Pan's Labyrinth

I've been hesitant to rent this one . Fantasy isn't usually in my rotation.

I would not even consider this to be Fantasy. It's a hard film to classify; for me the closest category would be Drama. I'm not sure that the marketing for the film took the best angle.

Hope you do end up watching it. And after you do, it will be interesting to hear your take on it.
 
...anyone who got this film (and praising it) will find your argument about its excessive violence or production values mostly irrelevant. I'm not going to bother arguing this point with you.
So... you're saying only people who praise this film have validity in their arguments?
Too cerebral. Sometimes knowing too much can be a drawback. Some films you must watch with your heart.
There is the old saying "ignorance is bliss." I do not hold this opinion. Many people can derive aesthetic values out of, say, a Britany Spears song. That doesn't mean it has inherent value or worth. Using this to back your argument would be similar to "I like X pop band over y pop band because x makes better music." Films should be a descendant of erudite (art) music, not pop, and should be counted as such.
Apparently, not as many as you. I've seen enough movies to know in my heart that this is a very special movie... one that touches me on a very deep level. It's a shame this movie has not moved you to the same extent. In the end, that's your loss...
I cannot enjoy a Britany Spears song, but, as I said, many people do, for reasons beyond the pure music. That does not mean I envy them, nor does it mean they should be envied.
 
I find it useful to be able to enjoy Tom and Jerry cartoons, Tarkovsky films, and everything in between...but that's just me.

The trick to enjoying Britney Spears' older stuff, is to turn off the audio and just watch her bouncing around.
 
Last edited:
I find it useful to be able to enjoy Tom and Jerry cartoons, Tarkovsky films, and everything in between...but that's just me.

The trick to enjoying Britney Spears' older stuff, is to turn off the audio and just watch her bouncing around.

After watching a Tarkovsky film I usually blink for several hours in rapture. :) Then I say to myself "What I movie!" and a million other thoughts appear.

There's a lot of talking and direct philosophizing in his movies but I can live with that [believe me :)]. Nevertheless, for me, Tarkovsky is a true master of visual storytelling.

He was also very elitarian:

Following the release of the film [Solyaris], Tarkovsky was asked why the 'car traffic' sequence filmed in Japan was as long as it was, to which he responded by saying, "so the idiots leave before the film starts".

:)

Maybe the only Russian filmmaker that I really like. But the good old f*&^ing commies found a way to finish him. As so many other things and people. :(

P.S. Britney Spears is completely different aestetics :).
 
I cannot enjoy a Britany Spears song, but, as I said, many people do, for reasons beyond the pure music. That does not mean I envy them, nor does it mean they should be envied.
You're comparing Pan's Labyrinth to a Britney Spears song? Surely, with your wealth of film knowledge, you can make better and appropriate film-to-film comparisons.

I sense you feel pigeon-holed into defending your criticism of this movie, for whatever reason. You've certainly made your thoughts known in this thread. It's funny, because you'll never see me visiting a 'music production' forum and criticizing a Britney song.

I think you must feel frustrated why everyone can enjoy this movie, but you seemingly cannot... so that irks you. Given that Pan's received a 100% fresh tomatometer rating from the cream of the crop critics, it's no wonder you've resorted to comparing this film to a Britney song. You just don't get it. I've repeated this in the past, and your comments only re-inforce what I assumed to be true. So thank you. :thumbsup:
 
I left this in the refuse bin for a while, since I'd felt rather discompelled to resurrect it again... but it must be done.

When I compared the Britney Spears song to Pan's, I was implying that similar aesthetic qualities that are unrelated to genuine artistic qualities can exist. And I actually beg to differ with the thought that Pan's Labyrinth was not a contorted mainstream film--it was, if not a slightly more stylistic one. It was clearly whittled down and simplified to cater to the lowest common denominator, similar to Palahniuk and his ilk-- manufactured "art" to make average people think they're understanding something deep and intellectual. To a degree, I find this more offensive than Spears. Ah, I just thought of a similar, perhaps more astute comparison-- the "progressive" rock band Tool. Just intelligent enough to make the average uneducated (or not educated in music theory) individual think they're "deep" or "intellectual," when they listen to the band, when really, they're just another run-of-the-mill pop rock band, very minimally separable from Spears.
Click
and Click

Perhaps not the "One Hundred" of The Lab, but still remarkably high for the near-non existent artistic merit.

And please stop saying I "don't get it." Have I resorted to giving you baseless ad hominems?

As an added note, my Film professor with a Doctorate in film and literature from USC, who's recorded interviews for Criterion Collection and other scholarly works, thought the film was one of the worst she'd ever seen (and she's seen ten times more films than I've even heard of). I should note I already had come to these conclusions, and she only reinforced them.
 
Does anyone know what software was used on this film for

1. Compositing its extensive greenscreen shots
2. 3D

Thanks
 
I left this in the refuse bin for a while, since I'd felt rather discompelled to resurrect it again... but it must be done.

Is discompelled a word? I don't know, but I like it and I'm stealing it.

When I compared the Britney Spears song to Pan's, I was implying that similar aesthetic qualities that are unrelated to genuine artistic qualities can exist.

Sure, just because it looks good, sounds good, etc, it's not necessarily "art." Anyone with money in hand, can hire a technically competent crew to produce good-looking stuff.

And I actually beg to differ with the thought that Pan's Labyrinth was not a contorted mainstream film--it was, if not a slightly more stylistic one. It was clearly whittled down and simplified to cater to the lowest common denominator, similar to Palahniuk and his ilk-- manufactured "art" to make average people think they're understanding something deep and intellectual.

I don't get the sense of whittling and simplification, that you do. I think that where it was spare, it was in service of the story being told, and that where it was fairy-tale simple, well, that served the storytelling, too.

I remember something William S Burroughs muttered, once...that critics overwhelmingly spend their time slamming the artist not because of what he did, but for not having done what they wanted him to do.

I never got the sense that the film was 'trying' to be deep or intellectual...it was simply un-self-consciously telling the story, that it was telling.

To a degree, I find this more offensive than Spears.

Does Spears even rise to the level of being offensive? Not that I have noticed.

Ah, I just thought of a similar, perhaps more astute comparison-- the "progressive" rock band Tool. Just intelligent enough to make the average uneducated (or not educated in music theory) individual think they're "deep" or "intellectual," when they listen to the band, when really, they're just another run-of-the-mill pop rock band, very minimally separable from Spears.

I listen to music because I enjoy it. If there is something 'deep' or 'intellectual' going on, then so much the better, I suppose. But if there is a song I like, that someone else does not enjoy, that doesn't impress me as being about depth or intellectual content. If something sounds like cats f*cking under the house, no amount of intellectual virtue is going to impel me to listen to it.

And please stop saying I "don't get it." Have I resorted to giving you baseless ad hominems?

I doubt that was intended as an ad-hom. Although pointing out that there's something someone gets, that they feel you apparently don't, doesn't really advance the conversation, either.


As an added note, my Film professor with a Doctorate in film and literature from USC, who's recorded interviews for Criterion Collection and other scholarly works, thought the film was one of the worst she'd ever seen (and she's seen ten times more films than I've even heard of). I should note I already had come to these conclusions, and she only reinforced them.

Having spent four years working with academics specializing in art theory, semiotics, and art psychology, I can't at the moment think of anything with less value, than the opinions of academics specializing in art theory, semiotics, and art psychology. But admittedly that's just me.
 
Last edited:
...received a 100% fresh tomatometer rating from the cream of the crop critics, ...



Aren't some of those critics just a bunch of 'quote whores,' who merely praise whatever is being offered so they can keep going go to junkets and scoring free swag, travel and food?

How many cream of the crop critics are there, really?

I will admit, though...this film seems to have hit a note with many people.
 
I agree I wouldn't use Rotten Tomatoes as a defense..... Maybe the fact that it won 3 Academy Awards would be better.... Maybe not!
 
Back
Top