|Originally posted by EgosXII |
I can't think of one hollywood action film which has any moral or artistic value
Really? I can think of plenty (Bourne trilogy comes to mind but there's a lot more).
|You always rage on about films "intentions": This film, more than any I've seen you defend met and exceeded the intentions. I don't think it was ever aiming to be anything deep or intelligent; it was aiming to draw emotions and 'increase testosterone' levels, and I think it nailed that perfectly |
You got it mixed up again - I'm talking about what's actually in the film (the text), not what it was supposed to say. Ironically, you're the one preoccupied with "what the film was aiming to be" as if there was some unquestionable artistic intention, even though you don't directly personalize it.
It seems to me that instead of actually trying to interpret the film, you rely on prejudices and popular half-truths like "Hollywood films have no meaning ever". Look, no film exists in a vacuum. Even if the artist says "I'm going to do something utterly mindless" there will still be meaning and subtext - partly because he doesn't have full control of his subconscious so a lot of "meaning" is completely accidental, but that doesn't invalidate its existence.
Fighting dramas are often also social dramas so obviously I'm going to be interested in how it deals with this subtext. The problem I have here is that Warrior uses the impending foreclosure to motivate the character's decision to go fighting again and then it is completely marginalized as soon as the family problems are introduced. At the end, every one is carried away by the intense fights so they forget there was that trouble with the mortgage. It implies that everything's fine, it stopped being important, and we shouldn't care about it either. It also isn't good storytelling, which is art in and of itself.