A TV DANTE
Jul. 22nd, 2010 02:00 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Yup. I've now been exposed to Peter Greenaway's Dante. And, you know what? It was enjoyable. It is, obviously, a little dated special effects wise. This isn't a major issue for me, in a lot of ways I would rather have rough around the edges, triptacular effects than a throat stuffed full of computer imaging, painted so close to realism as to be grotesque. Meh. In places the layering of different images and |UNEXPECTED PROFESSOR IN A BOX| style of footnote became grating (Really, if you're going to footnote that whole catalog we'll be here all day) but there were some fairly interesting powerful visual choices. I particularly enjoyed how damned CREEPY Beatrice and the other heavenly presences were, they were almost hard to look at during their brief appearance
For the most part, the modern comparisons were made fairly subtly, with a few notable exceptions, and it was watchable. Granted I enjoy being able to watch things and try, for the most part, to throw myself in as though the picture at hand will be, but Greenaway's use of image, nudity and...eh... lots of nudity built up a frightening but not over-gory Inferno.
John Gielgud!Virgil makes me want Omega!Virgil all the more. I may get on that.
Also there were boobs, and a Paolo who looked, to my tired and Who-tainted eye, disturbingly like Turlough. (Well, if anyone's going to accidentally get lucky reading about Lancelot it might as well be him)
ED ECCO! some lulzy pictures
Based on the astute observations of
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)