Wednesday, 5 April 2006

Girl with a Pearl Earring - Jan Vermeer

Jan Vermeer, Girl with a Pearl Earring, c. 1665-1666. Deservedly famous.


Blogger Rick said...

On Saturday I watched the movie of the same name, which was about this picture. It's not a very good movie.

4 Apr 2006, 21:59:00  
Blogger Berend de Boer said...

I disagree. It was beautifully shot, lighting exactly like Vermeer's paintings. Maybe the story wasn't very compelling, but the way the movie was shot was a feast for the eyes.

4 Apr 2006, 22:10:00  
Anonymous Sus said...

Agreed, Berend. I saw it on the big screen when it was released. Beautifully shot - and captured, I thought, the essence of Vermeer's work.

No mean feat.

5 Apr 2006, 09:24:00  
Blogger Rick said...

Oh don't get me wrong. Screenography has taken a giant leap forward in our time, whereas story and plot a giant leap backwards.

Just take your eyes to the movies, leave your brains at home.

I'm glad my dissatisfaction with the state of the art doesn't also afflict you two. You've literally lost the plot and like it that way!

6 Apr 2006, 10:19:00  
Anonymous Sus said...

Ah, Rick .. we're just not seeing eye to eye these days, are we!

I was agreeing with Berend on two counts: slow story and beautiful lighting.

I don't disagree with you re the plot - in my less than humble op. it wasn't much at all .. but having seen some of Vermeer's work (years ago), I thought the film brought *that* to life.

Did you see it on the big screen? Presumably not. Films are not made for the small screen - and invariably lose something in translation, so to speak.

6 Apr 2006, 11:53:00  
Blogger Rick said...

Films are not made for the small screen - and invariably lose something in translation, so to speak.

Quips like this Susan...when ACT form a Government you've got to come work for us as a speech writer.

6 Apr 2006, 13:49:00  
Anonymous Sus said...

'When ACT form a govt you've got to come work for us ..'

Thank God my day-job looks solid for a while, then! :)

6 Apr 2006, 16:20:00  
Blogger Rick said...

Only until I come home.

Nobody knows the answer to this but I'll ask anyway.

Why did Vermeer have a feast for his new child? Wasn't infant mortality so high in C17th that they just kept popping sprogs and didn't invest love in their young until it was reasonable to assume they weren't going to die overnight?


7 Apr 2006, 17:24:00  

Post a Comment

Respond with a polite and intelligent comment. (Both will be applauded.)

Say what you mean, and mean what you say. (Do others the courtesy of being honest.)

Please put a name to your comments. (If you're prepared to give voice, then back it up with a name.)

And don't troll. Please. (Contemplate doing something more productive with your time, and ours.)

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home