Re: What can we trust?
Posted: Sun Sep 01, 2019 10:36 am
MacCruiskeen » Wed Jun 22, 2011 4:27 am wrote:tazmic, you beat me to it! That video is brilliantly funny, very precisely observed, and (therefore) a real public service. It's such a timesaver.
The Complete and Utter Works of Adam Curtis in three minutes flat! All you need to know is here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1bX3F7u ... e=youtu.be
From the voice-over, one priceless quote among many:"Combining archive documentary material with interviews, Curtis filled in the gaps by vomiting grainy library footage onto the screen, to a soundtrack of Brian Eno and Nine Inch Nails. He had discovered that it did not matter which footage he used, so long as he changed the shots so bewilderingly fast that the audience did not notice the chasm between argument and conclusion. This was especially effective when he simply cut the music mid-bar." [music cuts out mid-bar]
8bitagent » Mon Jun 20, 2011 1:59 pm wrote:tazmic wrote:
HOLY CRAP! I literally almost spit out my soda. That is, wow...simply a brilliant spot on parody. I'm a huge Adam Curtis fanboy and love his trademark woozy hypnotic collage/music/narrative style, but he hit all the right notes here. "late night wikipedia binge", and "armed with a skinny puppy cd", oh man...
Adam Curtis could make a right wing documentary talking about how communists are behind US entertainment pop culture and I'd still eagerly watch and be entranced by his technique.
To me, documentaries are often the feeling and not always the message.
8bitagent » Wed Jun 22, 2011 4:30 am wrote:See, cognitively I recognize Michael Moore, Curtis, etc play certain fiddles...but I don't care. It's an intoxicating brew I can't get enough of!
tazmic » Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:31 am wrote:MacCruiskeen wrote:The Complete and Utter Works of Adam Curtis in three minutes flat! All you need to know is here
It's worth adding this:
ERROL MORRIS: There are those that believe that [the Gulf of Tonkin incident was] part of a conspiracy to escalate the Vietnam War. Here’s a question: are they right? And, in an even more general sense, is history primarily a history of conspiracy? Or is it just a series of blunders, one after the other? Confusions, self-deceptions, idiocies of one kind or another?
ADAM CURTIS: It’s the latter. Where people do set out to have conspiracies, they don’t ever end up like they’re supposed to. History is a series of unintended consequences resulting from confused actions, some of which are committed by people who may think they’re taking part in a conspiracy, but it never works out the way they intended.
I couldn't have summed him up better myself.