Critic Cites Revenge of the Sith As "Generation's Greatest Work of Art 376
eldavojohn writes "Art critic and University Professor of Humanities and Media Studies at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia Camille Paglia has written a book that not only claims George Lucas is the 'World's Greatest Living Artist' but also that 'Revenge of the Sith' is our generation's greatest work of art. That's right: Titian, Bernini, Monet, Picasso, Jackson Pollock and ... George Lucas. If you thought you understood art but you hated Episode III, it might be difficult to understand how her book 'Glittering Images: A Journey Through Art from Egypt to Star Wars' ends with 'Revenge of the Sith.' There is a possibility that the art world remembers this generation by examining that movie."
Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
No. (Score:5, Insightful)
Okay, I get it. Art is subjective. Sometimes someone's "best movie ever" is another's pukeorama. I know this.
But, no.
Just no.
Titian, Bernini, Monet, Picasso, Jackson Pollock (Score:4, Insightful)
There's the problem, none of them really "our generation".
Critics need an opinion (Score:5, Insightful)
If art critics and movie critics would just blindly follow the popular opinions, there would not be much point in having them around.
We can check what's in the IMDB Top 250 without needing their help.
Same with Picasso... I'd much rather look at a peaceful picture of mountains than his morbid creations. It takes a critic to like it.
What a load. (Score:3, Insightful)
Any so-called art critic and professor who wants to put George Lucas next to William Shakespeare needs to just drive off a cliff.
Yeah, the Star Wars universe is pretty awesome, but it's hardly a cultural masterpiece that stands alongside works of art hanging in the Louvre.
Free publicity (Score:4, Insightful)
Entire Star Wars section added solely to gain publicity for the rest of the work.
Mission accomplished.
unconsidered candidate (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ha Ha (Score:5, Insightful)
What I was thinking, brings to mind a quote I don't quite remember the exact details of, talking about shooting a gun to see who jumps.
So much of our mass media these days are just professional trolls who just take a contracdictory opinion to feed their bank account from the attention: Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, countless pundits, etcera. The whole 2012 election coverage was a farce to make it seem like there was an actual photofinish race vs a marathon where one guy was lagging a mile behind. Or CopperCab on Youtube.
I don't understand why people fall for the tactic again and again. So the worst is the lady may actually believe this, does anyone take the argument seriously? No, then move on and don't give her attentions/book sales/whatever either way.
Re:No. (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe she defines "our generation" as "people who were 5 when the movie came out, and still think like 5-year-olds".
Actually.... (Score:4, Insightful)
To be fair, there are a couple really good scenes in Revenge of the Sith. As a whole the movie is indeed pretty lacking, but if the whole movie had more scenes like the following, it could have been something truly grand:
The best is the scene (sans dialog!) where (eh, am I really going to spoiler this?) there is one character looking across the city toward where another character is doing something atrocious. That is a brilliant scene, where there is actually a glimpse of emotion, conveyed not by dialog or effects, but simple imagery and the score.
It's too bad, really, that the rest of the movie is so full of cliche and noise.
Re:"art critic says" (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:How much is Disney paying her? (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Critics need an opinion (Score:2, Insightful)
If art critics and movie critics would just blindly follow the popular opinions, there would not be much point in having them around.
We can check what's in the IMDB Top 250 without needing their help.
Same with Picasso... I'd much rather look at a peaceful picture of mountains than his morbid creations. It takes a critic to like it.
No, not really. Your own statement shows that his art is better because it evokes a stronger emotion within you than all the landscapes which you can't remember specifically. "Better" doesn't always mean that you find more enjoyment or happiness in it.
Re:No. (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly, this was suppose to be the big emotional moment. When I saw this I just started laughing at it
Besides I never really had a feeling from the move from the Light side of the Jedi to the Dark Side of the sith.
Emperor: I am the Sith Lord, Join Me.
Skywalker: OK, let me kill Samuel Jackson, then a bunch of helpless kids to show that I really crossed into the dark side.
If it were artistic you would have had a series of moral quest where you slowly cross the line.
Heck War Craft 3 had a better story arch of turning the good guy to the bad guy.
Paglia's a crank (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't tar "art critics" with the brush you use on Camille Paglia. I've been ignoring her as a bit of a sociological nutcase since the 1990s. She styles herself as kind of feminist libertarian, but as Gloria Steinem put it, "Her calling herself a feminist is sort of like a Nazi saying they're not anti-Semitic."
Re: Titian, Bernini, Monet, Picasso, Jackson Pollo (Score:3, Insightful)
For the older farts among us, Akira Kurosawa and Stanley Kubrick are still relevant. Both of them WAY greater artists than George Lucas.
Even if you strictly limit the comparison to living artists, I'd rate Ridley Scott a bit higher. Sure he made some weak films too, but his better ones beat Star Wars IMHO.
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: Titian, Bernini, Monet, Picasso, Jackson Pollo (Score:4, Insightful)
Your generation is just fine. The generation before you is annoyed by you, you'll be annoyed by the generation after you, and so it goes. Change becomes more difficult to accommodate with age, I can honestly report.
George Lucas obviously greater - in impact (Score:3, Insightful)
Akira Kurosawa and Stanley Kubrick are still relevant. Both of them WAY greater artists than George Lucas.
Nope. You are thinking of the word "greater" in terms of quality, which is a pointless metric when talking about art because quality is entirely subjective.
In terms of impact on humanity, there's no question that Lucas has had far greater impact than Kubrick and Kurosawa combined. The reason is simple, it's because Lucas is getting to viewers at a much younger age, with a more widely distributed product. Lucas has altered the lives of more people than Kubrick ever will.
Re:George Lucas obviously greater - in impact (Score:5, Insightful)
By that metric, the greatest artist of all time was Adolf Hitler.
Re:Not so (Score:4, Insightful)
Hitler got into politics because his art was rejected. At least near the end he saw his reign in terms of art - namely, a classic tragedy. The culture of Nazi Germany was largely based on artistic choices and has ever since been an inexhaustible well for other artists. In fact, the very Star Wars itself draws a major source of inspiration from there, from the very concept of an evil empire worshipping the Dark Side to the aesthetics of space battles.
Hitler had a far greater effect on the art world than Lucas could ever even dream of. And with the generation that actually went through World War II, you just know he's on his way to become this [purrsia.com].