a light of their own; their effect to-day is the same as it was yesterday, because, having no parallax, their appearance does not alter with a difference in our standpoint. They belong not to one system, one nation only, but to the universe.."
~Arthur Schopenhauer 1851

to dog meat

what the...

100-100

"Rocky II." It's round 15 of the rematch between Rocky Balboa and Apollo Creed. The two fighters are beating each other into hamburger. As the final round builds, the camera pulls in close to the fighters. Creed delivers a series of haymakers with his right, and Balboa answers with punishing alternating body blows. These are the punches that in a few moments will bring both fighters to the mat. Most of the shots are over-the-shoulder views from the perspective of the boxer receiving the blows. So as you sit in the audience, for about 20 seconds fists are popping out of the screen toward your face almost continuously. It is exhausting to watch, and almost impossible not to flinch.

"Alice in Wonderland." When Alice slays the Jabberwock in Tim Burton's film version, the head tumbles down directly toward you. Try not to duck just a little. I saw this movie with my 7-year-old son, who likes to sit up front. Jonah wiggled around in his chair as if he were really there, craning to see through the crowds in the castle grounds and flinching at the looming Jabberwock. As the camera swooped and dove and the action heated up, eventually the sense of movement became too strong—he turned to me and said, "Dad, I think I'm gonna barf." I had him close his eyes for a little bit and he was fine.

http://www.salon.com/2015/01/18/rocky_balboa_just_punched_me_the_neuroscience_behind_our_tears_fears_and_flinches_at_the_movies/

"Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs"

An industrious young woman neglects to charge for her housekeeping services and is rightly exploited for her naïveté. She dies without ever having sought her own happiness as the highest moral aim. I did not finish watching this movie, finding it impossible to sympathize with the main character. —No stars.

"Bambi"

The biggest and the strongest are the fittest to rule. This is the way things have always been. —Four stars.

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/ayn-rand-reviews-childrens-movies?intcid=mod-most-popular

What's the appeal of B-movies for you?

Rae Dawn Chong: I'm not in this [business] to be adored; it's to get better at what I do. I don't have a resistance to doing "Knock 'em Dead." It's super fun. Sure, I got paid $3.50 and we made it in six days. I would love a three-story trailer, or that they would be brave enough to cast me in a major Hollywood film, but aren't we here for fun? I had a lot of fun with this, and I have done some crazy things in my career.

http://www.salon.com/2014/12/19/i_made_no_money_and_i_was_drenched_in_blood_this_is_what_its_like_to_star_in_a_b_movie/

Abstract
Explanations of psychological phenomena seem to generate more public interest when they contain neuroscientific information. Even irrelevant neuroscience information in an explanation of a psychological phenomenon may interfere with people's abilities to critically consider the underlying logic of this explanation. We tested this hypothesis by giving naïve adults, students in a neuroscience course, and neuroscience experts brief descriptions of psychological phenomena followed by one of four types of explanation, according to a 2 (good explanation vs. bad explanation) × 2 (without neuroscience vs. with neuroscience) design. Crucially, the neuroscience information was irrelevant to the logic of the explanation, as confirmed by the expert subjects. Subjects in all three groups judged good explanations as more satisfying than bad ones. But subjects in the two nonexpert groups additionally judged that explanations with logically irrelevant neuroscience information were more satisfying than explanations without. The neuroscience information had a particularly striking effect on nonexperts' judgments of bad explanations, masking otherwise salient problems in these explanations.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2778755/

Keyboard Cat and the Betrayal of Commodities (další epizody po rozkliknutí videa v Youtube)

The Loving Trap of Pandora's Nightmares

ukázka z knihy Hope for Film:

Imagine a world where a filmmaker could go to a studio and say, "My team has five million followers. Through crowd-funding, we've done 25,000 preorders for the video that we haven't begun to shoot, and I want to be your partner in the producing and marketing of this movie." How could that not be enticing? And we're almost at that point. This is the beginning of the third way. And you can already see it peeking out from under the horizon. Each day, it grows larger, better, and, perhaps for some, more threatening.

http://www.salon.com/2014/08/17/does_indie_film_have_a_future_blockbuster_culture_critics_social_media_and_the_next_philip_seymour_hoffman/

Velmi bychom se mýlili, kdybychom myslili, že stačí, nejsme-li sami osobními. Neboť tím, že dokážeme odpůrci docela klidně, že nemá pravdu a že tedy nesprávně usuzuje a myslí, což bývá u každého dialektického vítězství, roztrpčíme ho více, než nějakým hrubým, urážlivým výrokem. Proč? Poněvadž, jak praví Hobbes, de Cive, Cap. 1: Omnis animi voluptas omnisque alacritas in eo sita est, quod quis habeat, quibuiscum conferens se, possit magnifice sentire de se ipso. [Všechna rozkoš a veselí mysli spočívá v tom, abychom měli někoho, ke komu se přirovnávajíce, bychom něco našli, čím bychom se honosili (Hobbes, Delive, I. 5. př. J. Krále)] — O nic člověk tak nepečuje jako o uspokojení své ješitnosti, ja žádná rána tak nebolí, jako ta, jež je zasazena marnivosti (odtud pocházejí rčení, jako: »Čest nad život« atd.). Toto uspokojení ješitnosti vzniká hlavně z přirovnání sebe k druhým, a to z přirovnání v každém ohledu, avšak především v ohledu duševních sil. A to se právě děje effective [skutečně, pravdivě, účinně] a velmi silně v diskusi. Odtud roztrpčenost poraženého, ač se mu nestala křivda, a odtud i jeho uchopení se posledního prostředku, tohoto posledního uskoku, jemuž však s druhé strany nelze ujiti s pouhou zdvořilostí. Přece však veliká chladnokrevnost vypomůže i zde, a sice, odpovídáme-li klidně, jakmile odpůrce se stává osobním: »To nepatří k věci,« a hned se zase vrátíme k věci a pokračujeme mu zde dokazovali jeho nepravdu, nedbajíce jeho urážek, tedy stejně, jak praví Themistokles Eurybiadovi: παταξον μεν, ακουσον δε [čti pátakson mén, ákuson dé: Udeř, avšak poslechni! Plutarchos, Životopisy VII. kap. 11, ř. 15—16, vyd. Weidmann-Haupt-Sauppe.)]. Avšak není to každému dáno.

Proto jediným bezpečným protipravidlem jest ono, jež uvádí již Aristoteles v poslední kapitole Topica: Nediskutovati s prvním nejlepším, nýbrž jedině s těmi, jež známe a o nichž víme, že mají dosti rozumu, aby netvrdili něco přímo absurdního, a pak, aby proto nemusili býti zahanbeni; a také, aby se mohlo diskutovati důvody, nikoliv silnými slovy, a aby se důvodům naslouchalo a vcházelo se na ně; a konečně, aby si cenili pravdy, aby rádi vyslechli dobré důvody, třebas z úst odpůrcových, a aby byli dosti spravedliví a mohli snésti, zůstanou li v neprávu, když pravda je u druhé strany. Z toho plyne, že ze 100 sotva jeden jest hoden, abychom s ním diskutovali. Ostatní nechme mluviti, co jim libo, neboť desipere est iuris gentium [jest právem národů ztratiti rozum], a pamatujme, co praví Voltaire: La paix vaut encore mieux que la vérité [klid platí víc ještě než pravda], a arabské přísloví: »Na stromu mlčení visí jeho ovoce, mír.« Diskuse je ovšem často vzájemně prospěšná jakožto prostředek k vytříbení hlav, k opravě vlastních myšlenek a také k tvoření nových názorů. Avšak oba diskutující musí si býti co do vzdělání a ducha prostředně rovni. Nedostává-li se jednomu prvého, nerozumí všemu, není au niveau [na úrovni]. Nedostává-li se mu druhého, svede ho tím způsobená hořkost k nepoctivosti a k žaludům a konečně i k hrubosti.

Hollywood, then, is like any other major institution: It reflects and reinforces its society's assumptions, its economic systems, and its audience's most deeply held beliefs. This may seem like a no-brainer, but if we look at the debates inspired by three of the year's most high-profile releases—Zero Dark Thirty, Lincoln, and The Dark Knight Rises—we can see that Hollywood's ideology can operate with more subtlety than one might expect from the folks who brought us White Chicks and Resident Evil.

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/01/hollywoods-real-bias-is-conservative-but-not-in-the-way-liberals-often-say/266960/