It’s crazy that I read this whole thing and don’t know either of you. I would be very annoyed if I made something and someone’s immediate questions were 1 did this make money and 2 who is institutionally backing it. Id be especially mad if that person was a critic with a genuine bone to pick with my lack of artistic intent or trite reliance on nudity with no actual point. Both points you made here but never seemed to ask this guy. Have no idea why I read this tn but just convinces me to never got to dimes square again.
This whole situation seems very lame. Vack is a huge dork. Though at the same time I felt like parts of your story read like « …and everybody clapped. » but I wasn’t there so I take you at your word. Nice writing btw. Gonna check out your other stuff
Sounds like a guy who’s never been punched in the face. Also the New York rich kid “creative” scene sounds somehow even more insufferable than the London one. Whole situation is a human centipede of nonsense.
i haven’t seen the film and have no stake in its reception but you both seem to be caught in the throes of a tantrum yet vack is the much more sympathetic character. your vitriol is so much less pointed, none of this seems to branch from a critical standpoint, why does it matter if the plot is stolen? why is the acting terrible? i’m sure if you tried just a little bit harder to engage with the work you’d find a reason for the crassness and maybe something to like in it but you seem to have a vague vendetta against this guy. perhaps something more personal is bubbling to the surface here or maybe you just rushed to have a take on the film?
i think it’s just tiresome to hear questions like that from someone who’s supposed to be engaging with the film more critically rather than economically. especially when a lot of a less specialised’ audience would be asking those same questions that you did
I did engage with it critically, I sat there for an hour and a half and thought it was the worst POS movie I've ever seen. It has no artistic merit, it's plot is stolen from a George Saunders short story, the writing is terrible, acting is terrible, it's overly gross out and crass for no good reason. It's a horrible film. If you would've rather me ask like "how does it feel directly such an artistically bankrupt pile of trash" I could've done that, but that seemed mean. So I asked a simple question about how it would be distributed which I found to be more respectful and interesting. When you have nothing nice to say or ask, you find a new route.
no, but it was a single simple question at the Q&A that could've easily been answered with "I understand what you're asking but the simple answer is, I don't care if it's niche, I want to make what I want to make."
It’s crazy that I read this whole thing and don’t know either of you. I would be very annoyed if I made something and someone’s immediate questions were 1 did this make money and 2 who is institutionally backing it. Id be especially mad if that person was a critic with a genuine bone to pick with my lack of artistic intent or trite reliance on nudity with no actual point. Both points you made here but never seemed to ask this guy. Have no idea why I read this tn but just convinces me to never got to dimes square again.
totally fair
This whole situation seems very lame. Vack is a huge dork. Though at the same time I felt like parts of your story read like « …and everybody clapped. » but I wasn’t there so I take you at your word. Nice writing btw. Gonna check out your other stuff
Sounds like a guy who’s never been punched in the face. Also the New York rich kid “creative” scene sounds somehow even more insufferable than the London one. Whole situation is a human centipede of nonsense.
Great piece!
Many pitfalls to 'becoming the main character' when it pertains to creating serious art.
i don’t get all your questions about distribution, is a films worth based on how many people see it?
i haven’t seen the film and have no stake in its reception but you both seem to be caught in the throes of a tantrum yet vack is the much more sympathetic character. your vitriol is so much less pointed, none of this seems to branch from a critical standpoint, why does it matter if the plot is stolen? why is the acting terrible? i’m sure if you tried just a little bit harder to engage with the work you’d find a reason for the crassness and maybe something to like in it but you seem to have a vague vendetta against this guy. perhaps something more personal is bubbling to the surface here or maybe you just rushed to have a take on the film?
i think it’s just tiresome to hear questions like that from someone who’s supposed to be engaging with the film more critically rather than economically. especially when a lot of a less specialised’ audience would be asking those same questions that you did
I did engage with it critically, I sat there for an hour and a half and thought it was the worst POS movie I've ever seen. It has no artistic merit, it's plot is stolen from a George Saunders short story, the writing is terrible, acting is terrible, it's overly gross out and crass for no good reason. It's a horrible film. If you would've rather me ask like "how does it feel directly such an artistically bankrupt pile of trash" I could've done that, but that seemed mean. So I asked a simple question about how it would be distributed which I found to be more respectful and interesting. When you have nothing nice to say or ask, you find a new route.
no, but it was a single simple question at the Q&A that could've easily been answered with "I understand what you're asking but the simple answer is, I don't care if it's niche, I want to make what I want to make."