I've been discussing this with Anna Imhof recently, following the problems she experienced watching 'Post Tenebras Lux'.
An incident occurs in the film where it appears that a dog is beaten by its owner. Having both looked into it a little further, we found out that it was actually a 'simulation.'
However, following another comment made by director Carlos Reygadas about the treatment of his own personal dogs, it left Anna feeling that she could no longer support the film. I may be wrong but it will probably affect how she views his work in future.
Charlotte Rampling then spurts out an idiotic comment today that may or may not indicate something more sinister on her part. From my point…
I've been discussing this with Anna Imhof recently, following the problems she experienced watching 'Post Tenebras Lux'.
An incident occurs in the film where it appears that a dog is beaten by its owner. Having both looked into it a little further, we found out that it was actually a 'simulation.'
However, following another comment made by director Carlos Reygadas about the treatment of his own personal dogs, it left Anna feeling that she could no longer support the film. I may be wrong but it will probably affect how she views his work in future.
Charlotte Rampling then spurts out an idiotic comment today that may or may not indicate something more sinister on her part. From my point of view, it's left me with a similar feeling Anna experienced the other day.
It's a conflict I'm sure we've all felt at some time, where an artists' personal life or opinion colours how we view their work. The question being, should that be the case? Does a difference of opinion or action, make their art less valid or is it impossible not to allow our judgement to affect how we absorb our art? Especially given how personally each of us interpret it.
