Ojos de vainilla
Wanalee has rated 237 netflix movies and has 130 movies in her queue. That is a movie a week for the next 2.5 years. Netcrackix sounds like a better name for that. Anyways, last night, among those 237 movies came up Vanilla Sky which got 3 stars in Wanalee's book. It'd get only 1 or 2 in mine. However, we both seemed to agree that Abre Los Ojos was phenomenal. But, but, but... it is the exact same script and even the same lead actress! How is it that the Hollywood version managed to leave me with a "man, that was stupid!" while the Spanish version somehow made it neat, and left me with some kind of warm and fuzzy yet nostalgic feeling? It is the exact same script!
Wanalee hypothesizes that it is the cinematography and I think I agree. Sort of the same reason that the first photo seems much better than the second one or the same reason that the acoustic Hotel California seems a lot richer than the first one. Alas, perhaps that is all subjective but it seems to be there nonetheless (oh, I know I have a better case with the photograph than with the song -- the solo at the end in the original version is fantastic).
In any event, I think there is a second component to all this. Vanilla Sky is a Hollywood movie whereas Abre Los Ojos is a pelicula española. Watching the first one is nothing, you go to the movies and you watch it. To watch the second you have to go out of your way a bit, research it a bit, know the director or study a bit -- something. I think people who do that also tend to think that the are refining their taste by going out of their way. Hey, at least I know I'm guilty of this. In fewer words, it seems that it is easy to be biased towards liking the foreign version because it is (or makes you feel) more "culturally rich" or something similar. Again, I'm certainly guilty of this. But, given the track record of Hollywood, I think the bias is fair. And yes, this is the all-american foreigner saying all this. Ha!
In any event, the nerd in me says that an experiment is in order to show that the bias is a fair one. When I have time I'll put them both in the netckrackix queue and watch them one right after the other trying to make notes about what makes Abre Los Ojos better than its counterpart. I think the claim I'd like to make is that what makes it better is not just subjective, but there are some tangible things as well. We'll see. I'll publish the report in this peer-reviewed space, though all y'all don't get to tell me that my stuff is crap before I publish it, only afterwards. Take that PRL!
Wanalee hypothesizes that it is the cinematography and I think I agree. Sort of the same reason that the first photo seems much better than the second one or the same reason that the acoustic Hotel California seems a lot richer than the first one. Alas, perhaps that is all subjective but it seems to be there nonetheless (oh, I know I have a better case with the photograph than with the song -- the solo at the end in the original version is fantastic).
In any event, I think there is a second component to all this. Vanilla Sky is a Hollywood movie whereas Abre Los Ojos is a pelicula española. Watching the first one is nothing, you go to the movies and you watch it. To watch the second you have to go out of your way a bit, research it a bit, know the director or study a bit -- something. I think people who do that also tend to think that the are refining their taste by going out of their way. Hey, at least I know I'm guilty of this. In fewer words, it seems that it is easy to be biased towards liking the foreign version because it is (or makes you feel) more "culturally rich" or something similar. Again, I'm certainly guilty of this. But, given the track record of Hollywood, I think the bias is fair. And yes, this is the all-american foreigner saying all this. Ha!
In any event, the nerd in me says that an experiment is in order to show that the bias is a fair one. When I have time I'll put them both in the netckrackix queue and watch them one right after the other trying to make notes about what makes Abre Los Ojos better than its counterpart. I think the claim I'd like to make is that what makes it better is not just subjective, but there are some tangible things as well. We'll see. I'll publish the report in this peer-reviewed space, though all y'all don't get to tell me that my stuff is crap before I publish it, only afterwards. Take that PRL!
posted by rz at 8:32 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home