Youtube comments of (@ThomasFlight).

  1. 9600
  2. 8000
  3. 3400
  4. 3200
  5. 2400
  6. 2000
  7. 1900
  8. 1900
  9. 1800
  10. 1200
  11. 1200
  12. 1200
  13. 1000
  14. 866
  15. 819
  16. 700
  17. 685
  18. 670
  19. 641
  20. 630
  21. 601
  22. 579
  23. 562
  24. 561
  25. Often when I publish a critical essay like this the comments turn into a mess. Before you comment, here are a few things to bear in mind: I'm a big fan of Christopher Nolan and his work. When Inception came out it played a role in re-igniting my interest in filmmaking. I've seen all his films, many multiple times, and made a video examining his work in the past. This video is not a personal attack against Nolan or anyone who likes his films. What it is, is an attempt to examine and talk about one aspect of his writing and filmmaking that has frustrated me in several of his films, and the aspect that I think ultimately kept TENET from being a great movie. It's because I like and respect so many other aspects of how Nolan makes his films- that I would spend so much time dissecting one aspect that I think he gets wrong. You might disagree! Maybe what I talk about in this video doesn't bother you, and you think TENET is Nolan's best. Maybe you're somewhere in between. All that is fine. The point is we're making individual, subjective analysis of our own experiences, and then trying to share those experiences with each other. Feel free to elaborate in the comments on why you think I'm wrong, but let's all be respectful of each other and the filmmakers. Please provide actual examples from the film, or elaborate on what part of film theory or analysis you think I'm getting wrong, instead of attacking me personally. A critic disliking and criticizing something that you like is just part of the ongoing discussion surrounding film- don't take it personally.
    523
  26. 504
  27. 472
  28. 466
  29. 452
  30. 416
  31. 408
  32. 392
  33. 382
  34. 378
  35. 377
  36. 375
  37. 371
  38. 364
  39. 363
  40. 360
  41. 347
  42. 344
  43. 330
  44. 327
  45. 323
  46. 314
  47. 308
  48. 301
  49. 297
  50. 289
  51. 288
  52. 273
  53. 269
  54. 260
  55. 259
  56. 259
  57. 258
  58. 255
  59. 251
  60. 241
  61. 233
  62. 229
  63. 221
  64. 220
  65. 220
  66. 212
  67. 196
  68. 188
  69. 186
  70. 184
  71. 182
  72. 181
  73. 179
  74. 178
  75. 172
  76. 167
  77. 165
  78. 163
  79. 161
  80. 158
  81. 157
  82. 156
  83. 152
  84. 151
  85. 148
  86. 147
  87. 146
  88. 146
  89. 145
  90. 143
  91. 142
  92. 137
  93. 132
  94. 130
  95. 126
  96. 122
  97. 121
  98. 121
  99. 119
  100. 118
  101. 116
  102. 116
  103. 116
  104. 112
  105. 111
  106. 110
  107. 108
  108. 104
  109. 103
  110. 100
  111. 100
  112. 100
  113. 97
  114. 95
  115. 95
  116. 94
  117. 93
  118. 93
  119. 93
  120. 92
  121. 91
  122. 91
  123. 88
  124. 88
  125. 85
  126. 84
  127. 83
  128. 83
  129. 81
  130. 81
  131. 80
  132. 79
  133. 79
  134. 78
  135. 78
  136. 77
  137. 77
  138. 77
  139. 76
  140. 75
  141. 74
  142. 73
  143. 72
  144. 70
  145. 70
  146. 69
  147. 68
  148. 68
  149. 68
  150. 67
  151. 67
  152. 65
  153. 65
  154. 64
  155. 64
  156. 64
  157. 64
  158. 64
  159. 62
  160. 61
  161. 61
  162. 61
  163. 60
  164. 59
  165. 57
  166. 56
  167. 56
  168. 56
  169. 56
  170. 55
  171. 55
  172. 55
  173. 54
  174. 54
  175. 54
  176. 53
  177. 52
  178. 51
  179. 51
  180. 50
  181. 50
  182. 50
  183. 50
  184. 50
  185. 49
  186. [CC] To see which films I'm referencing, turn on "English (United States)" under captions. This video was made possible by MUBI: Get a whole month of great cinema FREE with MUBI: https://mubi.com/thomasflight FAQ *1. Aren't you oversimplifying (modernism, postmodernism, metamodernism, fill in the blank)?* Yes. From a philosophical perspective actually fleshing fully fleshing out complex concepts like Modernism or Postmodernism is well beyond the scope of this video. My goal was to provide a broad enough overview of these concepts to be able to introduce people to the idea of metamodernism as it relates to film. This is not meant to be an academically rigorous description of either modern or postmodern philosophy, just a broad enough introduction for people to be able to understand the trends. *2. Isn't Metamodernism just Postmodernism?* Most of the Metamodern chapter of this video is trying to explain why I think this isn't the case, but I have a feeling people are going to ask or assert this anyway. My short answer is: Metamodernism looks a lot like postmodernism, because it has elements of postmodernism in it, but it also contains modernist features that you won't find in most postmodern stuff. Also, again, it's about the "structure of feeling" of postmodernism vs. metamodernism- not the specific features of each. *3. But "meta" stuff has been around for ages/That one thing you talked about isn't "meta"/etc* The "meta" in "metamodernism" does not actually refer to things "being meta" in the way "meta" is commonly used to refer to self-aware or forth-wall-breaking content. It's true that a lot of postmodern and metamodern stuff is "meta" in some way (include a lot of what I talk about in this video), but that's not the primary feature of metamodernism. The idea (as I understand it) is more that "metamodernism" is a "meta-philosophy."
    49
  187. 49
  188. 49
  189. 48
  190. 48
  191. 48
  192. 48
  193. 47
  194. 47
  195. 47
  196. 47
  197. 47
  198. 46
  199. 46
  200. 46
  201. 46
  202. 46
  203. 45
  204. 45
  205. 44
  206. 44
  207. 44
  208. 44
  209. 44
  210. 44
  211. 44
  212. 43
  213. 43
  214. 43
  215. 43
  216. 43
  217. 43
  218. 42
  219. 42
  220. 42
  221. 42
  222. 41
  223. 41
  224. 40
  225. 40
  226. 39
  227. 39
  228. 39
  229. 39
  230. 39
  231. 39
  232. 39
  233. 38
  234. 38
  235. 38
  236. 38
  237. 38
  238. 38
  239. 37
  240. 37
  241. 36
  242. 36
  243. 36
  244. 36
  245. 36
  246. 35
  247. 35
  248. 35
  249. 35
  250. 34
  251. 34
  252. 34
  253. 34
  254. 34
  255. 33
  256. 33
  257. 33
  258. 33
  259. 32
  260. 32
  261. 31
  262. 31
  263. 31
  264. 31
  265. 30
  266. Hi Robert, thanks for the well thought out comment. I don't have time to fully address every point you raise but I have a few things I want to mention. -I'm working within a film focused framework here. So I'm not asserting any of these definitions are necessarily directly applicable to other mediums! I think Modernism and film is a weird combo because film never really had a proper "modernist" movement. It was just "born" as a modernist form. So Modernism very much existed in literature in a way that it never did in film. So when you say "traditional story structure" is not in the great modernist novels, you're absolutely right. When I use the term "story structure" in this video I'm reffering specifically to "conventional film story structure." I suppose I could have been more clear about that, but figure it would be clear within the context of the video. Again for clarity, I don't think modernism in film maps perfectly to modernism in lit or philosophy. Modernism in film and literature both feel very different. These "movements" in lit usually precede film, and I don't think any of them map perfectly. The lit I feel is "metamodern" is really not like the metamodern films I'm talking about here in my experience. To your issue about No Country- sure there's no sneering empty irony here, but I think we'd both agree that postmodernism is bigger than just that! That's why I threw in Monty Python as an additional example. Within film when we think about postmodernism, we're really looking at how a film like that deconstructs the structures that we came to expect in cinematic storytelling. I also think the film is very philosophically nihilist, even though it's not sneering and ironic. We may just disagree on The Coen's work in general- I find most of their stuff have a very nihilistic and almost apathetic vibe. I think they love their characters, but the world those characters inhabit is cruel and chaotic, and ultimately possibly meaningless. That's what I personally take away from them and so they feel very postmodern to me but I understand if you feel differently. You kind of dismiss the fact that No Country is a great example of "deconstructing the western" but that's exactly why I picked it! It seems like you're looking mostly at the philosophical arc here (which is important) but in doing so you aren't really examining the shifts in terms of how they impact filmmaking form and technique, which I think is just as central to my argument. Finally on the TG:M point- I disagree again, and I feel like I addressed it in the movie. They do in fact still make big blockbusters that don't have the features of the MCU, Tom Cruise's other work is a great example. Their are many smaller boutique action films that have lots of great practical stunts. Denis Villeneuve's Sci-fi's have some of the most stunning CGI I think we've ever seen. I'm as bored of the franchise stuff and the MCU as the next guy- but pretty much every good quality TG:M has exists in other current films- except, the sincerity, and traditional film story structure. Hope that helps! I don't think you're being a dick at all. I appreciate the thorough response, it seems to me like you just got caught up in try to make what I'm saying fit within an understanding of these structures in literature, which makes sense, but which I don't think will ever perfectly compare. That would have to be its own video.
    30
  267. 30
  268. 30
  269. 30
  270. 30
  271. 30
  272. 30
  273. 30
  274. 29
  275. 29
  276. 29
  277. 29
  278. 28
  279. 28
  280. 28
  281. 27
  282. 27
  283. 27
  284. 27
  285. 27
  286. 27
  287. 26
  288. 25
  289. 25
  290. 25
  291. 25
  292. 25
  293. 25
  294. 24
  295. 24
  296. 24
  297. 24
  298. 23
  299. 23
  300. 23
  301. 23
  302. 23
  303. 23
  304. 23
  305. 22
  306. 22
  307. 22
  308. 22
  309. 21
  310. 21
  311. 21
  312. 21
  313. 21
  314. 21
  315. 21
  316. 20
  317. 20
  318. 20
  319. 20
  320. 20
  321. 20
  322. 20
  323. 19
  324. 19
  325. 19
  326. 19
  327. 19
  328. 19
  329. 19
  330. 19
  331. 19
  332. 19
  333. 19
  334. 19
  335. 19
  336. 18
  337. 18
  338. 18
  339. 18
  340. 18
  341. 18
  342. 18
  343. 17
  344. 17
  345. 17
  346. 17
  347. 17
  348. 16
  349. 16
  350. 16
  351. 16
  352. 16
  353. 16
  354. 16
  355. 16
  356. 16
  357. 16
  358. 16
  359. 16
  360. 15
  361. 15
  362. 15
  363. 15
  364. 15
  365. 15
  366. 15
  367. 15
  368. 15
  369. 15
  370. 15
  371. 14
  372. 14
  373. 14
  374. 14
  375. 14
  376. 14
  377. 14
  378. 14
  379. 14
  380. 14
  381. 14
  382. 14
  383. 14
  384. 14
  385. 14
  386. 14
  387. 14
  388. 14
  389. 13
  390. 13
  391. 13
  392. 13
  393. 13
  394. 13
  395. 13
  396. 13
  397. 13
  398. 12
  399. 12
  400. 12
  401. 12
  402. 12
  403. 12
  404. 12
  405. 12
  406. 12
  407. 12
  408. 12
  409. 12
  410. 11
  411. 11
  412. 11
  413. 11
  414. 11
  415. 11
  416. 11
  417. 11
  418. 11
  419. 11
  420. 11
  421. 11
  422. 11
  423. 11
  424. 11
  425. 11
  426. 11
  427. 10
  428. 10
  429. 10
  430. 10
  431. 10
  432. 10
  433. 10
  434. 10
  435. 10
  436. 10
  437. 10
  438. 10
  439. 10
  440. 10
  441. 10
  442. 9
  443. 9
  444. 9
  445. 9
  446. 9
  447. 9
  448. 9
  449. 9
  450. 9
  451. 9
  452. 9
  453. 9
  454. 9
  455. 9
  456. 9
  457. 9
  458. 9
  459. 9
  460. 9
  461. 9
  462. 9
  463. 9
  464. 9
  465. 9
  466. 9
  467. 8
  468. 8
  469. 8
  470. 8
  471. 8
  472. 8
  473. 8
  474. 8
  475. 8
  476. 8
  477. 8
  478. 8
  479. 8
  480. 8
  481. 8
  482. 8
  483. 7
  484. 7
  485. 7
  486. 7
  487. 7
  488. 7
  489. 7
  490. 7
  491. 7
  492. 7
  493. 7
  494. 7
  495. 7
  496. 7
  497. 7
  498. 7
  499. 7
  500. 7
  501. 7
  502. 7
  503. 7
  504. 7
  505. 7
  506. 7
  507. 7
  508. 7
  509. 7
  510. 7
  511. 6
  512. 6
  513. 6
  514. 6
  515. 6
  516. 6
  517. 6
  518. 6
  519. 6
  520. 6
  521. 6
  522. 6
  523. 6
  524. Thanks for watching everyone! If you enjoy my content please consider supporting my channel: http://patreon.com/thomasflight To give the film's editor, John Ottman, a fair shake, he recognizes this scene isn't great. Here's the editor's explanation of this scene: "It was one of the scenes shot by Fletcher in the post-Singer home stretch. Fletcher mostly picked up Freddie’s relationship moments, along with the origination of “We Will Rock You” and “Another One Bites the Dust.” But the story line also got reordered a bit, and dialogue in the original meeting between the band and manager John Reid no longer made sense. So Fletcher shot the one that takes place outside a London pub. Ottman was under pressure to make the film’s first act move swiftly, but test audiences never got bored and actually wanted more of the band’s early days. So he went back and slowed those scenes down and let them breathe more — but he didn’t have time to do so with that meeting. “Whenever I see it, I want to put a bag over my head. Because that’s not my aesthetic,” he said. “If there’s ever an extended version of the film where I can put a couple scenes back, I will recut that scene!” Full Article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/did-john-ottman-save-bohemian-rhapsody-the-oscar-winning-editor-is-being-praised-by-colleagues--and-mocked-online/2019/03/04/89aed896-3e8e-11e9-922c-64d6b7840b82_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.2d94937a6b6f -Thanks to user /u/msedits on reddit for bringing this to my attention.
    6
  525. I'm not unconcerned. And maybe I wasn't clear enough but a big part of this video is (I thought) a critique of how Nathan handles that situation. I specifically chose not to talk much about Remy because I just don't think it's appropriate for me to speculate about whether or not Remy was traumatized when we don't/can't even have a full understanding of what happened on or off screen (which is the point of my video). And while I wanted to discuss this piece of media I don't feel right creating a bunch of "discourse" around a young child's experience on the show. The larger point of this video is that we can't even evaluate if the show is or isn't ethical by watching it because we don't know what's actually going on and don't know how real any of it is. Spending the video trying to determine if Remy was harmed based on the "evidence" of what we see on the screen misses the point entirely. I think it's very worth discussing the laws around child-acting, and I'd be very supportive of more strict regulation, but that's a different video. The truth is we don't know that Remy was actually participating in a reality TV show. It's possible the entire thing is fake. For the record, Remy's grandmother has spoken online about Remy's well-being and says he's doing very well. And I think the narrative of The Rehearsal goes a long way to critique the very issue of children involved in this kind of thing, which very little popular media even addresses. But it's hard to evaluate the ethical dilemma of that scenario because of overarching ethical issues with the reality TV format as a whole that I talk about in this video.
    6
  526. 6
  527. 6
  528. 6
  529. 6
  530. 6
  531. 6
  532. 6
  533. 6
  534. 6
  535. 6
  536. 6
  537. 6
  538. 6
  539. 6
  540. 6
  541. 6
  542. 6
  543. 6
  544. 6
  545. 6
  546. 6
  547. 6
  548. 6
  549. 6
  550. 6
  551. 6
  552. 6
  553. 6
  554. 6
  555. 6
  556. 6
  557. 6
  558. 6
  559. 6
  560. 6
  561. 6
  562. 6
  563. 5
  564. 5
  565. 5
  566. 5
  567. 5
  568. 5
  569. 5
  570. 5
  571. 5
  572. 5
  573. 5
  574. 5
  575. 5
  576. 5
  577. 5
  578. 5
  579. 5
  580. 5
  581. 5
  582. 5
  583. 5
  584. ​ @RevRonin7  Since you finished the video I'll give you an actual response: To your first question: A. I don't think everyone loves his films. They do well in the box office, but no real film critic uses box office performance as a measure of what is "good filmmaking." Otherwise we would have to say that the films that make the most money are objectively the best- anyone who's studied film at all will tell you that's not true. My goal in examining a film in my essays has never been to look at "what people will tolerate" or "what is popular and sells" and always "what makes a GOOD" film. Just because Nolan "has to" include exposition for people you're calling dumb, doesn't mean that it's the best thing to do or is good filmmaking or writing. Your primary criticism of my video is that I'm saying that TENET is "a feeling movie." The fact that Tenet "telling" instead of letting us feel, is only 1 of the 4 problems I present with the exposition. What do you think of the 3 other reasons I gave for why exposition causes problems? Do you think that good character motivation and development is not important to a film? Maybe you don't- but I believe the vast majority of film critics and viewers would disagree with you. You say Tenet is a "thinking man's" movie. I personally don't think the plot or the concept makes much logical sense. The world as Nolan has constructed it in TENET does not really work. If you think about it... you don't really get much in return. I don't have a problem with you disagreeing with my take on this film. I disagree with all of my favorite critics and essayists about films at some point. But I'll be honest with you your attitude in this response comes across as really, defensive, aggressive, and pretentious and I'd prefer if you kept that out of my comments.
    5
  585. 5
  586. 5
  587. 5
  588. 5
  589. 5
  590. 5
  591. 5
  592. 5
  593. 5
  594. 5
  595. 5
  596. 5
  597. 5
  598. 5
  599. 5
  600. 5
  601. 5
  602. 5
  603. 5
  604. 5
  605. 5
  606. 5
  607. 5
  608. 5
  609. 5
  610. 5
  611. 5
  612. 5
  613. 5
  614. 5
  615. 5
  616. 5
  617. 4
  618. 4
  619. 4
  620. 4
  621. 4
  622. 4
  623. 4
  624. 4
  625. 4
  626. 4
  627. 4
  628. 4
  629. 4
  630. 4
  631. 4
  632. 4
  633. 4
  634. 4
  635. 4
  636. 4
  637. 4
  638. 4
  639. 4
  640. 4
  641. 4
  642. 4
  643. 4
  644. 4
  645. 4
  646. 4
  647. 4
  648. 4
  649. 4
  650. 4
  651. 4
  652. 4
  653. 4
  654. 4
  655. 4
  656. 4
  657. 4
  658. 4
  659. 4
  660. 4
  661. 4
  662. 4
  663. 4
  664. 4
  665. 4
  666. 4
  667. 4
  668. 4
  669. 4
  670. 4
  671. 4
  672. 4
  673. 4
  674. 4
  675. 4
  676. 4
  677. 4
  678. 4
  679. 4
  680. 4
  681. 4
  682. 4
  683. 4
  684. 4
  685. 4
  686. 4
  687. 4
  688. 4
  689. 4
  690. 4
  691. 3
  692. 3
  693. 3
  694. 3
  695. 3
  696. 3
  697. 3
  698. 3
  699. 3
  700. 3
  701. 3
  702. 3
  703. 3
  704. 3
  705. 3
  706. 3
  707. 3
  708. 3
  709. 3
  710. 3
  711. 3
  712. 3
  713. 3
  714. 3
  715. 3
  716. 3
  717. 3
  718. 3
  719. 3
  720. 3
  721. 3
  722. 3
  723. 3
  724. 3
  725. 3
  726. 3
  727. 3
  728. 3
  729. 3
  730. 3
  731. 3
  732. 3
  733. 3
  734. 3
  735. 3
  736. 3
  737. 3
  738. 3
  739. 3
  740. 3
  741. 3
  742. 3
  743. 3
  744. 3
  745. 3
  746. 3
  747. 3
  748. 3
  749. 3
  750. 3
  751. 3
  752. 3
  753. 3
  754. 3
  755. 3
  756. 3
  757. 3
  758. 3
  759. 3
  760. 3
  761. 3
  762. 3
  763. 3
  764. 3
  765. 3
  766. 3
  767. 3
  768. 3
  769. 3
  770. 3
  771. 3
  772. 3
  773. 3
  774. 3
  775. 3
  776. 3
  777. 3
  778. 3
  779. 3
  780. 3
  781. 3
  782. 3
  783. 3
  784. 3
  785. 3
  786. 3
  787. 3
  788. 3
  789. 3
  790. 3
  791. 3
  792. 3
  793. 3
  794. 3
  795. 3
  796. 3
  797. 3
  798. 3
  799. 3
  800. 3
  801. 3
  802. 3
  803. 3
  804. 3
  805. 3
  806. 3
  807. 3
  808. 3
  809. 3
  810. 3
  811. 3
  812. 3
  813. 3
  814. 3
  815. 3
  816. 3
  817. 3
  818. 3
  819. Hi Stuart, Thanks for the thoughtful constructive criticism. I appreciate it when people take the time to provide meaningful feedback. I think your perspective is valid, if you didn't take much away from my video, I can't convince you otherwise, so I won't try to do that. But I can offer my perspective. First, this video was largely an experiment. While you're right in that I've been trending towards appearing on-screen more, this video isn't indicative of where I'm planning to go with my content, unless I feel like I have a strong motivator for doing so. I had no idea starting out if it was going to work. I wanted to copy not just Bo's visual style but the approach of writing and shooting it as I went because I thought it would be fun. This meant it wasn't fully scripted from the start, and I was setting myself up for potentially having nothing interesting to say, I think I did end up saying something interesting but you're obviously welcome to disagree. Was this a bad idea? Possibly. But I wanted to try it and it was a risk I was willing to take. My work as a YouTuber isn't just about making the most popular videos I can but is selfishly about getting to work in a way that's enjoyable for me. And experimenting with the format to see what's possible, instead of just repeating the same formula applied to different topics, is important to me. That said: I do think my adoption of the style and the imitation does say something, serves a purpose in my commentary, and is more than just distracting and self-indulgent. I think my approach to deconstructing Inside is less technical and more thematic than my usual work so if you were expecting something technical I can definitely see how this fell short of that. That said, what was most important to me with this video was exploring two things 1. What Bo Burnham is saying 2. Commenting on how commentary surrounds a piece of work like this and the process of constructing a commentary. For 1. I agree with many elements of Bo's "message" in the special and what he's communicating, but I wanted to also showcase the areas where I disagree with him. It's hard to put those things into words, and I could have made a video that was 30 minutes of exposition but I thought it would be interesting to try to communicate that in subtext. I think the visual journey of "breaking out" of Inside is communicating my conclusions more clearly than I could have with words. This ending, wouldn't have said what it had said if I hadn't extensively re-created the style leading into things. For 2. There are many moments throughout this where I'm not copying Bo's style but am recreating different styles of criticism. My purpose in taking this approach was to explore visually the way I often try to approach a piece of media from many different perspectives in order to figure out how it works. Constructing criticism is a process, things never come out fully formed, and so I wanted to show that process a bit since I thought it might be interesting and since it fit well within the format. Further, I think Bo's style of comedy special acts as a sort of long-form YouTube-style commentary. This is something I alluded to briefly, but my adoption of his style was in part to show how comfortably the special's style fits within the world of YouTube. It's not for me to say whether I accomplish those things or not. Like I said this was an experiment and maybe it failed, I like to think it was worth trying even if it did. Your experience of my videos is your own, and I appreciate you sharing your criticism since it helps me understand how things are coming across, but that's how I feel about it. Rest assured back to another disembodied voice in two weeks. (At least until I get another zany, hair-brained idea).
    3
  820. 3
  821. 3
  822. 3
  823. 3
  824. 3
  825. 3
  826. 3
  827. 3
  828. 3
  829. 3
  830. 3
  831. 3
  832. 3
  833. 3
  834. 3
  835. 3
  836. 3
  837. 3
  838. 2
  839. 2
  840. 2
  841. 2
  842. 2
  843. 2
  844. 2
  845. 2
  846. 2
  847. 2
  848. 2
  849. 2
  850. 2
  851. 2
  852. 2
  853. 2
  854. 2
  855. 2
  856. 2
  857. 2
  858. 2
  859. 2
  860. 2
  861. 2
  862. 2
  863. 2
  864. 2
  865. 2
  866. 2
  867. 2
  868. 2
  869. 2
  870. 2
  871. 2
  872. 2
  873. 2
  874. 2
  875. 2
  876. 2
  877. 2
  878. 2
  879. 2
  880. 2
  881. 2
  882. 2
  883. 2
  884. 2
  885. 2
  886. 2
  887. 2
  888. 2
  889. 2
  890. 2
  891. 2
  892. 2
  893. 2
  894. 2
  895. 2
  896. 2
  897. 2
  898. 2
  899. 2
  900. 2
  901. 2
  902. 2
  903. 2
  904. 2
  905. 2
  906. 2
  907. 2
  908. 2
  909. 2
  910. 2
  911. 2
  912. 2
  913. 2
  914. 2
  915. 2
  916. 2
  917. 2
  918. 2
  919. 2
  920. 2
  921. 2
  922. 2
  923. 2
  924. 2
  925. 2
  926. 2
  927. 2
  928. 2
  929. 2
  930. 2
  931. 2
  932. 2
  933. 2
  934. 2
  935. 2
  936. 2
  937. 2
  938. 2
  939. 2
  940. 2
  941. 2
  942. 2
  943. 2
  944. 2
  945. 2
  946. 2
  947. 2
  948. 2
  949. 2
  950. 2
  951. 2
  952. 2
  953. 2
  954. 2
  955. 2
  956. 2
  957. 2
  958. 2
  959. 2
  960. 2
  961. 2
  962. 2
  963. 2
  964. 2
  965. 2
  966. 2
  967. 2
  968. 2
  969. 2
  970. 2
  971. 2
  972. Thanks for sharing, I think it's a journey for everyone, I think (at least for me) it's less that all of this meta, self-reflexivity is good or necessary in it's own right, but that it's a response to a place or mindset you find yourself inside. You start down a path of examining things and eventually you realize that path is a dead end- some of this art explores the moment where you find you've reached the dead end and start coming to terms with it. "Just shut up and feel something." Is absolutely how I would describe a big part of what I've been trying to internalize in my own life the last couple years, but here I am, someone who makes a living talking about art, what do I do with that? The answer would seem to be just talk about the movies that make you feel something. Well, this movie made me feel something, ironically about this very experience of wanting to be more connected directly to reality and emotion, but finding that difficult sometimes. I'd just say based on what you're saying about where you are in that journey, I don't think you're really the target audience for this movie or video then. They might have felt very different if you had seen them in that time of your life when you were shifting from wanting that intellectual validation to realizing that embracing real life is more valuable. I think I'd say I do think this movie (and my attempt at analyzing it) affirm the sort of embrace of life you're describing. It's just targeted at people who are lost inside the attempts to understand and explain and intellectually justify their own work, not the people who have already learned that lesson. Maybe my work or Anderson's will get stuck there and we'll never escape, Cheers!
    2
  973. 2
  974. 2
  975. 2
  976. 2
  977. 2
  978. 2
  979. 2
  980. 2
  981. 2
  982. 2
  983. 2
  984. 2
  985. 2
  986. 2
  987. 2
  988. 2
  989. 2
  990. 2
  991. 2
  992. 2
  993. 2
  994. 2
  995. 2
  996. 2
  997. 2
  998. 2
  999. 2
  1000. 2
  1001. 2
  1002. 2
  1003. 2
  1004. 2
  1005. 2
  1006. 2
  1007. 2
  1008. 2
  1009. 2
  1010. 2
  1011. 2
  1012. 2
  1013. 2
  1014. 2
  1015. 2
  1016. 2
  1017. 2
  1018. 2
  1019. 2
  1020. 2
  1021. 2
  1022. 2
  1023. 2
  1024. 2
  1025. 2
  1026. 2
  1027. 2
  1028. 2
  1029. 2
  1030. 2
  1031. 2
  1032. 2
  1033. 2
  1034. 2
  1035. 2
  1036. 2
  1037. 2
  1038. 2
  1039. 2
  1040. 2
  1041. 2
  1042. 2
  1043. 2
  1044. 2
  1045. 2
  1046. 2
  1047. 2
  1048. 2
  1049. 2
  1050. 2
  1051. 2
  1052. 2
  1053. 2
  1054. 2
  1055. 2
  1056. 2
  1057. 2
  1058. 2
  1059. 2
  1060. 2
  1061. 2
  1062. 2
  1063. 2
  1064. 2
  1065. 2
  1066. 2
  1067. 2
  1068. 2
  1069. 2
  1070. 2
  1071. 2
  1072. 2
  1073. 2
  1074. 2
  1075. 2
  1076. 2
  1077. 2
  1078. 2
  1079. 2
  1080. 2
  1081. 2
  1082. 2
  1083. 2
  1084. 2
  1085. 2
  1086. 2
  1087. 2
  1088. 2
  1089. 2
  1090. 2
  1091. 2
  1092. 2
  1093. 2
  1094. 2
  1095. 2
  1096. 2
  1097. 2
  1098. 2
  1099. 2
  1100. 2
  1101. 2
  1102. 2
  1103. 2
  1104. 2
  1105. 2
  1106. 2
  1107. 2
  1108. 2
  1109. 2
  1110. 2
  1111. 2
  1112. 2
  1113. 2
  1114. 2
  1115. 2
  1116. 2
  1117. 2
  1118. 2
  1119. 2
  1120. 2
  1121. 2
  1122. 2
  1123. 2
  1124. 2
  1125. 2
  1126. 2
  1127. 2
  1128. 2
  1129. 2
  1130. 2
  1131. 2
  1132. 2
  1133. 2
  1134. 2
  1135. 2
  1136. 2
  1137. 2
  1138. 2
  1139. 2
  1140. 2
  1141. 2
  1142. 2
  1143. 2
  1144. 2
  1145. 2
  1146. 2
  1147. 2
  1148. 2
  1149. 2
  1150. 2
  1151. 2
  1152. 2
  1153. 2
  1154. 1
  1155. 1
  1156. 1
  1157. 1
  1158. 1
  1159. 1
  1160. 1
  1161. 1
  1162. 1
  1163. 1
  1164. 1
  1165. 1
  1166. 1
  1167. 1
  1168. 1
  1169. 1
  1170. 1
  1171. 1
  1172. 1
  1173. 1
  1174. 1
  1175. 1
  1176. 1
  1177. 1
  1178. 1
  1179. 1
  1180. 1
  1181. 1
  1182. 1
  1183. 1
  1184. 1
  1185. 1
  1186. 1
  1187. 1
  1188. 1
  1189. 1
  1190. 1
  1191. 1
  1192. 1
  1193. 1
  1194. 1
  1195. 1
  1196. 1
  1197. 1
  1198. 1
  1199. 1
  1200. 1
  1201. 1
  1202. 1
  1203. 1
  1204. 1
  1205. 1
  1206. 1
  1207. 1
  1208. 1
  1209. 1
  1210. 1
  1211. 1
  1212. 1
  1213. 1
  1214. 1
  1215. 1
  1216. 1
  1217. 1
  1218. 1
  1219. 1
  1220. 1
  1221. 1
  1222. 1
  1223. 1
  1224. 1
  1225. 1
  1226. 1
  1227. 1
  1228. 1
  1229. 1
  1230. 1
  1231. 1
  1232. 1
  1233. 1
  1234. 1
  1235. 1
  1236. 1
  1237. 1
  1238. 1
  1239. 1
  1240. 1
  1241. 1
  1242. 1
  1243. 1
  1244. 1
  1245. 1
  1246. 1
  1247. 1
  1248. 1
  1249. 1
  1250. 1
  1251. 1
  1252. 1
  1253. 1
  1254. 1
  1255. 1
  1256. 1
  1257. 1
  1258. 1
  1259. 1
  1260. 1
  1261. 1
  1262. 1
  1263. 1
  1264. 1
  1265. 1
  1266. 1
  1267. 1
  1268. 1
  1269. 1
  1270. 1
  1271. 1
  1272. 1
  1273. 1
  1274. 1
  1275. 1
  1276. 1
  1277. 1
  1278. 1
  1279. 1
  1280. 1
  1281. 1
  1282. 1
  1283. 1
  1284. 1
  1285. 1
  1286. 1
  1287. 1
  1288. 1
  1289. 1
  1290. 1
  1291. 1
  1292. 1
  1293. 1
  1294. 1
  1295. 1
  1296. 1
  1297. 1
  1298. 1
  1299. 1
  1300. 1
  1301. 1
  1302. 1
  1303. 1
  1304. 1
  1305. 1
  1306. 1
  1307. 1
  1308. 1
  1309. 1
  1310. 1
  1311. 1
  1312. 1
  1313. 1
  1314. 1
  1315. 1
  1316. 1
  1317. 1
  1318. 1
  1319. 1
  1320. 1
  1321. 1
  1322. 1
  1323. 1
  1324. 1
  1325. 1
  1326. 1
  1327. 1
  1328. 1
  1329. 1
  1330. 1
  1331. 1
  1332. 1
  1333. 1
  1334. 1
  1335. 1
  1336. 1
  1337. 1
  1338. 1
  1339. 1
  1340. 1
  1341. 1
  1342. 1
  1343. 1
  1344. 1
  1345. 1
  1346. 1
  1347. 1
  1348. 1
  1349. 1
  1350. 1
  1351. 1
  1352. 1
  1353. 1
  1354. 1
  1355. 1
  1356. 1
  1357. 1
  1358. 1
  1359. 1
  1360. 1
  1361. 1
  1362. 1
  1363. 1
  1364. 1
  1365. 1
  1366. 1
  1367. 1
  1368. 1
  1369. 1
  1370. 1
  1371. 1
  1372. 1
  1373. 1
  1374. 1
  1375. 1
  1376. 1
  1377. 1
  1378. 1
  1379. 1
  1380. 1
  1381. 1
  1382. 1
  1383. 1
  1384. 1
  1385. 1
  1386. 1
  1387. 1
  1388. 1
  1389. 1
  1390. 1
  1391. 1
  1392. 1
  1393. 1
  1394. 1
  1395. 1
  1396. 1
  1397. 1
  1398. 1
  1399. 1
  1400. 1
  1401. 1
  1402. 1
  1403. 1
  1404. 1
  1405. 1
  1406. 1
  1407. 1
  1408. 1
  1409. 1
  1410. 1
  1411. 1
  1412. 1
  1413. 1
  1414. 1
  1415. 1
  1416. 1
  1417. 1
  1418. 1
  1419. 1
  1420. 1
  1421. 1
  1422. 1
  1423. 1
  1424. 1
  1425. 1
  1426. 1
  1427. 1
  1428. 1
  1429. 1
  1430. 1
  1431. 1
  1432. 1
  1433. 1
  1434. 1
  1435. 1
  1436. 1
  1437. 1
  1438. 1
  1439. 1
  1440. 1
  1441. 1
  1442. 1
  1443. 1
  1444. 1
  1445. 1
  1446. 1
  1447. 1
  1448. 1
  1449. 1
  1450. 1
  1451. 1
  1452. 1
  1453. 1
  1454. 1
  1455. 1
  1456. 1
  1457. 1
  1458. 1
  1459. 1
  1460. 1
  1461. 1
  1462. 1
  1463. 1
  1464. 1
  1465. 1
  1466. 1
  1467. 1
  1468. 1
  1469. 1
  1470. 1
  1471. 1
  1472. 1
  1473. 1
  1474. 1
  1475. 1
  1476. 1
  1477. 1
  1478. 1
  1479. 1
  1480. 1
  1481. 1
  1482. 1
  1483. 1
  1484. 1
  1485. 1
  1486. 1
  1487. 1
  1488. 1
  1489. 1
  1490. 1
  1491. 1
  1492. 1
  1493. 1
  1494. 1
  1495. 1
  1496. 1
  1497. 1
  1498. 1
  1499. 1
  1500. 1
  1501. 1
  1502. 1
  1503. 1
  1504. 1
  1505. 1
  1506. 1
  1507. 1
  1508. 1
  1509. 1
  1510. 1
  1511. 1
  1512. 1
  1513. 1
  1514. 1
  1515. 1
  1516. 1
  1517. 1
  1518. 1
  1519. 1
  1520. 1
  1521. 1
  1522. 1
  1523. 1
  1524. 1
  1525. 1
  1526. 1
  1527. 1
  1528. 1
  1529. 1
  1530. 1
  1531. 1
  1532. 1
  1533. 1
  1534. 1
  1535. 1
  1536. 1
  1537. 1
  1538. 1
  1539. 1
  1540. 1
  1541. 1
  1542. 1
  1543. 1
  1544. 1
  1545. 1
  1546. 1
  1547. 1
  1548. 1
  1549. 1
  1550. 1
  1551. 1
  1552. 1
  1553. 1
  1554. 1
  1555. 1
  1556. 1
  1557. 1
  1558. 1
  1559. 1
  1560. 1
  1561. 1
  1562. 1
  1563. 1
  1564. 1
  1565. 1
  1566. 1
  1567. 1
  1568. 1
  1569. 1
  1570. 1
  1571. 1
  1572. 1
  1573. 1
  1574. 1
  1575. 1
  1576. 1
  1577. 1
  1578. 1
  1579. 1
  1580. 1
  1581. 1
  1582. 1
  1583. 1
  1584. 1
  1585. 1
  1586. 1
  1587. 1
  1588. 1
  1589. 1
  1590. 1
  1591. 1
  1592. 1
  1593. 1
  1594. 1
  1595. 1
  1596. 1