July 13, 2008

• Weekend Shows

  It occurs to me that I never have good titles for my entries anymore… Oh well.

  Anyway, this weekend had a few things to it. There were a couple of Smithsonian exhibits that caught my attention. There was also a company bowling thing that I just got back from. Thought I might as well continue my summer movie review thing here with Hancock, too.

  Smithsonian Views

  There are two exhibits at the Freer & Sackler Gallery currently that are really interesting. The first is Muraqqa’: Imperial Mughal Albums, a display of Mughal-era portraits centering around the main lineage of Akbar – Jahangir – Shah Jahan – Alamgir (link here). I think particularly fascinating is how much the art commissioned by court tells about how the monarchs reigned, and how they viewed themselves in relation to the kingdom. Of course there are some pieces that are easy to interpret, such as Shah Jahan standing atop a globe holding the world in his hands. But, there are others such as the commissioned artwork for Jahangir reflecting Hinduism, Jainism, and Christianity (through Jesuit missionaries in India), in addition to Islam. Yes, the Mughal Empire was a bit untenable considering its reliance on an absolute monarch, but it’s a fascinating period of history brought out through the artwork on display.

  The second is a more recently-opened exhibit, Yellow Mountain: China’s Ever-Changing Landscape (link here). This one centers around how the Yellow Mountain has figured so prominently in Chinese art.

  Moving on to the Hirshhorn Museum… The funny thing is, I don’t really like modern art. I think far too much of it is haphazard, with more attention paid to justifying why it should be considered art than to the actual creative process. But, there was a two-parter at the Hirshhorn that caught even my attention. Part I was entitled Dreams, and had a lot of very surreal and… “odd” pieces on display. There was much use of light, mist, contours, and projections, and an overall ambience that was meant to confuse and misdirect the senses. I really enjoyed that, so I thought I’d go back for Part II, entitled Realisms (link here).

  Now, I wouldn’t do it much justice trying to describe it. But the basic focus is on how “reality” is portrayed, from different angles. There are a few rather surreal bits that stand out, such as Lonely Planet by Julian Rosefeldt, in which an intentionally-stereotypical backpacker goes through India:

  

  It turns from amusing to absurd when he takes camera techniques designed to make India seem “exotic”, such as slow-motion and slightly blurred images with dramatic music overlayed, and applies it to a more mundane scene in India, like the office of a call center.

  There are a few others that stand out, but it’s better to try seeing the exhibit for yourself. Try also viewing each work first, before reading the title and description; I found that to be more enjoyable.

  Move Movies…

  Before I forget…

  Hancock
  Overall: good and unique superhero story, but not much more (worth it, but low priority)

  It seems like there are way too many superhero movies this year again: Iron Man, The Incredible Hulk (with Edward Norton), Hellboy II, and of course Dark Knight. The even weirder thing is, all the superhero movies this year seem to be really good. Hancock I think deserves to be up there. Even though the theaters are kind of full with superhero films at the moment, it’s a much more unique story that’s markedly different from the others. There’s only a little focus on the background (which works, since the “origin story” is beside the point in this one), and more focus on a superhero who hates all the expectations placed upon him.

  The main problem with it, though, was that the story wasn’t expanded as much as it could have been, leaving you feeling like there should have been “more” to the movie: more events, more action, more chances to see the main character’s irritable nature come out, that sort of thing (I’ve heard, though, that the director and creators did want to do this, but for some reason–budget or time constraints–they weren’t able). I am glad that they only gave you bits and pieces of Hancock’s origin, enough to advance the plot, rather than spelling it all out to you. That way, the focus is maintained on the characters and not the artifices that led them up to this point.

  Basically, it is a good movie. If this were another year, it might be higher on my list. But as it stands, there are many other superhero movies that are probably worth seeing ahead of this one. So, I’d say it’s worth it, but it’s a pretty low priority considering what it’s up against.

  Well, that’s it for now. Dark Knight is in theaters this Friday, and one of my friends is having a wedding reception on Saturday. So, I should have a bit more to talk about next week. KF

  • 8:20 pm
  • 1 Comment