I just wanted to bring this back to comment because this line of thought means a lot to me, not just for this movie but for all of filmdom. In this case, I have not seen the test footage. I have no real connection to the source material.Svevan wrote:I'm all for artistic autonomy, but the leaked video was not fantastic. I think people are quick to champion Spike Jonze on principle (as am I) without considering that his "vision" may be total and utter shit.
That said, I will take the director's vision over the alternative version in almost any case. I would much rather see the total and utter shit version than the studio version. In general, Hollywood studios make good movies. The problem is that they're interchangeable.
Given the subjectivity of the form, I'd rather take my chances on a movie that 75% of the audience hates, but 25% loves than another solid, safe, predictable studio film that has 75% on RottenTomatoes. I'd always rather see the personal vision. It's something to discuss afterwards. If I want to see a "good" movie, I could probably pick a random studio dvd off the shelf at my local rental store. I'd rather see a visionary film, even if most consider it a disaster (*winks at Synecdoche, New York*).
A strong number of my favorite films from the past few years have had divided critical acclaim rather than unanimous praise. The Fall, Assassination of Jesse James, Marie Antoinette, etc. These movies are considered boring or shitty by some, but there's an author to the material. To me, that makes them all the more worthwhile for viewing and discussion rather than some forgettable movie like... well, I forgot.
