Happy Birthday Rysade!!!!!!!!

[Agent M]

*Thinks back* Yeah... I guess your right Diego... but I'm ok with non action packed movies.

[Rysade]

Well, I didn't think it was slow. I thought it moved along at a decent pace. I enjoyed it muchly, only it did take a while to get to the Arabian part.

Why thank you, DB, thank you very much. You know, I do try my best at being immoral. So far, it's worked out great. No idea how to stop the aging process with this, though.

(PS, try typing 'I' in italics. It's an experience you MUST have. Credit goes to Neil Stephenson for the Immortal/Immoral joke.)

[Birdhead]

I think there's nothing special about I in italics thanks very much.

As for Hidalgo... is it good? (Viggo!!! <33333!) I mean, not did you liek it, is it good? I actually don't know what it's about...

But anyway, I couldn't see it, I have
-no time
-no money
-to see mona lisa smile before anything else (Julia Stiles and Roberts, Maggie Gillenhaal, Kirsten Dunst? SO there.)
*sigh* Oh well.

[Rysade]

Pshhhhh.

Mona Lisa Smile is advertiesed in CosmopolitanMona Lisa Overdrive title.

Oh, and everything above is absolutely relative. I'm not sure any of that is true, especially the part about my opinion.

[Birdhead]

Well, I don't think they're ripping off Gibson, because the Mona Lisa is kinda famous for he smile, such as it is. And as for expecting hype, all I have to say is: TMR.

But you don't have to see it. And I never read Cosmo, just so you know.

Wait a minute. How do you know it's being advertised in Cosmo?

[Aurora]

well, Cosmo does have a lot of pretty girls in it and I swear it's at least 1/3 advertisements (I was counting ads in a CosmoGIRL! magazine for health class last year. There were 60 full page ads in a 180 page magazine).... and there are a lot of inappropriate tips for things I shouldn't talk about here... Hehehehe.. Just judging from the covers, anyway.

Cosmo is worse that *******... because it disguises itself as a useful magazine.

[Rysade]

Now how did I know you would ask that?
Tui: Sharper than a subtle knife...
The ad was in the only remotely interesting magazine in the entire doctor's office.
And the reason I'm upset about it, the mona lisa, I mean, is because it's famous and everybody knows about it. It's unoriginal now. Yes, of course it's facinating. Can we move on to some more meaningful peice of art? So what if it's the first smiling portrait of a woman? So what if there's xray images that suggest it may have been a self portrait at one point? So what if it's painted on wood or slowly degenerating or is a priceless painting? So what if J-Lo and Ben Afleck are back together again and Rosie O'Donnel is a lesbian? I don't care!

Everyone grows up knowing trivia, and frankly I'm tired of it. The movie is popular because EVERY SINGLE PERSON HAS THIS ONE THING IN COMMON: They all think they know something about art when the have dirt on DaVinci.

Jeez, could we be more off topic? Happy Birthday, Everyone Else!

[Birdhead]

Tui: Sharper than a subtle knife...

Thankyou.

Beyond that, the only thing I understood about that post was the first three lines. An explanation?

[Rysade]

Right. Well, the Mona Lisa is the most talked about painting, ever. Thus, it is a pop icon. Or perhaps it's talked about because it's a pop icon, I'm not sure, all I know is that is is definitely both of those things. When something becomes a pop icon, a sort of hype haze forms around it, and you can't really consider the peice of art as a whole anymore, all you see when you look at it is the rumors, the personal life of the artist, etc. That, by the way, is the reason I hate Van Goh as well. The artwork of these old artists has become so popular today, they might as well be as devoid of meaning as a Warhol. People don't see the art's meaning anymore, they just see an icon. I related it to other 'big news stories,' such as the J-Lo and Ben fiasco(es) because they are on the same level of hype.

[Birdhead]

I take your point, but as far as I'm concerned it's not much of one. Sure, there's a lot of hype about Van Gogh. So? If I see one of his paintings, and it's beautiful, that's all that matters. Furthermore, an understanding of the artist helps you understand the paintings better.

Just because something's popular doesn't mean it hasn't got meaning, or that its meaning has to be devalued. That's elitist. The likelihood is that, if something's popular, even a pop icon, (do you count Starry Night as a pop icon? Do you even know what it is?) it has a meaning that appears to everyone.

by contrast, J.Lo and Ben really are hype- stories that have no actual meaning or are in no way much different from any other Hollywood breakup story. They have no depth that you couldn't find in any other story. They're just hyped up because of Jennifer Lopez, who has (presumably) affected people through her music (well, it must have happened, her songs sell) and Ben, who affects people through, uhm, looks.

[Rysade]

Hmm. I've never been called an Elitist before. Kinda new. Anyway, Sure I know what Starry Night is. I replicated it in pastels in 5th grade. You're right. The paintings are still very good. I don't like it when good paintings are devalued by cheap rumors. People can't see past the rumors to the underlying beauty of the painting.