Last Tango In Paris, and the Negation of Art in Mainstream Media

[Anonymous No.2767480]

[1/2]

I'm a /b/tard, so please excuse any lack of etiquette. I rarely leave the comforting squallor of my pig sty. But I've something to discuss here that I obviously can't discuss there without weird shit being spammed in the thread.

I've recently been *EXTREMELY* upset at the Last Tango In Paris controversy.

Bertolucci has come out to defend himself against recent media articles, and I am of the *STRONGEST* opinion that, if at the end of the day it is considered true art (timeless art/expression) & it was consentual (as in 'no take back-sees' nonsense), then the sacrifices are not only worth it, but enrich us as a collective. Not just for LTIP, but art in general.

The use of butter in the sexual encounter in LTIP fell organic; real. Something that two consenting (well...somewhat consenting; watch the film) adults would use in such a situation.

It is one thing to claim gross mistreatment and abuse, and quite another to be revisionist. Being consistent about the way you live your life is key.

>Oh, that whole thing about me pursuing the limits of my artistic expression & wanting to make something timeless? After thinking about it a little, welp ... it was actually abuse and I feel hella raped. Please invalidate this art, its existence, and besmirch the legacy of X literary/auteur figure. kthxbye

If a director was telling a young actress to do weird shit, and/or was abusive to the actress with ZERO payoff ('Cannibal Holocaust' comes to mind), then the director is a shitlord & a wannabe People have mentioned Kubrick and Duvall in "The Shining". These people need to take a fucking seat.

The end result was a masterpiece. I don't begrudge the right of Duvall to say that Kubrick was a cunt, or whatever (Pro-tip: he was a turbo-cunt), but she couldn't say that the end result wasn't worth it. Her performance, just as Schneider's performance in LTIP, was part of the very soul of that masterpiece.

[Anonymous No.2767481]

[2/2]

I don't doubt that such sacrifice, abuse, etc. can test a person to their limits (and the audience)...

But to fucking NEGATE the art once its been made, to NEGATE the people involved in the vision ... it makes me hate the human race, to be perfectly frank. Are we going to go back to burning books again? Huh? Is that where we go to now?

>Hey, guess what? Michael Jackson probably did a bit of pedo shit (not proven, not convicted) on the side. Guess we should never listen to his music again?
>John Wayne Gacy was a painter in prison; guess we burn his paintings? (oh wait, they did by and large...shit)
>etc.

Many of the people weighing in on this controversy are not only shitlords, their body of work is mediocre at BEST. AT *BEST*!

>Chris Evans
Name 1 all-time classic film he has acted in. Oh, that's right, he doesn't & will never have one, because he is not good enough to belong to that class of people. Literal trash. I'm sure he'll get his millions in Capeshit movies for the next decade, though.
>Anna Kendrick
Name 1 all-time...wait, gonna stop there. You already know! She has never, and will never, belong to that class of people. You won't even remember her name in 10 years, because she won't be acting in anything worth a god damn sheeeeeeeee-it.
>Jessica Chastain
Was apparently raped twice by Illuminati Hollywood Producer Man. Twice. Didn't go to court, though. I mean, ain't nobody got time for that! Trial by media FTW, amirite? Anyway, same as above applies, not a great actress but perhaps with some dedication & humility may allow herself to be a part of a project worth somewhat of a damn. And WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW, that's drawing a long bow. Nothing she has done is memorable, she is not memorable (yet); completely forgetable.

So, what have we learned today? One, /b/tards should never be allowed on other boards. Two, try as you might to change history or malign people with an agenda, you can't negate art or ideas.

[Anonymous No.2767489]

>>2767481
>Jessica Chastain
My error; I was refering to Evan Rachel Wood specifically.

Then again, Jessica Chastain - different actress, but still someone you would say "literally who?"

But. But. Chastain was not part of my little diatribe, I retract; I claw back the name.

>You're being revisionist

Goddamn I wish this site had an edit button sometimes....

[Anonymous No.2767506]

>>2767480
>mfw the internet starts shit about a masterpiece from the 70s because of tumblr ideology

[Anonymous No.2767509]

>>2767506

Ty for the reply; even if it's just you, at least I know that I'm not the only person on this planet that is getting heated over this.

[Anonymous No.2767512]

>>2767480
>Have to shoot a simulated rape scene. I'm ok with it.
>Wait what, I wasn't told butter was to be involved?! OMG I hate Brando and Bertolucci now because I am racist against butter or something.
>Media: "Actress was literally raped. For reals."

Is that about the gist of this?

People are just dying for something to be offended/outraged over. Something to blab about on twatter or facebook to farm some social capital. Reacting to sensationalist clickbait headlines without bothering to read any further or check other sources.

Was a boring movie desu. The Night Porter got me harder.