Antonio

I think it's almost only about trust; belief, if you prefer. Every man is son of his time, so it's useless try to understand him extrapolated from that context. By more or less two centuries, technology has become so powerful and so helpful that masses do believe that it can explain almost anything. We've completely put our faith in it, so the consequences are pretty obvious. We often forget that filmmaking, as nearly all artistic occupations, it's about interaction: with people, with environment, with yourself, with everything conceivable. Of course, even with technology. But we can't confine just one aspect from the others. Maybe this is the point nowadays: we find difficult to understand the simple complexity of mankind. Sorry for the oxymoron, but it's true. My english doesn't allow me to explain properly what I'd want to say, so maybe it's better quoting Ingmar Bergman, when roughly 15 years ago he said that "[i]today a lot of young filmmakers seem to have excellent skills in technical stuff, much more than we used to have when I was young, at the beginning of my career[/i]", adding, "[i]the point is that the vast majority of them don't have anyhing to say[/i]". How technology could provide us what we need in that sense? People like Steve Jobs, no matter what we personally think on him, showed us that more choices in terms of technology means also more choices in terms of creativity. But we must always face the necessity of transmitting something. In other words: technology can tell us [b]how[/b], but we have to find [b]what[/b] by other means. And, if by one side these words sound like a manifest truth, from another, the work of too much good filmmakers proves the urgency to repeat this truth and try to understand again what it involves. In my opinion, that's the difference between [i]professional[/i] and [i]artist[/i]. The first one can't never be an artist; the latter one could be a professional. And that's why our system requires most frequently professionals than artists, in order to level every person to the low, enslaving his creative will - and with this statement I have no intention to say that all professionals are an expression of mediocrity, not at all. It's not foolish paranoia. Ask yourself why once in the past (no matter when and in what art), people with very humble means succeeded in bringing some of the most amazing pieces of art in history. When technology wasn't enough, they strove hard in order to create what they really wanted. Otherwise, they created new technology - most people don't know that even the paintbrush once was the most innovative creation around; the higher form of technology of its time. I really appreciate this kind of articles, because they force us to ask ourself (or someone else) the right questions. Hope to read more of them. Without forgetting technical articles, of course. 50/50, as Andrew wrote, would be wonderful.

First of all, thank you for your articles and your passion in writing them, Andrew. That said, visually speaking, I think it could be rather interesting learn something about two movies released this year. I'm talking about Melancholia and The Tree of Life. I remember you wrote something about Terrence Malick photography, but not specifically on his last film. Regards