Keep track of everything you watch; tell your friends.
If your account is linked with Facebook and you have turned on sharing, this will show up in your activity feed. If not, you can turn on sharing
here
.
I rather liked Opus I, II and III when I came across them, but for some reason -- perhaps I was getting a little tired on this occasion after having seen II, III and IV consecutively in a batch! -- I didn't find this one so enjoyable. The flow of the shapes seemed more arbitrary and less subconsciously fascinating, and it was all starting to look a bit the same.
Basically this is a similar piece to the others in the series: shapes of a fluid or a jagged nature appear from either side of the screen, swell up, chase each other and occasionally, thanks to the tints applied to the film print, change colour. It didn't seem to have quite such a fortuitous rhythm to it, though, and I found myself starting to get bored. I wonder if the longer running time (Opus IV was shown at approximately one minute longer than its predecessors) was implicated.
1 of 3 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
I rather liked Opus I, II and III when I came across them, but for some reason -- perhaps I was getting a little tired on this occasion after having seen II, III and IV consecutively in a batch! -- I didn't find this one so enjoyable. The flow of the shapes seemed more arbitrary and less subconsciously fascinating, and it was all starting to look a bit the same.
Basically this is a similar piece to the others in the series: shapes of a fluid or a jagged nature appear from either side of the screen, swell up, chase each other and occasionally, thanks to the tints applied to the film print, change colour. It didn't seem to have quite such a fortuitous rhythm to it, though, and I found myself starting to get bored. I wonder if the longer running time (Opus IV was shown at approximately one minute longer than its predecessors) was implicated.