XPost: rec.arts.movies.past-films, rec.arts.movies.current-films   
   From: madkevin@golden.net   
      
   "Calvin Rice"  wrote in message   
   news:22680de.0401091745.22bdb8fa@posting.google.com...   
   > "madkevin"  wrote in message   
   news:...   
   > > The opening scene of "Stardust Memories" is lifted directly - and I mean   
   shot   
   > > for shot - from the original opening sequence to "8 1/2" that was filmed   
   but   
   > > never used. What do you call that? If I went out and made a movie that   
   opens   
   > > with black 'n' white images of New York set to Gershwin music, did I just   
   make a   
   > > masterpiece? Or did I just rip-off "Manhattan"?   
   >   
   > Interesting analogy.  Can anyone in the class spot the flaw?   
      
   That doesn't answer my question. No matter what you feel personally about the   
   quality of "Stardust Memories", there's simply no avoiding the fact that Allen   
   lifted this scene directly from Fellini. Call it homage, call it post-modern   
   appropriation, call it rip-off, it amounts to the same thing. A "masterpiece",   
   in my books, is not a movie that apes the style and content of another   
   extremely   
   well-known film-maker. If "Stardust Memories" is a masterpiece, then what do   
   you   
   call the actual Fellini movies he's ripping-off - uber-masterpieces?   
   Super-duper-masterpieces? Ultra-amazing-masterpieces?   
      
   Don't get me wrong - I loooove Fellini. All told, I'd rather than people try to   
   be Fellini than try to be Bergman. Being the cineaste that Allen is, it would   
   seem almost a requirement that he try his hand at "8 1/2" at least once. To   
   you,   
   "Stardust Memories" may be wonderful, but original it ain't.   
      
   > As a matter of fact I'm not completely alone, as Stardust Memories has been   
   > reconsidered and re-evaluated by the 'critics'.  You might want to look into   
   > that, since 'critical consensus' matters so much to you.   
      
   Feel free to link me up with some of those re-evaluations, and I'd be happy to   
   read them.   
      
   >   
   > Let me get this straight:   
   >   
   > My way - like what I like, and give my own reasons.   
   > Your way - like what most 'critics' like, and use their reasons.   
      
   Since we're doing math, it's more like:   
   Your way = defining terms (like "masterpiece" and "original") any way you'd   
   like   
   regardless of actual meaning.   
   My way = watching films with a working knowledge of historical film context.   
      
   Out of curiousity, any specific "reason" you put "critics" in "quotations"?   
      
   >   
   > I think I'll continue with my way, until a more inspiring second-hander   
   > than you comes along.   
      
   I would probably take offense at this, as was no doubt the intention, if I had   
   any inkling as to what a second-hander was. Don't let me stop you from making   
   up   
   any other new words, though.   
      
   Kevin "Kevin" Cogliano   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)