art vs entertaiinment

I watched the movie on DVR and benefited from the ability to re wind a scene when the lighting or the sound made it difficult to see or hear, which was unfortunately, often the case. subtitles were not available on the version i watched but they would have been quite helpful.

the problem or should is say the debate as to movies like this centers around how you view art and the message it conveys. to say the least this movie is difficult to watch and to comprehend. If you do not believe so read the reviews presented here and see the completely different interpretations they champion. The tuner is really a baby doc, or assumption is the protagonist, or the Doc of the island is a kindly mental health practitoner leading the tuner out of his delusions. this is a story of self less love or of selfish failure to see the reality of the world you wrecked.

the reality of this all in reference to the film-maker is to ask what is it that a successful artist/film maker needs to do to create a work of an art. If a tree falls in a forest does it make any sound and if a work of art is so veiled and unfathomable that the message is lost, is it still a work of art. Every artist has to ask what it is he is trying to do. if it stands by itself for oneself then why publish it to the masses. art for art's sake and just be done with it. But when you create with an intent to market it to others, to convey the message, then don't you have a duty to make sure your message is heard and understood.

this is an age old debate for people who create and who try to give others the pleasure of their creation. It has always been a matter of degree and taste. Too obscure with too many veiled symbols does smack of elitism and smug what a clever boy i am chicanery. too many explosions and CGI car chases leave you hungry for something with more substance. so the answer is somewhere in between and that something is impossible to define.


to send your message you need a vehicle and movies are as powerful a medium as there is to do so. Do you need to hit someone over the head with a hammer to do so or do you want to hide your message in layer and layer of allegory and symbolism? Humans react well to symbolism and seem to need it. Our modern religions all rely heavy on symbols to express complex thoughts and feelings and the message is more comforting within it.

for me this movie was too steeped in confusing symbols and meanings. the wide range of ideas as to its meaning indicate that to me. I don't feel i am an moron if i admit i do not understand what the artist was trying to say, as I don't feel that if someone connects with this movie that they are guilty of elitist snobbery. I just think that overall if you have to work so hard to find meaning in a movie then the artist has lost his way.


Give you an example, the Fountain is not every one's cup of tea. In my mind it is an exceptional film about life and the acceptance of death. It is entertaining and full of symbols. I found it to be a very emotional experience, and i connected with it. maybe you liked the movie maybe you did not, but in my mind the director conveyed his message in an artistic, entertaining way, one that was neither obscure or heavy handed. For me this movie (piano tuner) despite all its pretty design did not. For those that felt it, i am glad to hear , but don't say that we are village idiots if we did not. That would be indeed be elitism.