list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Nightwatching on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Nightwatching/291669/default.aspx Title: Nightwatching
Year: 2009
Director: Peter Greenaway
Plot: Director Peter Greenaway explores the life of Dutch Golden Age artist Rembrandt in a biographical feature that uses the 1642 painting "Night Watch" as a launching point to explore the 17th Century artist's life from an entirely new perspective. British film and television star Martin Henderson assumes the role of the prolific painter, with Eva Birthistle, Jodhi May, and Emily Holmes assuming the roles of his wife and mistresses respectively. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 9
Number of Lists: 1
Number of blog posts: 2
]]>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 21:54:04 GMTNightwatching2009Peter GreenawayDirector <a href="/players/P____92456/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Peter Greenaway</a> explores the life of Dutch Golden Age artist Rembrandt in a biographical feature that uses the 1642 painting "Night Watch" as a launching point to explore the 17th Century artist's life from an entirely new perspective. British film and television star <a href="/players/P___126257/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Martin Henderson</a> assumes the role of the prolific painter, with Eva Birthistle, <a href="/players/P____46675/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Jodhi May</a>, and Emily Holmes assuming the roles of his wife and mistresses respectively. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide9Taggedy Taggged (6-10)12http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s291669.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Nightwatching/291669/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/karina/archive/2008/7/2/32034.aspx Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 7/2/2008 3:01:36 PM
Body: My favorite part of this NY Times story about filmmaker Peter Greenaway’s “dazzling confection” Leonardo’s Last Supper––wherin he “enhanced” the original painting for one night only by introducing sweeping lights, “rhythmic” music, and the generally ill-advised planetarium aesthetics––is the explanation of why the event almost didn’t happen: A vigorous debate erupted earlier this year after some art historians recommended that Mr. Greenaway be denied access to “The Last Supper.” They feared for the well-being of the painting, which began to deteriorate only 20 years after its completion in 1498. Cultural officials also objected to what they saw as the improper use of a monument with an intrinsic universal value…“I don’t know why we would allow anyone to run the risk of possibly damaging a work of art in which the Italian state has invested a huge number of resources in the last 20 years,” said Marisa Dalai Emiliani, one expert who opposed the project. While champions insisted that the project would lend new meaning to Leonardo’s painting, she said, “ ‘The Last Supper’ doesn’t need any added value.” I’m no expert, but from the writeups of the event and the above, frustratingly unprofessional video document, it sounds like the worst fears of Emiliani and friends were justified. “We’re out to educate you as entertainingly as possible,” Greenaway reportedly said after his 20-minute laser light show, which seems to nail down the problem: is there anything more insulting to a grown-up than smug edutainment? Supper is the second in a series of projects Greenaway is trying to mount, which he characterizes as “dialogues” with nine paintings, each with “a Cecil B. DeMille cinematic scope.” The first of these projects was Nightwatching––which, you’ll remember, I actually liked at Toronto, although it admittedly put me to sleep. But Nightwatching seemed to be an actual character study, of both a painting and its painter, and not an entirely reductive one at that. So much of Greenaway’s work seems to be based on simple equations: a spewing of Greenaway’s knowledge about art, intermingled with dick/cum/poop jokes, inevitably rendered in a posh accent so as to, ostensibly, merge low brow with high. And it’s all didactic as hell. Get it? The entire history of art is mitigated through the artist’s bodily functions and attempts to get laid! Get it? God is in the trance music!!! Disclaimer: I’m cranky about Greenaway today because I had to watch his The Draughtsman’s Contract for one of Kevin Lee’s video essays. There are Greenaway films that I don’t find entirely abhorrent, but this one…oh, I’ll save it for the tape… Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth
]]>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:01:36 GMTKarinaKarina on SpoutBlog7/2/2008 3:01:36 PM My favorite part of this NY Times story about filmmaker Peter Greenaway’s “dazzling confection” Leonardo’s Last Supper––wherin he “enhanced” the original painting for one night only by introducing sweeping lights, “rhythmic” music, and the generally ill-advised planetarium aesthetics––is the explanation of why the event almost didn’t happen: A vigorous debate erupted earlier this year after some art historians recommended that Mr. Greenaway be denied access to “The Last Supper.” They feared for the well-being of the painting, which began to deteriorate only 20 years after its completion in 1498. Cultural officials also objected to what they saw as the improper use of a monument with an intrinsic universal value…“I don’t know why we would allow anyone to run the risk of possibly damaging a work of art in which the Italian state has invested a huge number of resources in the last 20 years,” said Marisa Dalai Emiliani, one expert who opposed the project. While champions insisted that the project would lend new meaning to Leonardo’s painting, she said, “ ‘The Last Supper’ doesn’t need any added value.” I’m no expert, but from the writeups of the event and the above, frustratingly unprofessional video document, it sounds like the worst fears of Emiliani and friends were justified. “We’re out to educate you as entertainingly as possible,” Greenaway reportedly said after his 20-minute laser light show, which seems to nail down the problem: is there anything more insulting to a grown-up than smug edutainment? Supper is the second in a series of projects Greenaway is trying to mount, which he characterizes as “dialogues” with nine paintings, each with “a Cecil B. DeMille cinematic scope.” The first of these projects was Nightwatching––which, you’ll remember, I actually liked at Toronto, although it admittedly put me to sleep. But Nightwatching seemed to be an actual character study, of both a painting and its painter, and not an entirely reductive one at that. So much of Greenaway’s work seems to be based on simple equations: a spewing of Greenaway’s knowledge about art, intermingled with dick/cum/poop jokes, inevitably rendered in a posh accent so as to, ostensibly, merge low brow with high. And it’s all didactic as hell. Get it? The entire history of art is mitigated through the artist’s bodily functions and attempts to get laid! Get it? God is in the trance music!!! Disclaimer: I’m cranky about Greenaway today because I had to watch his The Draughtsman’s Contract for one of Kevin Lee’s video essays. There are Greenaway films that I don’t find entirely abhorrent, but this one…oh, I’ll save it for the tape… Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/7/2/32033.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 7/2/2008 3:01:25 PM
Body: My favorite part of this NY Times story about filmmaker Peter Greenaway’s “dazzling confection” Leonardo’s Last Supper––wherin he “enhanced” the original painting for one night only by introducing sweeping lights, “rhythmic” music, and the generally ill-advised planetarium aesthetics––is the explanation of why the event almost didn’t happen: A vigorous debate erupted earlier this year after some art historians recommended that Mr. Greenaway be denied access to “The Last Supper.” They feared for the well-being of the painting, which began to deteriorate only 20 years after its completion in 1498. Cultural officials also objected to what they saw as the improper use of a monument with an intrinsic universal value…“I don’t know why we would allow anyone to run the risk of possibly damaging a work of art in which the Italian state has invested a huge number of resources in the last 20 years,” said Marisa Dalai Emiliani, one expert who opposed the project. While champions insisted that the project would lend new meaning to Leonardo’s painting, she said, “ ‘The Last Supper’ doesn’t need any added value.” I’m no expert, but from the writeups of the event and the above, frustratingly unprofessional video document, it sounds like the worst fears of Emiliani and friends were justified. “We’re out to educate you as entertainingly as possible,” Greenaway reportedly said after his 20-minute laser light show, which seems to nail down the problem: is there anything more insulting to a grown-up than smug edutainment? Supper is the second in a series of projects Greenaway is trying to mount, which he characterizes as “dialogues” with nine paintings, each with “a Cecil B. DeMille cinematic scope.” The first of these projects was Nightwatching––which, you’ll remember, I actually liked at Toronto, although it admittedly put me to sleep. But Nightwatching seemed to be an actual character study, of both a painting and its painter, and not an entirely reductive one at that. So much of Greenaway’s work seems to be based on simple equations: a spewing of Greenaway’s knowledge about art, intermingled with dick/cum/poop jokes, inevitably rendered in a posh accent so as to, ostensibly, merge low brow with high. And it’s all didactic as hell. Get it? The entire history of art is mitigated through the artist’s bodily functions and attempts to get laid! Get it? God is in the trance music!!! Disclaimer: I’m cranky about Greenaway today because I had to watch his The Draughtsman’s Contract for one of Kevin Lee’s video essays. There are Greenaway films that I don’t find entirely abhorrent, but this one…oh, I’ll save it for the tape… Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 19:01:25 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com7/2/2008 3:01:25 PM My favorite part of this NY Times story about filmmaker Peter Greenaway’s “dazzling confection” Leonardo’s Last Supper––wherin he “enhanced” the original painting for one night only by introducing sweeping lights, “rhythmic” music, and the generally ill-advised planetarium aesthetics––is the explanation of why the event almost didn’t happen: A vigorous debate erupted earlier this year after some art historians recommended that Mr. Greenaway be denied access to “The Last Supper.” They feared for the well-being of the painting, which began to deteriorate only 20 years after its completion in 1498. Cultural officials also objected to what they saw as the improper use of a monument with an intrinsic universal value…“I don’t know why we would allow anyone to run the risk of possibly damaging a work of art in which the Italian state has invested a huge number of resources in the last 20 years,” said Marisa Dalai Emiliani, one expert who opposed the project. While champions insisted that the project would lend new meaning to Leonardo’s painting, she said, “ ‘The Last Supper’ doesn’t need any added value.” I’m no expert, but from the writeups of the event and the above, frustratingly unprofessional video document, it sounds like the worst fears of Emiliani and friends were justified. “We’re out to educate you as entertainingly as possible,” Greenaway reportedly said after his 20-minute laser light show, which seems to nail down the problem: is there anything more insulting to a grown-up than smug edutainment? Supper is the second in a series of projects Greenaway is trying to mount, which he characterizes as “dialogues” with nine paintings, each with “a Cecil B. DeMille cinematic scope.” The first of these projects was Nightwatching––which, you’ll remember, I actually liked at Toronto, although it admittedly put me to sleep. But Nightwatching seemed to be an actual character study, of both a painting and its painter, and not an entirely reductive one at that. So much of Greenaway’s work seems to be based on simple equations: a spewing of Greenaway’s knowledge about art, intermingled with dick/cum/poop jokes, inevitably rendered in a posh accent so as to, ostensibly, merge low brow with high. And it’s all didactic as hell. Get it? The entire history of art is mitigated through the artist’s bodily functions and attempts to get laid! Get it? God is in the trance music!!! Disclaimer: I’m cranky about Greenaway today because I had to watch his The Draughtsman’s Contract for one of Kevin Lee’s video essays. There are Greenaway films that I don’t find entirely abhorrent, but this one…oh, I’ll save it for the tape… Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/poverty/MemberTagFilms.aspxpoverty
Number of films tagged: 1505

Number of people who tagged: 38

Number of times used: 70

]]>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:28:37 GMT15053870Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/painting/MemberTagFilms.aspxpainting
Number of films tagged: 1010

Number of people who tagged: 24

Number of times used: 33

]]>Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:24:02 GMT10102433Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/illness/MemberTagFilms.aspxillness
Number of films tagged: 15

Number of people who tagged: 14

Number of times used: 15

]]>Sat, 22 Aug 2009 11:48:49 GMT151415Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/orphans/MemberTagFilms.aspxorphans
Number of films tagged: 13

Number of people who tagged: 12

Number of times used: 16

]]>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 21:02:24 GMT131216Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/beauty-disfigured/MemberTagFilms.aspxbeauty-disfigured
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 21:44:14 GMT111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/commissioned/MemberTagFilms.aspxcommissioned
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 21:53:47 GMT111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/conspiracy-theory/MemberTagFilms.aspxconspiracy-theory
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 21:37:32 GMT111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/hidden-imagery/MemberTagFilms.aspxhidden-imagery
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 21:47:16 GMT111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Illegitimate-Daughters/MemberTagFilms.aspxIllegitimate-Daughters
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 21:53:06 GMT111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/miltia/MemberTagFilms.aspxmiltia
Number of films tagged: 1

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 1

]]>Sun, 04 Jan 2009 21:49:46 GMT111Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/mistress/MemberTagFilms.aspxmistress
Number of films tagged: 623

Number of people who tagged: 1

Number of times used: 3

]]>Wed, 06 May 2009 13:04:03 GMT62313Tag