Perhaps one person's reductiveness is another's amplification.
The Andy Warhol effect, or the hiphop effect.
It is getting to be a current signature with which a lot
of folks identify.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nancy Gish" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 11:24 PM
Subject: Re: movies
> I'm not sure which observation you mean was appealing. The scattering
> would not have bothered me if the implications were not so simplified.
> But it very soon becomes apparent that the best of us may do terrible
> things and the worst of us may slip into decency. After that point is
> made, repeating it for the rest of the film seems to me to treat the
> audience is a bit thick. So my point was that any one thread was well
> acted and sometimes powerful, but the cumulative effect, on reflection,
> was underwhelming. It is the obviousness I think reductive.
> >>> [log in to unmask] 04/10/06 11:32 PM >>>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nancy Gish" <[log in to unmask]>
> "Crash" was good but, on reflection, it took a serious topic and
> it so much that you could not really care much about any individual
> character, and the very important issue became a bit too obvious after a
> while. I'm not denying its impact.
> The director is from Ontario. I believe your observation reflects the
> exact intention of the director. It would seem that many found that an
> appealing quality.
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.0/304 - Release Date: 4/7/2006