4 ms·
I disagree that one learns anything important from a (non-documentary) movie. Movies are an experiential but non-interactive art form that resists internalisati
by Gatsky 5y ago
I disagree that one learns anything important from a (non-documentary) movie. Movies are an experiential but non-interactive art form that resists internalisation. At best they make you feel a certain way for a short while, in my experience.
- Strawhorse 5y agoMovies (non-documentary) can moot and champion whole ideologies, psychologies, and philosophies, for example Fight Club (nihilism), Logan's Run (progressivism, anti-establishmentism), Lost in Translation (existentialism, contemporary anomie), Magnolia (existentialism, fugue) etc. I suggest you broaden your viewing.
- Gatsky 5y agoMy viewing is pretty broad, I’ve seen these movies except Magnolia. What you are describing is the placing of a movie in a cultural context. This is criticism, not learning on an individual level. For example, take Mulan. I can generate a feminist counter-critique that the new Mulan is in fact better because women are born with special qualities men don’t have, and often are superior when given equal opportunities. This isn’t a lesson the movie teaches however, it’s academic bloviating. I mean I think actual existentialist philosophers would laugh if you tried to tell them that Lost in Translation is an existentialist movie. Also I think you mean ennui not anomie.
- Strawhorse 5y agoI think we were doing well until you brought in some pap like Mulan.
- Gatsky 5y agoThat’s the example in the original video.