More Appolonian and Dionysian Things and Stuff

I commented on another post just a few minutes ago about how I don’t think the Apollonian and Dionysian should be kept separate when it comes to certain films, and how it seems to be more of a matter of perspective as to whether a film falls into one or the other exclusively. A film could be called Apollonian from an audience perspective, by someone who found themselves more actively thinking over the film during viewing, and felt separated from the experience enough for it to provoke thought about specific elements of what was being shown. On the other hand, that same film could have been a pure expression of it’s animator, not necessarily designed to provoke that kind of thought on the part of the audience, and more taking it’s intellectual reception as a latent effect.

That being said, I could see a film like Triangles being Dionysian from both perspectives, audience and creator. It’s not to say a film should or can’t be a mix of the two or one or the other. I just think it makes more sense to look at these modes as they apply to an individual’s exposure to or involvement in the film rather than how they apply to the film itself, as if it were an objective characteristic.

Maybe this is how we were looking at it the whole time, and I was just misunderstanding... regardless, it’s food for thought.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Bratz: Rock Angelz is the movie I didn't know I needed

Does Animation Have to Make You Laugh?

She-ra is my new favorite gay icon