Way to lasso the scintillating herd of wild ideas that you have stampeded across the movie plains all year long, bringing them into the final pen ... uh-oh, 'scuse me, metaphor breakdown.
Your take on the Secret Agent is incomprehensible - and you and I were in the same literary theory classes in college! I am stoked for Sam and his novel, though, good luck to him.
hmm i think my argument is pretty simple but maybe muddled - that filho lays out the elements he uses to construct his story in the same way that other directors lay out the equipment they use to produce their movies. the secret agent sort of makes no sense for two hours and then exposes its source materials, as if to say the reason its being told this way is because it comes from this stuff . . . the same way a director like jafar panahi's movies are explictly linked to the restraint under which they're created (or a director like pta somewhat less explicitly links himself to analog cameras).
'Scuse me for butting in, but I think possibly the issue is that this film is SO densely symbolic that one review can't possibly capture it. Suggest you read Richard Brody's review in the New Yorker. Putting that together with Ben's really helped me appreciate this film ... which I have yet to see.
Way to lasso the scintillating herd of wild ideas that you have stampeded across the movie plains all year long, bringing them into the final pen ... uh-oh, 'scuse me, metaphor breakdown.
Your take on the Secret Agent is incomprehensible - and you and I were in the same literary theory classes in college! I am stoked for Sam and his novel, though, good luck to him.
hmm i think my argument is pretty simple but maybe muddled - that filho lays out the elements he uses to construct his story in the same way that other directors lay out the equipment they use to produce their movies. the secret agent sort of makes no sense for two hours and then exposes its source materials, as if to say the reason its being told this way is because it comes from this stuff . . . the same way a director like jafar panahi's movies are explictly linked to the restraint under which they're created (or a director like pta somewhat less explicitly links himself to analog cameras).
'Scuse me for butting in, but I think possibly the issue is that this film is SO densely symbolic that one review can't possibly capture it. Suggest you read Richard Brody's review in the New Yorker. Putting that together with Ben's really helped me appreciate this film ... which I have yet to see.