miffed by mifune the dogma movie
gayboy
though it made me wanna puke but then that was the point, to air all
the dirty family laundry and rub our faces in the odor and stain.
i don't much like it when solondz or anderson or some american jerk
does it but celebration had a wildness, a mad rush quality about it
that was visually exuberant and emotionally lacerating. it didn't
simply beg for attention. it really slapped you around, and as they
say in court, the defense may plead insanity or intoxication. there
was no coyness about it, no self-pity. but, it still very ugly and
unpleasant. and, its shitting on the veneer of bourgeois
respectability was hardly original. what was perhaps original was the
level of rage, dementia, and infantilism, a complete lack of
philsophy, insight, critique, or uplift. the movie seemed to say
bourgeois is shit, but hardly better are the spoiled scum children
who've exposed it as shit. if the movie had one positive message it
was that all of us are equally shit and those who try to affect a
sense of dignity is just a hypocrite.
stylistically raw, hormonally charged, and brutal; a work of
considerable talent and intelligence. but ugly as hell, with no vision
of a world free from ugliness. but, it wasn't even ugliness as
ugliness but ugliness as the norm. ugliness in a pasolini film about
the poor or in the form of fellini's grotesque whore carried either
the badge of social consciousness or a charming caricature, an oddity
fascinating for its ugliness apart from normality. but ugliness in
dogma films is part of everyday and everything. the minutiae is ugly
in dogma films. parents, brothers and sisters, sane and retarded,
children and adults, rich and poor, all ugly mugly putrid arses. their
every word, gesture, expression.
mifune is another dogma 93 film and it is UGLY! it's not bad. maybe
it's even good. but it's so relentlessly ugly that i felt nauseous
throughout. worse, i didnt' feel a bit enlightened by this ugliness.
it all looked kind of familiar.
it begins with a yuppie couple getting married. they look clean and
lovey dovey. bride's parents seem very rich and respectable. a nice
wedding. next scene, they are screwing and the demure bride is now
screaming like a wild sex animal. yes, the movie begins the process of
exposing the crazyass animal hidden inside the respectable modern
person. then, the hubby gets a phone call and is told his father--a
farmer--has died. it turns out he had concealed his family secrets
from his wife. his father was maybe an asshole(another shitty dogma
patriarch) and left behind a retardo son, the groom's brother. the
newly wed hubby goes off on his own to put things in order at thg
farm. it's a real mess there, and he hires a cleaning lady who's a
callgirl and wants to get away from threatening calls from a sex fiend
who later turns out to her blood kin, a bratty boy arsehole.
yes, another dogma retardo character. what's with this dogma retards?
everyone in celebration acted like bratty retarded children. lars von
trier's 'idiots' was about people purposefully acting like retards,
rather unnecessary in dogma films. and, dancer in the dark and
breaking the wind, neither of which i've seen are supposedly about
oddball eccentric characters, either childlike or retardlike. and
'kingdom' also had a couple of retards. why this fethish for the
retard? it probably goes back to modern art with its degenerate
themes. bourgeois ideals were for health, cleanliness, order, reason,
and respectability. modern artists said the hell with that shit.
modern artists wanted to explore into uncharted, subconsious,
irrational territory. which is why picasso and gang were interested
in primitive african art, paintings by retards in insane asylums, by
children's drawings. in these primitive forms the modern artist saw
the truer, purer, and direct link between the subconscious and human
expression. bourgeois expression, with its dignified posture and
pretension at rationality, was much too embellished and affected with
falsity and pomp. the primitives, the children, and the retards were
closer to the truth. they may know less about objective reality but
their expression was straight from their heart, mind, and gut; it was
subjectively truer. lars von trier's characters in 'idiots' are a
bunch of modernists trying to do in acting what dadaists did in
painting and poetry. and, it was plenty retarded.
so in mifune, the yuppie dude ends up in a primitive farm in the
danish boondocks somewhere, accompanied by a vulgur hooker, her
obnoxious but forthright kin, and his retarded brother. he takes
leave of respectable life and finds himself among the primitives.
he's a modern dane who, via modernist retardism, rediscovers his
barbarian viking soul.
the movie takes its title from toshiro mifune, whose samurai character
is the means of weird communication between the brothers just as santa
serves as the bridge between parents and children. and, of course,
mifune in seven samurai played a primitive peasant retardo pretending
to be a noble samurai(the yuppie kinda goes reverse--like the real six
samurai in 7 samurai--becoming a peasant primitive himself; on the
other hand, he was a farmer to begin with so he's actually like the
mifune character who ends up back on the farm).
the retardo brother's into UFO, in tune with all the imbecilities
which upon closer inspection perhaps are not so imbecile since man in
his natural state is a freaking imbecile, something modern man tries
to repress.
i dunno. i prefer straw dogs instead. the image of a guy getting beat
up by a bunch of whores at the end didn't make my day. but, i guess
there is true love at the end. yuppie returns to the farm and becomes
a true man. a hooker leaves her impersonal whorish life and finds true
love in the prodigal son returned home to retardoville.
PunyEarthling1
> and respectability. modern artists said the hell with that shit.
> modern artists wanted to explore into uncharted, subconsious,
> irrational territory. which is why picasso and gang were interested
> in primitive african art, paintings by retards in insane asylums, by
> children's drawings. in these primitive forms the modern artist saw
> the truer, purer, and direct link between the subconscious and human
> expression. bourgeois expression, with its dignified posture and
> pretension at rationality, was much too embellished and affected with
> falsity and pomp. the primitives, the children, and the retards were
> closer to the truth. they may know less about objective reality but
> their expression was straight from their heart, mind, and gut; it was
> subjectively truer.
You know, gayboy, despite the unpleasant way you talk about disabled
people, you've hit on an interesting facet of mental disability in the
above paragraph.
in these primitive forms the modern artist saw
> the truer, purer, and direct link between the subconscious and human
> expression.
What if dreams could be directly transcribed into art? Salvador Dali
would sleep in a chair holding a spoon, which would clatter to the
floor as he dropped off, so he could quickly draw his dreams.
The art of some autistic people is detailed and technical. Perhaps
with less poetry but more fascinating observation.
Not sure if it's a truer link from the subconscious though. Just like
the bones of a person are not meant to be exposed to the outside, the
subconscious is not meant to be directly observed. The perceptions of
someone whose thoughts pass through many filters are as true and valid
as those of someone with a mental disability.
monsieurblob
no not really. not that at all actually