I don't "get" sports fans - Page 6

That may be it. I'll admit a pronounced bias on my part, since the particulars of these aesthetics on the sports end aren't my cup of tea, which is why I can only make some tentative assumptions in regard to how the appeal works.

This makes sense to me. I tried (maybe unsuccessfully) to stay away from suggesting that the actual win/lose was the sum total of sports' appeal for fans. It's more that, as Gumbrecht is saying, the underlying sense of competition drives the aesthetics. So it's perfectly possible that kungfumonkeymike can derive a lot of aesthetic pleasure from watching tennis without even seeing the end of the match, but the competition is still highly relevant in defining what makes the aesthetics appealing to him. In other words, even if Mike doesn't care who wins, it's only interesting to watch because the players care who wins.

Such is the way of my employer's web anxiety. You should see what it does to threads with a heavy visual component.

AESTHETIC VS ATHLETIC?

What of the activities that sort of blend the 2 (art & sport)? Grace meeting competition in ballroom dancing, martial arts, synchronized swimming, figure skating, etc.

Ballet (aesthetic) and gymnastics (athletic) bookend these crossover examples, but share so many similarities.

And I'm gonna sound gay when I say this, but ballet and football have more in common than people think.

As mentioned, there is an aesthetic element to sports - all sports. They're just fundamentally different from the arts in that competition is the underlying, motivating force that inspires those aesthetics. When that element is more subjective or harder to perceive, some sports fans get uncomfortable about whether a sport even qualifies as such - see synchronized swimming.

Why do you think the sports you mention don't attract the audiences that football, baseball, and basketball do? It seems that the closer a sport veers toward an aesthetic-heavy, more subjectively evaluated competition, the less mainstream appeal it holds.

Very true. We might also consider American Idol and poetry slams, which impose a sport-like competition on a form that's traditionally aligned with art. Unlike the sports like synchronized swimming (even more of an extreme case than gymnastics, I'd argue) that most closely resemble art (i.e., are evaluated more subjectively, in which the aesthetics are the means to win), American Idol - in a loose sense, "art" that closely resembles "sport" - is hugely popular in the mainstream. But, similarly, huge sports fans tend to dismiss synchronized swimming at least to the point that it doesn't have the following that football does, while many huge music fans tend to perceive American Idol as a slight misapplication of art (*raises hand*). We cling to perhaps entirely incorrect notions of purity on both sides.

Herschel Walker took ballet lessons during his playing career to help his running.

What's interesting about AMERICAN IDOL, is that in spite of being a subjective art (voice especially, but also musicality, performance, audience emotional connection, and even the looks department), it's proposed that it can still be judged by a small panel of experts (and also by a TV audience). Popular vote and art is a tricky thing. Probably why it's called AMER. "IDOL" and not "FIRST CHAIR" or "LEAD MEZZO-SOPRANO". It's also key to not that the show also positions gender and musical style against each other, making the competition even more subjective.

Arts w/ the competition angle have definitely gotten a boost since reality TV's exploded. Before, the competition existed in the workplace (especially commercial art) due to careers, contracts, clients, prestige, limited opportunities, etc. Now we have people going against each other for a chance to achieve their dreams faster and garner approval from the TV audience of strangers (no longer just your client and boss): interior design, hair styling (art? maybe), runway fashion, culinary arts, etc. Movie Stars and Pro Athletes make it big (get rich and famous quickly); I want the American Dream too... just in the cake baking field! If Vince Papale or Jimmy Morris, ordinary guys off the street can do it, why can't I? Just give me the arena (whether it's MMA fighting or landscaping), the chance to show what I've got, and I'll knock your socks off. Not to further derail (and certainly not to support reality television), but in a generation where job security is down, in a time when it's difficult to support your family on a single income, in a job market where a 4 year degree isn't enough anymore, in a society where image and popularity are more important than ever, these dangling carrots are very attractive for common people.

Art (film, music, painting, you name it), as long as people have been paid for it, has always had a competition element tainting (and yet at the same time pushing) it's purpose and evolution. Even within the fine art "vaccuum" (or art for art's sake), improvement (self-competition) is present.

While watching the summer games this year, I remember noting the different competitions that require different scoring systems. Volleyball (like Tennis, Basketball, Baseball, Football, Golf, and any "ball" sport) is fairly clear cut (unless the ref is blind) and based on a set of rules and scoring against the other team. Running and swimming are timed and there's a concrete path and finish line. Very clear. But... even though there are criteria (GUIDELINES), diving and gymnastics require an average of multiple and subjective opinions. Form and precision are key, but aesthetic and preference starts to creep in here.

Just observations (or ramblings), not arguments.

You make some interesting points, but there is nothing competitive inherent in film as a product. It just is there to be considered as a film. The competition aspect is peripheral. What is sport without competition?

But my point was that finding comparisons between people that love movies and people that love sports isn't difficult, at all.

Not in the actual finished standalone piece. Just in the industry itself... financing, auditioning, recruiting talent, positioning, marketing, etc. Being a product implies that competition isn't far away (behind the scenes, or as you said, "peripheral"), but, you're right... the competition isn't necessarily an element of the enjoyment or viewing experience (besides the presence of conflict or "drama" as others have also pointed out).

But... another angle: How difficult would film critique be if there wasn't a catalog of past examples to set standards, compare, inspire, remake? Looking back and placing 2 films side by side (whether it's consciously or unconsciously) is a sort of competition. This new film is competing against memory/past film experiences, forever shifting around in a taste heirarchy within the viewer's mind, competing for the viewer's awareness, discussion, analysis, future DVD allowance. A single film (like an art and its artist) struggles to standout against all the noise (now more than ever in the information and internet age) within the history of cinema, to be viewed, to become relevant, immortal.

I know as a film-watcher, I'm always looking for that undiscovered gem that blows me away. The new experience. The film that pushes the boundary (like rooting for the athlete that pushes his/her body beyond what is thought to be possible), creating something new and exciting, evolutionary/revolutionary. I'm not a fair-weather fan for the genuinely good movies I like (and even the guilty pleasures), but as an avid film-geek, I'm constantly searching for wider horizons, weighing craft and emotional investment with every flick, comparing, growing, learning. Cross-genre? Cross-training.

Dmitri Martin: "An ex-girlfriend is the same as an OK movie. I liked it at the time but i don't want to see it again.Especially if the movie is kind of...a bitch."


Or I'm talking nonsense.

Now if we take into consideration ON THE LOT or PROJECT GREENLIGHT, that's a whole 'nother story.

EDIT: This post is too out there. Apologies.

Oh yes, sure. I was on the whole 'artform' kick for some reason.