Originally posted by TeinosukeIndeed an excellent point. No one would ever argue that reading Cicero is to be shunned because he lived 2K+ years ago. Few things are as enjoyable as beholding a Raphael, Signorelli, reading Ariosto, Dante, Canterbury Tales, Sheakespeare, some of these if only to marvel at the incredible artistry of writing, painting, the creativity of ancient musicians like Purcell, Vecchi, Monteverdi. Exploring the old helps appreciate the newer and sometimes even the avant garde. I stumbled upon Orazio Vecchi and his incredible opera/madrigal L'Amfiparnasso(1597), predating Iacopo Peri's Dafne by seven years. I feel I can enjoy the ancient and the new. And, talking about old, I have searched high and low for Wagner's Requiem for Carla Maria von Weber based on themes from Euryanthe and cannot find anything at all. Any help would be appreciated.
I'm not so interested in short films from the 1890s, and I think that some decent films still get made in the 21st century, but I do think most of the cinema's real masterpieces were made between about 1920 and 1980. Really, the trouble started once television displaced cinema as the main medium of entertainment, at which point, filmmakers started resortin and listened to an old string quartet by Mozart and looked at an old painting by Raphael."
I found it. I was looking for a requiem and it is funeral march for Carla maria von Weber, greatly admired by Wagner, for the composers re-interment 18 years after the composer died in London and was brought back to Germany for his eternal rest in Dresden. Wagner read the funeral oration and wrote his Trauermusik on a couple of themes from von Weber's opera Euryanthe.
Originally posted by NoEarthlyReasonI don't think there's been any appreciable improvement in camera technique since the late 1920s. By that point, all the major techniques necessary to make a masterpiece - the pan and track, montage, compositional precision - were in full use and had become as flexible and expressive as they were ever going to. See F.W. Murnau's Sunrise for a demonstration of this. The coming of sound transformed cinema of course, and it took a few years for directors to learn to combine the visual flair of the late silent era with the new demands of sound, but they had done so to perfection by the late 1930s. See Jean Renoir's La Regle du Jeu for a demonstration of this. These masterpieces have been equalled, but never really surpassed.
While it's true that those who turn their nose up at old movies miss out on most of the best films ever made, and it's their loss, film is rather unique as an art form in than it it is a very technological medium, hence advances in movie technology will have more of an effect in films than most other art forms (except, perhaps, computer games). While at there could be such a relationship (nearly) for the potential to make better films.
In at least one aspect, it can be said that film technology has actually declined - the replacement of nitrate stock by acetate, and then of acetate by digital, for reasons of safety and convenience. If you ever get to see a good surviving nitrate print, seize the chance! The sheer quality of the image will take your breath away!
Originally posted by NoEarthlyReasonNo, the American series is a reworking of a BBC series.
That appears to be an American series.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Cards_(UK_TV_series)
The US version has been released on Netflix with all episodes in one go. This may well be the way of the future.
I didn't really get into the UK version, though it was very popular. US version seems to be well received as well.
On a Lighter Note:
Note: Learn a rare word or two, too...
"CUCUMBER NOTE: LOVE HAPPENS introduces us to three interesting words, through Aniston's logophile.
quidnunc: a nosy person, a busybody. poppysmic: the Movie Dictionary describes this as 'the sound lips make when they kiss.' Which cannot be found in any real dictionary. Anyway, the sound lips make when they kiss is: "wallet." sesquipedalianist - the fake constructed dictionary page in the movie shows it as: a person who uses long, unusual, sometimes obscure words in speech or writing." True, but in etymology, it refers to words that are inordinately long. From Latin sesquipedalis, a foot and a half long, or, in metaphorical use, of an unnatural length, huge, big, from sesqui, one and a half times as great + pedalis, foot."
.
Originally posted by Rank outsiderI apologize; however, I haven't seen it so can't compare it to Borgen. I certainly would like to, having grown up during the Thatcher years.
No, the American series is a reworking of a BBC series.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Cards_(UK_TV_series)
The US version has been released on Netflix with all episodes in one go. This may well be the way of the future.
I didn't really get into the UK version, though it was very popular. US version seems to be well received as well.
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyQuidnunc sounds like the kind of nonsense words Jonathan Swift coined in Gulliver's travels, although it has a more "authentic" English-derived from Latin feel. I guess it is a real word?
On a Lighter Note:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5fJeyzge2Sk
Note: Learn a rare word or two, too...
"CUCUMBER NOTE: LOVE HAPPENS introduces us to three interesting words, through Aniston's logophile.
[b]quidnunc: a nosy person, a busybody. poppysmic: the Movie Dictionary describes this as 'the sound lips make when they kiss.' ...[text shortened]... tural length, huge, big, from sesqui, one and a half times as great + pedalis, foot."
.[/b]
Sesquipedalian is a good one to know. Thanks for that 🙂.
Seldom if ever use the slang but this movie’s worthy of a resounding, OMG! Convoluted Story Line, Deceptive Characters, Enmeshed Intrigue and Complicity at the Highest Levels of Government may as well have been Front Page News for Any Media Coverage in the Free World Today. Please see it with your family and friends; they’ll thank you, again, years from now…
.