Comments on: Sex, Poop & Norman Mailer: Maggie Gyllenhaal, Paul Giamatti & Others Degrade Themselves For Matthew Barney’s Art

By: Bob G

Bob G — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:07:28 +0000

Like Scott F. said "The rich are different from you & me." (And not just because they have more money.) Scorcese could have used some of this material in 'Wolf of Wall Street' to good effect.
We are entering the Vampire Squid era of social contracts. Mailer saw it coming in 'Ancient Evenings'. He was angry enough to stab his wife, beat Rip Torn on the head with a ball peen hammer and write about U.S. troops knocking gold teeth out of the heads of Japanese corpses.
I would bill this as a double feature with 'Damsel's in Distress'.

By: MC

MC — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:07:28 +0000

MATT J – can you provide an instance(s) of the kind of thing you're talking about?

By: Matt J

Matt J — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:07:28 +0000

Why volunteer for public embarrassment by talking about or trying to have an opinion on something you obviously interact with on the most superficial level Rachel?

"Modern art" ended in the 1970s first of all, so god knows where you're going with that one, and your mock intellectual opening salvo is a pedestrian joke, serving no real point other than giving yourself an excuse to smugly chuckle at your own wittiness. You, like the author of this article, are similarly unable to offer any real insight (negative or positive) about Barney's work in general, or this film specifically.

For the record I am certainly no fan of Barney's work either. It is unlikely I will even give "River of Fundament" a shot, knowing his work is not my taste. But I think the world deserves intelligent criticism, which neither writers like Hoffman nor readers like Rachel are helping contribute to.

By: Matt J

Matt J — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:07:28 +0000

Though I understand the cultural conditioning that has lead to art being so utterly foreign to film critics, it still depresses me greatly. Whether it is a legitimate work such as Matthew Barney's, or something highly questionable like Shia LeBouf's antics, no conversation about art had by the film community is without skepticism and the expression of a deep sense of "otherness". How is it that a reputable site for film criticism such as this allows for such banal and adolescent writing?

By: Ashley

Ashley — Fri, 13 May 2016 08:07:27 +0000

I watched this travesty from begging to end. I feel that most of Tue movie was just shock value and very little story telling also some scenes were ludicrously drawn out. Tue movie could have been cut to 3 or 3 and a half hours and still had the same impact if not more. For allowing it to go OJ as long as it did it subtracted from the already hazy message because many people left before it was over and others were completely distracted lot giving up because at times there was a twenty minute flip of someone deficating or playing with feces. The music was hit and miss. There were quite a few good numbers, Tue jazz and operatic numbers were my favvorite but so much of the movies sound track is repetitive aggrivating and grating sounds that make your teeth hurt and you give up on watching any more. This movie was excessive, annoying and an excersice in endurance. I got paid to watch the damn thing andblet me tell you, I wouldn't do it again for 3 times as much money.