3 ms·
If that was the intent of the film, it didn't work on me. It starts out with shots of nature and then I guess the idea was supposed to be, "Along comes mankind,
by juniper_strong 6y ago
If that was the intent of the film, it didn't work on me. It starts out with shots of nature and then I guess the idea was supposed to be, "Along comes mankind, industrialism ruins everything, life is out of balance!". But the problem is that it is all so gorgeous. Shots of Pruitt–Igoe being blown up, the Twinkie factory assembly line, traffic jams, bridges collapsing, a rocket exploding, all shot so that they are beautiful trippy visual wallpaper.
- trevett 6y agoTrue the film is captivating on the aesthetic layer, with manufactured landscapes appearing as beautiful as the natural ones. Sounds like some viewers pull a positive (or neutral) message out of that equivalence.
- juniper_strong 6y agoI don't see it as positive or neutral, more like unintentionally nihilistic. I consider it a failed propaganda movie that is very successful as art for art's sake. And maybe that was the artist's intent all along. From the title I doubt it but I read that originally the filmmaker wanted it released without any title.