 |
| Red Fuji, 1831, Hokusai |
Do you need entertainment to enjoy this view?
 |
| Mont Sainte Victoire, 1887, Paul Cézanne |
Do you need lyric music to make you feel?
 |
| Le gobelet d'argent, 1768, Jean Siméon Chardin |
Do you need hero identification to suspend disbelief?
 |
| Still Life, 1934, M.C. Esher |
Do you need a climax to keep contemplating?
 |
| Oliviers avec ciel jaune et soleil, 1889, Vincent Van Gogh |
Do you need to pretend it's funny to make people watch?
 |
| Bay of Greifswald, 1834, Caspar David Friedrich |
Do you need narrative devices to contemplate this?
 |
| Swiss Landscape, 1830, Alexandre Calame |
Do you need spectacular effects to enjoy this?
 |
| View of Madrid from Capitan Haya, 1987-94, Antonio López García |
Related:
2 comments:
Although I like the idea behind this post, and love some of the paintings included, you do realise that nobody looks at the same painting for 2 hours straight, right? While I don't think films should be just about entertainment, they do have perhaps the highest potential to entertain out of all mediums, so it's not surprising (although a little disappointing) that people dismiss contemplative cinema in favour of crashwhizbangs and cheap laughs. Just discovered this blog today, BTW, great stuff!
If you never spent 2h on a painting in your life, you didn't study art seriously yet.
You realize that critics and historians spend more than the normal runtime of a film on it to study it in depth, right? Watching it over and over, frame by frame, extensive still shot analysis...
Post a Comment