Comments on: PIFF 2010: Crazy Pete http://www.cinecynic.com/2010/02/piff-2010-crazy-pete/ A cynic's take on movies, books and everything else Wed, 21 Jul 2010 16:52:50 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Cine Cynic http://www.cinecynic.com/2010/02/piff-2010-crazy-pete/comment-page-1/#comment-486 Cine Cynic Sun, 21 Feb 2010 07:19:48 +0000 http://www.cinecynic.com/?p=466#comment-486 Those audio books haven't really enriched anything. Wait until I write about Thoreau. I am partly disillusioned. But yes, I am also what I read. You may have read too much between <em>my</em> lines, but it is possible that one can never read too much into Godard's intentions, especially when one hasn't watched his movies. Those audio books haven’t really enriched anything. Wait until I write about Thoreau. I am partly disillusioned. But yes, I am also what I read.

You may have read too much between my lines, but it is possible that one can never read too much into Godard’s intentions, especially when one hasn’t watched his movies.

]]> By: Trinath http://www.cinecynic.com/2010/02/piff-2010-crazy-pete/comment-page-1/#comment-485 Trinath Sat, 20 Feb 2010 06:14:15 +0000 http://www.cinecynic.com/?p=466#comment-485 I haven't seen the film but I can imagine from the comparisons you made using some ideas and films I know. I see that Podcasts of Thoreau have enriched the thought process. Thoreau is one of the this long queue of philosophers but imagine viewing this from a variety of angles: Through Dostoevsky, Kafka, Nietzsche (I think you have touched this in the phrase about "Nihilism"), Sartre, Camus, Hemingway. A range of philosophies. Somehow the question "Why they did that?" whether put in this film's context or in case of Thelma and Louis, is a very rhetorical and a deep one. It might touch upon all the abstract philosophies developed to inquire about ourselves in the 20th century. At the same time it appears that we are reading too much between the lines. Now I understand what you mean by the volatility of the scene/characters. I haven’t seen the film but I can imagine from the comparisons you made using some ideas and films I know. I see that Podcasts of Thoreau have enriched the thought process. Thoreau is one of the this long queue of philosophers but imagine viewing this from a variety of angles: Through Dostoevsky, Kafka, Nietzsche (I think you have touched this in the phrase about “Nihilism”), Sartre, Camus, Hemingway. A range of philosophies. Somehow the question “Why they did that?” whether put in this film’s context or in case of Thelma and Louis, is a very rhetorical and a deep one. It might touch upon all the abstract philosophies developed to inquire about ourselves in the 20th century. At the same time it appears that we are reading too much between the lines. Now I understand what you mean by the volatility of the scene/characters.

]]>