Short Cranks Exemption

[David Nevin Friedman]

Shawshank Redemption is merely a MOVIE, not a FILM?  Where did this come 
from.  Shawshank Redemption is definitely not just a MOVIE.  It is an 
artistically done film depicting the struggle of one person as indicative 
of that of humanity as a whole.  This, it seems, is a common trait ALL 
art has.  Or do you have other requisites for something being art?  And, 
as far as Tim Robbins is concerned, your trite comments are unwarranted: 
Tim Robbins directed Dead Man Walking.  Are you going to tell me that was 
merely a MOVIE and not a FILM?

Art critics have every right to be arrogant, as a lot of crap is put out 
there, but just because something veers away from the traditional 'aura' 
of good art (as I suspect you seem to think of Shawshank Redepmtion) does 
not mean it is bad art.  Artists from Shakespeare to the Velvet 
Underground have been labeled 'bad artists' according to the prevailing 
opinions of the time; each came into their own, so to speak, however.

(I know it seems bizarre to mention Shakespeare and the Velvet 
Underground in the same sentence: I am just trying to convey the breadth 
of artistic categories that have been ridiculed by those claiming to have 
an objective 'truth' on what art, beauty, et., is.)

David Friedman
namdeirf at gwis2.circ.gwu.edu

Ignorance breeds complicity.

On Mon, 29 Jul 1996, Greg Montalbano wrote:

> Maybe we should keep in mind the fact that this is a MOVIE (as opposed
> to a FILM) --- and speaking of Tim Robbins, I think his movie THE PLAYER
> told us everything we needed to know about how movies develop & mutate
> in this country, and what moviemakers believe American audiences expect
> ("Yeah, it's like BIRDMAN OF ALCATRAZ meets 20,000 YEARS IN SING-SING...
> but funny!  Yeah, and with a happy ending!  Maybe we can get Julia Roberts...")
>