<<we see how popular culture has become closer to, in
the words of Adorno, a culture industry. The safest
way to make money is to capitalize on what has already
fought to become successful.>>
Yes.
I think there is a danger in idealising what film is
and what it does, based on speculative and
questionable "philosophy". As Freud said, sometimes a
cigar is just a cigar.
I enjoy some popular films; I don't have an
elitist/art-house stance. What I object to is boring,
predictable, dumbing-down work, and the way its
marketed and glamourised. I can't watch that kind of
crap, in fact; I find it far too frustrating. In such
cases I think the role of 'philosophy' is to
incorporate a stiff dose of economic/social/political
reality. Not to mention the psychological: how mass
audiences are manipulated, persuaded into the latest
consumer fashion - of which film is a part.
In other words that critical philosophy should be
critical, not supportive. Deleuze and other high
priests do not, in my opinion, account for all aspects
of film.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
http://tax.yahoo.com
|