• combat_brandonism [they/them]
    ·
    3 months ago

    wild that you thought my comment was relevant to reply to with this

    my dig at tarantino here is the fact that he's a likely sex pest and loves the edginess of having white actors say the gamer word on camera. I've got no problem with a bit of the ol' ultraviolence, and in general don't feel strongly about his movies one way or the other.

    this specific comment is about how he'd be the greatest to ever do it if inglorious bastards was a critique of the citizens of the fourth reich sitting in the theater watching his movie, but we all know it ain't that deep

    • FungiDebord [none/use name]
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      look, i think the film holds out the opportunity for self-reflection, about the audience's own relationship with violence, that you might appreciate. but, just because the film has, i think in the most felicitious reading, a different message than what you would want (a film about the power of film vs a film about how the audience is wretched) doesn't mean that the film "ain't deep." it's just has different aim than what you want from it.

      there's room of course for films that rub an audience's face in their own wretchedness, about their own complicity. Haneke's Cache, Haneke's Funny Games, The Sopranos come to mind. they're great, also thematically rich, but obviously to different ends.