Cracker: Wallywood
735 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 14 15 16 17 18 … 30 Newer→ Last
-
It isn't fair to say that Gio's objecting to prosaic analysis; rather he objects to the rejection of analysis.
Would you say this thread, up to its 13th page, has been characterised by the rejection of analysis?
-
Not saying that it's everything; just that it's not nothing.
An objective outlook on one's own subjectivity?
What I can't fathom is that it has taken until page 13 to get to existentialism. Spooky.
-
You've complained about the director prescribing the way the film can be thought of -- but you seem outraged by people declining to think of it in quite the way you do
If you say so. I'm not about to go and collect quotes again, but I've made abundantly clear what the attitude was that I objected to. And I've said fifteen different times that if people want to enjoy Avatar as a spectacle, that's fine by me, and if they want to praise it as a film of ideas, that is also fine and perfectly defensible. Yet I seem to get boxed into petulant bitching anyway, which rather proves my point if you ask me.
Yeah, I thought that “desperate bitching” comment was pretty petulant, too. Poor baby.
Wait, that was Gio, right?
:-)
I'm delighted, but not surprised, that we have come to re-evaluate Robot Monster to the extent that we have.
-
Compelling enough for you?
Well, it's not quite "you provide the prose poems and I'll provide the war" ...
-
I really don't get how the matrix can be seen as a deep movie.
Type Zizek and Matrix into Google some time.
-
a film can be used to pass the time, impress a date, learn factual information from, etc., but "good"/"bad"/"better"/"worse" means judging a film as a film, ie it's aesthetic qualities.
Ah, but you'd probably choose a different type of film, based on whichever one of those scenarios was applicable, no?
If you wanted to impress a date, you probably wouldn't go to see L'Humanité - a film which (and not to beat about the bush, if you'll excuse the phrase) opens with an extreme close-up of a dead womans vagina.
Depending on the date, of course. On the first date with the lady who was subsequently foolish enough to marry me, I thought it was quite appropriate to choose 'Apocalypse Now'. Hmmmm, I love the smell of romance in the morning.
So whether a film is 'good', or 'bad' is going to be contextually dependent.
Rich, I must be Asian then, because I loved The Seven Samurai and was also bemused by Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon , and have still yet to see Citizen Kane despite a lifetime of assurances I can't live without it.
Ah, but we're not talking about you, Ben. We're talking about those others. Them. That amorphous mass out there somewhere. Lurking. Waiting. That blank canvas onto which we can project.
-
Ah, but we're not talking about you, Ben. We're talking about those others. Them. That amorphous mass out there somewhere. Lurking. Waiting. That blank canvas onto which we can project.
You're talking about the Matrix now, aren't you?
-
Ah, but you'd probably choose a different type of film, based on whichever one of those scenarios was applicable, no?
If you wanted to impress a date, you probably wouldn't go to see L'Humanité - a film which (and not to beat about the bush, if you'll excuse the phrase) opens with an extreme close-up of a dead womans vagina.
Depending on the date, of course. On the first date with the lady who was subsequently foolish enough to marry me, I thought it was quite appropriate to choose 'Apocalypse Now'. Hmmmm, I love the smell of romance in the morning.
So whether a film is 'good', or 'bad' is going to be contextually dependent.
But that's not good or bad. That's just appropriate or inappropriate, suitable or unsuitable. If you're putting a DVD on to entertain your kids, The Little Mermaid would be more suitable than The Godfather. But it's not a better movie.
-
What I can't fathom is that it has taken until page 13 to get to existentialism. Spooky.
Existentialism after Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. There is a spooky protocol to these things. Expect Jonathan Livingston Seagull by around page 17.
-
I have the dvd for you, and I believe you'll like something about it beyond reputation
It's queued up in Fatso about 2 from now. If I hadn't got started on Outrageous Fortune (the allure of all that rude sex and swearing drew me in) I'd have seen it by now.
-
If you're putting a DVD on to entertain your kids, The Little Mermaid would be more suitable than The Godfather.
You know I'm going to have to dispute that, right?
-
You know I'm going to have to dispute that, right?
Please do. I should have qualified that with: my kids are girls aged six, five and three. But if your kids are Italian ...
-
To reassure any CYFS representative who may be in attendance, we fast forward through the toll booth scene.
-
Existentialism after Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. There is a spooky protocol to these things.
It's rude to jump straight to Existentialism.
To reassure any CYFS representative who may be in attendance, we fast forward through the toll booth scene.
Good call, high speed turns tragedy into comedy.
-
The Little Mermaid would be more suitable than The Godfather. But it's not a better movie.
It's a better children's movie, though.
So separating subjective/objective good/bad is quite difficult.
It seems like what is wanted is a set of objective measuring tools that crosses all genres.
For example, off the top of my head:
Does it relate to one of the seven basic plot types?
Does it follow the 3-act structure?
Does the 'break into the second' occur on or around minute 13?
Is the narrative arc of the main character strong and focussed?Those would be examples of your top-level ones.
The you might have secondary ones, like:
Is it well-acted?
Is it well-lit?
Was the audio good?
Did it contain, where appropriate, good use of 'show, don't tell'?and so on.
-
Expect Jonathan Livingston Seagull by around page 17.
But that's just a book about a bird with magic powers, though. Right...?
-
Does it relate to one of the seven basic plot types?
Does it follow the 3-act structure?
Does the 'break into the second' occur on or around minute 13?
Is the narrative arc of the main character strong and focussed?Does it have unity of action, time and place? Aristotle is going to insist on this. And would say that Citizen Kane is objectively terrible.
-
Aristotle is going to insist on this. And would say that Citizen Kane is objectively terrible.
Physiognomics FTW?
-
The Little Mermaid would be more suitable than The Godfather. But it's not a better movie.
It's a better children's movie, though.
So separating subjective/objective good/bad is quite difficult.
But children's movie is a subset of movie. The Godfather Part III is a better gangster film than 2001: A Space Odyssey. But no one would say it is a better film. Howard the Duck is a better film about a duck than Citizen Kane.
-
Does it have unity of action, time and place? Aristotle is going to insist on this.
Yes, but I've never been able to take him seriously as a director since Godfather vs MechaGodzilla.
What a turkey that was.
-
3410,
It's a better children's movie, though.
That's fine if you're judging it as a children's movie.
The Yellow Pages is a better book than The Great Gatsby, if you're looking for an effective doorstop. As literature though...
-
3410,
Howard the Duck is a better film about a duck than Citizen Kane.
One of the things I love about language is that we're constantly saying things that have never, ever been said before.
-
But children's movie is a subset of movie. The Godfather Part III is a better gangster film than 2001: A Space Odyssey. But no one would say it is a better film. Howard the Duck is a better film about a duck than Citizen Kane.
It's an interesting device you're using here, but I don't really see how it proves that Citizen Kane as a capital em Movie is better than The Little Mermaid or Howard the Duck.
Children's books are a subset of books. Alice in Wonderland is a better children's book than The Da Vinci Code. But it's also arguably a better Book than The Da Vinci Code. I just don't think it's a conclusion that can be reached without, you know, arguing.
(Young Frankenstein is a parody of a horror movie, which is about as subset as it gets. Now I'm sure that Citizen Kane in very many terribly important respects is a better movie than Young Frankenstein, but if I had to bring just one of them on a desert island, I'd reach for Young Frankenstein without batting an eyelid.)
-
Does it relate to one of the seven basic plot types?
Does it follow the 3-act structure?
Does the 'break into the second' occur on or around minute 13?
Is the narrative arc of the main character strong and focussed?When you get into whether or not a film needs to conform to these kinds of story points to satisfy an audience is where good and bad can get subjective. We were talking about Tarkovsky earlier. He didn't exactly tick these boxes. Nor does Bela Tarr or Carlos Reygadas or Apichatpong Weerasethakul or any number of more experimental film-makers who haven't exactly been starved of praise from critics and festivals.
-
I just don't think it's a conclusion that can be reached without, you know, arguing.
I thought we were arguing. But I'm not going to try to prove to you that Citizen Kane is a better movie than Howard the Duck because I know you already agree. Or do you disagree?
Post your response…
This topic is closed.