Talk:The Last Supper/Archive 1: Difference between revisions
Discussion page of The Last Supper/Archive 1
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
::That's a fun photo. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 13:45, 27 January 2008 (CST) | ::That's a fun photo. --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 13:45, 27 January 2008 (CST) | ||
:::Yeah, it's a great shot from a stylistic and artistic point of view. But the ridiculous amounts of speculation this has caused wants me to bash my head against the wall. Some people really thought that everything in it has a secret meaning. I'm glad that Douglas stepped up and shot that down. The over-analyzing really detracts from its other merits. -- [[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 13:58, 27 January 2008 (CST) | :::Yeah, it's a great shot from a stylistic and artistic point of view. But the ridiculous amounts of speculation this has caused wants me to bash my head against the wall. Some people really thought that everything in it has a secret meaning. I'm glad that Douglas stepped up and shot that down. The over-analyzing really detracts from its other merits. -- [[User:Serenity|Serenity]] 13:58, 27 January 2008 (CST) | ||
::The thing I don't get about Douglas's shoot-down take on the intrepretations of the photo is that, as this article makes explicit, Moore provided a commentary notes that seems to match with the way the actors are proped and posed, so it's kind of confusing to say that nothing in the image means anything... or is it just me in my normal spirit of confusion? --[[User:Mars|Mars]] 19:09, 10 February 2008 (CST) | |||
Revision as of 01:09, 11 February 2008
Aaron Douglas' comments about this photo need to be included as well... They can be located via the LJ. -- Joe Beaudoin So say we all - Donate - Sanctuary Wiki — New 18:33, 25 January 2008 (CST)
- Done. --Serenity 18:49, 25 January 2008 (CST)
- That's a fun photo. --Spencerian 13:45, 27 January 2008 (CST)
- Yeah, it's a great shot from a stylistic and artistic point of view. But the ridiculous amounts of speculation this has caused wants me to bash my head against the wall. Some people really thought that everything in it has a secret meaning. I'm glad that Douglas stepped up and shot that down. The over-analyzing really detracts from its other merits. -- Serenity 13:58, 27 January 2008 (CST)
- The thing I don't get about Douglas's shoot-down take on the intrepretations of the photo is that, as this article makes explicit, Moore provided a commentary notes that seems to match with the way the actors are proped and posed, so it's kind of confusing to say that nothing in the image means anything... or is it just me in my normal spirit of confusion? --Mars 19:09, 10 February 2008 (CST)
- That's a fun photo. --Spencerian 13:45, 27 January 2008 (CST)