This is the fart sniffing of pseudo intellectualism. Something must always be a “commentary” because the reality of it being just as it is has no allure to a pseudo intellectual.
When I was in college I had a PhD student I worked with talk about how frustrating it was for him to try and create some inane speech on "symbolism", particularly regarding literature. I told him, "Look, you got it all wrong. It's super easy. You just got to start with whatever you have, and then make up some nonsense meta-narrative that loosely ties in whatever you started with. Here, lets try this."
He was earlier complaining that he got his feet caught in a power strip that was under a desk that had a computer on it.
"You see that tangle of extension cords there? That's not extension cords, that's art! You see, the extension cords are a symbol of the power that our modern society has, and it fuels the computer which allows you to see the world and answer any question, but it comes at a price. When you got your feet caught in the cables, it was a representation of the entanglement that the modern man feels when caught in the labryinth of digital power, trapped in the shifting current of our computerized world. It's power restrains us physically, but gives us limitlessness virtually, and so we are constantly battling in the material world for control over the power of the machine, while reaping the benefits of of the virtual world it provides to us."
"Gizornik... did you just make all that bullshit up, just now?"
"Yes."
"What the fuck was that? How did you do that?"
The truth is, once you learn how the Intellectualists speak, you can just mimic it and they literally can't tell the difference. I actually wish I had studied rhetoric properly, because almost the entire Leftist world is based on rhetoric alone.
This is the fart sniffing of pseudo intellectualism. Something must always be a “commentary” because the reality of it being just as it is has no allure to a pseudo intellectual.
This is how stupid people feel smart. They watch shit like this crap.
An actually intelligent film is something like Adaptation, or really most of Charlie Kauffman's work.
The problem is the people who love glass onion are completely confused by anything that requires brainpower so they use dogshit mystery films instead.
There aren't even pseudo intellectuals they are straight up cavemen.
When I was in college I had a PhD student I worked with talk about how frustrating it was for him to try and create some inane speech on "symbolism", particularly regarding literature. I told him, "Look, you got it all wrong. It's super easy. You just got to start with whatever you have, and then make up some nonsense meta-narrative that loosely ties in whatever you started with. Here, lets try this."
He was earlier complaining that he got his feet caught in a power strip that was under a desk that had a computer on it.
"You see that tangle of extension cords there? That's not extension cords, that's art! You see, the extension cords are a symbol of the power that our modern society has, and it fuels the computer which allows you to see the world and answer any question, but it comes at a price. When you got your feet caught in the cables, it was a representation of the entanglement that the modern man feels when caught in the labryinth of digital power, trapped in the shifting current of our computerized world. It's power restrains us physically, but gives us limitlessness virtually, and so we are constantly battling in the material world for control over the power of the machine, while reaping the benefits of of the virtual world it provides to us."
"Gizornik... did you just make all that bullshit up, just now?"
"Yes."
"What the fuck was that? How did you do that?"
The truth is, once you learn how the Intellectualists speak, you can just mimic it and they literally can't tell the difference. I actually wish I had studied rhetoric properly, because almost the entire Leftist world is based on rhetoric alone.