Does size and scale matter in how we perceive works of art?
How about in cinema?
It seems that a certain threshold is subjective, but that in the majority, a standard must be reached before subjects are comfortable enough to identify said object.
In the case of cinema, this is the budget threshold, which most often refers to production value.
Although we have seen a large influx and adherence to lo-fi in almost all areas of media (music, video, design) it seems that its consumption is temporary and best served on short segments.
The feature film is altogether a different animal. When we think of scale, does the medium of film in this day and age, have any rights to claim itself to art.
I'm sure this might get your blood boiling. but give it a good swirl in the noggin.
Movies are, and always will be a business masquerading as pop-art. Once this distinction is made, our reaction to it is clearer. After all, is Tarkovsky any more arty than The Cosby show?
The answer of course is yes, but it becomes incredibly difficult to define properly. And if so, to what degree and who gets the rights to final assessment?