![]() ![]() And just as crucially, he finds a similar connection between the subjective experiences of those committing violent acts and the sociological factors that deem those acts acceptable (and often assumed). Scorsese sees the glamorization and moralization of filmic violence as irrevocably fused together, revulsion and fascination informing one another equally. (Combine it with some extended musings on John Ford’s conception of “masculinity” and you’ve got a full-proof narcoleptic for cineastes.) Then you re-watch Raging Bull and you remember that all those cocktail-party bloviations have their roots in one of American cinema’s most complex visions of physical brutality: its communal roots, hypnotic realization, and corrosive legacy. Film criticism seemingly doesn’t get more banal than commenting upon Martin Scorsese’s “fascination” with violence.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |