New category: "literature"

1 files changed, 63 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/literature/loving-vincent.rst b/literature/loving-vincent.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..79700d2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/literature/loving-vincent.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
+Loving Vincent
+##############
+
+:date: 2018-03-22T08:03:28
+:category: literature
+:tags: review, film
+
+Movie_ “Loving Vincent” is certainly an experience worthy of the 
+tickets to go to the cinema. The main idea of it is to make 
+“animated” film by painting endless number of quality oil 
+paintings in the style of Vincent van Gogh about the painter 
+himself. I have been warned_ that this idea is actually by far 
+the strongest part of the film, and that the story of the film 
+itself is by far the weakest part of it. I won’t do the spoilers 
+here, but yes the end comes rather flat.
+
+The visual side has been however troubling as well. It is truly 
+beautiful, there is no question about that, but this film showed 
+me the great difference between pictures (especially ones in the 
+tradition of post-van Gogh painting, what a irony!) and films. 
+The great pictures (in all traditions, it applies 
+perfectly well even to Rembrandt’s “Return of the prodigal son”) 
+are best when they don’t tell the whole story, but when they are 
+more a catalyst to make a viewer sit down and think her own 
+story. From this point of view, van Gogh was (with a bit of 
+artistic license) the first painter who stressed this role of 
+pictures even more by omitting a lot of realism and leaving just 
+those catalyst parts of the image.
+
+On the other hand, the biggest beauty of every film is *a story*.  
+Some films are beautiful, have pretty pictures, but what makes or 
+kills it is how the story is made. There is endless list of 
+beautiful pictures which lack a good story (the review of this 
+film points as an example to “`What Dreams May Come`_”). I don’t 
+want to deal now with quality (or lack of thereof) of the story 
+of this film, but I want to emphasize that perception of a film 
+is quite different from the perception of a picture. This 
+difference in perception made me torn to two sides by two 
+different both unpleasant feelings. While beautiful pictures made 
+me feel constantly “Wait! This was a beautiful picture, I would 
+like to watch it properly!” I had also constantly that feeling 
+that I forgot my glasses at home (no, I don’t need glasses for 
+watching films yet). Images in films are not supposed to be 
+abstract, thought-inducing experience, they are suppose to reveal 
+and deliver a story. I had that constant feeling “I would love to 
+see how this girl looks *in reality*.”
+
+So, my conclusion is that it was a great idea. I don’t care that 
+much for the quality (or not) of the film as a film, or 
+a detective story. It was a great experience, I came to new 
+appreciation of Vincent van Gogh’s paintings, but do I welcome 
+the inevitable avalanche of imitations of this film which are to 
+be expected? No, I think once was enough.
+
+
+.. _Movie:
+    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_Vincent
+
+.. _warned:
+    https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/loving-vincent-2017
+
+.. _`What Dreams May Come`:
+    https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/what-dreams-may-come-1998