NP - Terrence Malick SUCKS!

[Mark Kohut]

Anyone ever see this one of Marty's? I did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who%27s_That_Knocking_at_My_Door
Too bad he didn't show #PopeFrancis this one. Might have gotten a
compassionate response.

On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 6:17 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:

> Speaking of a Christian-themed movie, I guess:
> #PopeFrancis <https://twitter.com/hashtag/PopeFrancis?src=hash> will meet
> tomorrow with director Martin Scorsese, who is in Rome to screen his new
> film "Silence" for a group of Jesuits.
>
> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 9:38 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The pose is belied by the lack of delivery beyond pretty pictures and in
>> implied potent potential deep answer to an overwhelming sense of
>> discontent, imbalance.  The answer is always elusive sweet fluff hinting at
>> potential fulfillment.  It really is Christian in some sense.
>>
>>
>> On Monday, November 28, 2016, Danny Weltman <danny.weltman at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I guess I'm sort of interested in which features of Malick make his
>>> movies seem like things that are "posing as depth." What makes it a pose,
>>> and what's the depth his stuff is posing as?
>>>
>>> Also, perhaps it's my inability to really understand Kierkegaard,
>>> Heidegger, and Wittgenstein, but I've always had a lot of trouble imagining
>>> that I know enough about depth (if that's the sort of depth we're talking
>>> about) to tell when a movie's just posing at it vs. when a movie's actually
>>> there. I'm happy to just ignore the pose and take it for what I can get out
>>> of it, regardless of what it (ostensibly?) wants me to get out of it. But
>>> maybe if I knew more about these guys I'd be mad at the movie fucking them
>>> up just like movies that take on topics I'm more familiar with make me
>>> unhappy when they fuck that stuff up.
>>>
>>> Or perhaps Malick's movies aren't informed by his philosophical forays
>>> at all, in which case I'm back at my first question, which is curiosity
>>> about what the "depth" is that we're talking about.
>>>
>>> Danny
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 28, 2016 at 5:10 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's funny, but seemingly true, that people either love or hate
>>>> Malick's films.  I hate them. I would probably find his company maddeningly
>>>> smug and purposefully obscure, projecting a sense of deep meaning in every
>>>> sigh.  It seems a formula, a facade, posing as depth.  I guess that is the
>>>> definition of "pretension."
>>>>
>>>> David Morris
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, November 28, 2016, Danny Weltman <danny.weltman at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "(I think his thesis at college ... Yale? ... Harvard? ... was on a
>>>>> Christian theme ... sorry to be vague.)"
>>>>>
>>>>> I have not read the thesis, but Wikipedia says: "After a disagreement
>>>>> with his tutor, Gilbert Ryle, over his thesis on the concept of world in
>>>>> Kierkegaard, Heidegger, and Wittgenstein, Malick left Oxford without a
>>>>> degree. In 1969, Northwestern University Press published Malick's
>>>>> translation of Heidegger's Vom Wesen des Grundes as The Essence of Reasons."
>>>>>
>>>>> I am going to go out on a limb and say that Malick has a bit more
>>>>> going on with his philosophy than it being "basically Christian," at least
>>>>> insofar as that label would be derogatory enough to make the influence of
>>>>> the philosophy a "derailing" one as opposed to a guiding one or some other
>>>>> neutral or perhaps praiseworthy adjective. I can say that one need not be
>>>>> Christian in the last to find his stuff extremely compelling, as I do. It
>>>>> perhaps helps that 99% of the time, when someone uses "pretentious" as a
>>>>> derogatory term, it marks something I'm liable to enjoy. I'm lacking the
>>>>> organ that generates bile when exposed to ostensibly pretentious stuff,
>>>>> somehow.
>>>>>
>>>>> Danny
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Douglas Holm <dkholm at mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> His first two films, Badlands and Days of Heaven, were extraordinary
>>>>>> in telling a tale visually instead of through dialogue.  After a long gap,
>>>>>> he returned, but his basically Christian philosophy, which seems to go
>>>>>> unnoticed, has derailed his recent films.  (I think his thesis at college
>>>>>> ... Yale? ... Harvard? ... was on a Christian theme ... sorry to be
>>>>>> vague.). Al they all seem the same .... ladies in summer dresses twirling
>>>>>> in meadows as an emotional high point.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Nov 27, 2016, at 6:30 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All of them!  The only one I could stomach was "What Dreams May
>>>>>> Come."   But even that is pretentious beyond belief.  WHY do people like
>>>>>> his shit?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> David Morris
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sunday, November 27, 2016, Douglas Holm <dkholm at mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Which one?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> > On Nov 27, 2016, at 6:10 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > I HATE his shit!!!! How did he ever get it funded?
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > David Morris
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20161129/f5c7b7fd/attachment.html>