Week #2 -- Aesthetics and Artistics

Probably the major lesson I learned this past week is that when you truly like what you do, you do it regardless of money, projects, etc. No matter how disillusioned one may be with their talent, quirk, or philosophy, I think they'll still find a way to use it even if said endeavor didn't quite fit into once hoped mold. Maybe this is where passion turns into hobby: a word I think is somewhat insulting to the artistic crowd.

There we go. Here's the major lesson: the difference between artistic and aesthetic. These two words are honestly best friends so it isn't smart to separate them from each other.

Aesthetics has to do with a sense of the form; in most artistic pieces while partaking in during childhood, one connects with what they understand, what evokes their emotions, and what catches their attention, even if in all honesty they have no idea what the piece means, how it was put together, or any larger humanistic themes.

In a sense, we use aesthetic teachings to encourage young students to read and become literate, not necessarily analytical, but literate. In the developmental stages of anything, it is much easier to take note of the aesthetics, the things you can relate to with your own story than take notice of how the compositions of colors, sounds, actors, and the like come together to teach a whole message.

Aesthetics shouldn't be forgotten, for the power of it helps people to drift away from their own world into the silver screen, the pages of an ancient book, and the words of a curious poet. Aesthetics is easier on the mind and can be what a film can offer for audience members who are not connecting with some of the more complex plot points, struggles, meanings, and the like.

Artistic has more to do with a science -- which may be why art and science are often two interchangeable words.

Artistic has to do with the whys; how the composition of a particular frame is built and the reasoning behind what it means. This is the more analytical side which asks more from its reader and audience. I don't know if people are as literate with the visual medium to know the linguistic patterns of why a certain light might be telling the story, the relation of colors in a scene, or just the temporal space itself and what it has to offer.

Artistry can come off much more formulaic which may bother some artisans, but the truth is that in each piece of art, just like in every building block of life, there is a formula behind it -- a blueprint explaining the reality of the substance. Every chemical has a code behind it, not to sound eerie, but if it exists than it has an identity. Art is in a sense the same way and understanding those codes helps to find the more genius points behind the piece and the artist's mind. And we study chemical sequences to figure out how they operate and how they exist so as to have a better understanding of the universe around us. Storytelling at its heart helps us to understand the universe around us.

If we want better films I think we need to take this to heart. Aesthetics is what the majority of the audience will want in their film experience. Most people who go to a theater are looking to escape from their laundry list of obligations. We watch films in our leisure time. At the same time, many in the audience are fully capable of following and deciphering the complexity behind films, and in fact, many who are more prone and educated to follow this tract will find a great amount of pleasure in seeing how these highly crafted scenes were put together to make one whole story ring true. But, without aesthetics, I don't know if the meat of art can even be reached because aesthetics is simply the aroma coming off art. It's that aroma that asks more of the audience to dig deeper, to see why on some sort of level one has connected with genius, and how all of it relates back to the viewer.

All three of the Matrixes are really not that bad. Maybe not as killer as the first, but I think the main problem is that the material used in the second two films is a bit more undefined. We have a great amount of religious, psycho-theory, philosophy, any other cool related words -- thrown into the plot behind the films, and it gets tangled fast. I still enjoyed the second film, and the third was still enticing to me compared to other films, but I think as the films went on they began to lose their aesthetics and there was too much emphasis on artistic, which not only jaded the audience, but made it less interesting to watch. Even still, I think there's some incredible scenes in the second one that are worth noting on any top 100 action scenes of all time list.

The point of the sword has to meet the story. In Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, the fighting doesn't become pertinent until the last battle when you actually feel the story, the characters, the aesthetics, and the artistry all coming in sync. Even on the director's commentary, the director and cinematographer agree that the last battle is the only one that matters. When a movie drags it isn't just because of pacing, it's that things are not connecting and we want to get to that visceral world of urgent storytelling.

I for one think most action scenes are crap.

If you can't follow the story when getting lost in a fifteen minute action sequence -- who cares? It's just a nice way to get away from the story in many cases and use it as a deus ex machina. But when that action sequence connects to the story, the audience is on the edge of their seat. There's been multiple Bourne movies because each has been setup to where the action lines up with the story. Only what matters to the story should exist, anything else is unrelated and lessens the story. All aesthetics are connected to art; art needs to be composed in such a way that it brings out story in the best way.

Every frame matters. There is nothing hobby that should remain; there is nothing idle or trivial. Everything needs to be active, in sync with each other, and made relevant. Otherwise... the story is no longer reflecting reality; it's reflecting a foreign piece of pointless despair. And I for one don't necessarily believe that everything happens for a reason, but that everything has meaning. Every event in life has its own landscape, its own influence, and its own teachings. Strong art represents this.

Reason is just a box, and I for one don't think every action is reasonable... and for the sake of humanity, it shouldn't be.