warning: I have not seen the movie, so I will not address its content.
On Jul 18, 2006, at 8:05, Jason Trolian wrote:
Now we're movie critics?
I don't see a reason why anyone who watches a movie should NOT
criticize it.
Outside this list most
of the world knows nothing about Detroit, it's influence on
Electronica or
the people that made it happen. You are going to criticize a
documentary
calling it shoddy?
Documentaries can be shoddy, yes. They can present 100% fact and
still be boring, trite, childish, sloppy, repetitive, or disorganized.
Really, name one that isn't kind of shoddy (please don't
you dare reference a Michael Moore documentary here).If you must
wage an
attack on what I will call "reference material", then do so because
it fails
to provide facts or because it is biased.
I wouldn't call Scratch shoddy in the least. One time I saw a very
interesting student documentary on moonshine, right before a
meandering and pointless documentary on Marlene Dietrich. Both of
these were completely factual! There was no interpretation given of
the material, but the simple act of editing a film in a coherent
manner makes it watchable or unwatchable.
I personally haven't had the opportunity to see it. I personally
can't
wait. When I do see it I will take it for what it's worth...a low
budget
film.
Low budgets never excuse shoddy workmanship. Pi was done on a low
budget. The Stone Reader was done on leftover film and spare time the
director had from shooting nature documentaries. Both of these films
are incredibly dorky, but they're coherent.
I will take what I can learn from it and pump it to all these kids
that think this music culture is about drugs, fashion and who's
been to more
parties.
And if the movie is lousy, then it won't help!
So I ask, can anyone that has seen this film tell us about the
content?
Dan just did.
--
matt kane's brain
http://hydrogenproject.com
aim -> mkbatwerk || mkbwriu
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
