|
lazorexplosion posted:In this episode of CD, posters who haven't seen the film decide people who have seen it are wrong about it. Yes it was very bad people on CD didn't agree with you about [relevant movie], it's totally important to wait for CD's pratfall or whatever. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 09:37 on Aug 3, 2016 |
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 09:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 23:08 |
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:Uhhh I strongly disagree, maybe u just like continuity editing or w/e it's called? Things like continuity and editing are like referees. If they're doing their job you shouldn't notice them at all. If you're interested in it, then sure, you can critique it as good and make a point of analysing it. It is there. But for the average movie goer, A really bad cut or edit is something I'm going to notice as it takes me out of the story, which is the whole reason I'm there in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 10:35
|
|
|
Guy A. Person posted:Even if you are the type of person who thinks CD is skewed by a bunch of purposely contradictory nerds or whatever, a recent example was GB16 which was floating on an 85% fresh score for awhile while general consensus was hovering around "average" overall. It's seriously just a bad metric for judging, a 90% can mean "rave reviews" of "a lot of reviewers thought it was just north of decent", that 10% who gave it negative reviews could be more insightful, etc. Seriously, find someone who aligns with your views on other movies and read the content of the review. Yeah, the only thing the RT score tells us is that the critics generally gave favourable/unfavourable reviews. That statistic is only of any value if you're discussing the critical reaction to the movie, it's of almost zero value in predicting whether the film will be enjoyable, or whether the film is well made, or whether the film will do good business. I go on about box office grosses a lot but only because I'm fascinated by the business side of Hollywood, not because that's a useful metric for judging the quality of films. CityMidnightJunky posted:Things like continuity and editing are like referees. If they're doing their job you shouldn't notice them at all. Eh, for a certain style of editing, sure. If the editor is just trying to ensure that the narrative is conveyed in the clearest possible manner then it'll be pretty much invisible. If it's something like Crank where the editing is highly stylistic it'll be noticable but still enjoyable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 10:57
|
|
|
CityMidnightJunky posted:Things like continuity and editing are like referees. If they're doing their job you shouldn't notice them at all. If you're interested in it, then sure, you can critique it as good and make a point of analysing it. It is there. But for the average movie goer, A really bad cut or edit is something I'm going to notice as it takes me out of the story, which is the whole reason I'm there in the first place. Well first of all my bad Picard Day pointed out what I was talking about is called invisible editing. But like, would you agree that you define good editing as being unnoticeable and any edit that you absolutely notice is bad because it "takes you out of the story"? Cuz that's what I was saying I strongly disagree with ( and again my bad with the terms I probably made it confusing). Because a movie is so much more than just it's 'story' in that sense. Like I dunno that's the whole thing with film, it's visual & auditory & well obviously u know all that you've seen movies (hell - we're in the movie subforum) . It's just that it kinda seems like you're describing story as some abstracted thing that everything else "serves". But that doesn't make sense 2 me because that sorta imagines some ethereal version of a movie that doesn't actually exist. U know what I mean? Like if some element of a movie 'takes you out of the story' then what is the "story"? Like isn't the camera & the editing & everything the story? Because I mean that's what exists - that's the movie. So instead when you say some element separated you from/failed to live up to the story it kinda implies ur judging it not for what it is but relative to a hypothetical story that maybe exists in your head as your preferred form. Idk I'm not the best at explaining stuff But like if we remove the story thing maybe it's like. Edits are bad - because you notice them - what's bad about noticing them? That you don't feel uh "immersed" in the film? What makes immersion preferable? Because otherwise you start thinking about the fact that you're watching a movie? What's wrong with that? Because then you aren't as directly emotionally invested in the stakes of the film? Why does an awareness of what's going on lessen emotional investment & what's the inherent value in emotional investme- & I'm going 2 stop having a hypothetical argument with myself since that is just terrible posting technique. But uh, do you kinda get where I'm coming from here?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 11:21
|
|
|
If noticing edits is a bad thing, then what about French New Wave which having jarring edits was kinda the deal about it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 11:33
|
|
|
lazorexplosion posted:In this episode of CD, posters who haven't seen the film decide people who have seen it are wrong about it. You'd think it was a rerun but they recycle this plot a lot
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 13:59
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:Well first of all my bad Picard Day pointed out what I was talking about is called invisible editing. But like, would you agree that you define good editing as being unnoticeable and any edit that you absolutely notice is bad because it "takes you out of the story"? I do. Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 14:01
|
|
|
MrFlibble posted:If you're being entertained by a movie why would you notice the editing? You'd be caught up in the story / visuals / score / whatever it is you like in a movie. You should watch Raging Bull.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 14:10
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:But like if we remove the story thing maybe it's like. Edits are bad - because you notice them - what's bad about noticing them? That you don't feel uh "immersed" in the film? What makes immersion preferable? Because otherwise you start thinking about the fact that you're watching a movie? What's wrong with that? Because then you aren't as directly emotionally invested in the stakes of the film? Why does an awareness of what's going on lessen emotional investment & what's the inherent value in emotional investme- & I'm going 2 stop having a hypothetical argument with myself since that is just terrible posting technique. For a recent example of stellar editing that deliberately calls attention to that kind of artifice at every possible opportunity, see The Big Short
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
TheFallenEvincar posted:My problem with these reviews..It's not that I think the DC movies are good, I'm more surprised by these same critics fawning over Marvel films I see about as equally disorganized and mediocre. Like I'm sure Suicide Squad is a stupid mess, but you didn't think Civil War was a stupid mess? If you think Civil War was a mess you should probably just stop watching superhero movies. They will never, ever satisfy you. Its easily the best superhero movie since Spider-man 2.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
Civil War's problem is not that it's a mess, but that it's a depressing mess.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:13
|
|
|
SolidSnakesBandana posted:If you think Civil War was a mess you should probably just stop watching superhero movies. They will never, ever satisfy you. Its easily the best superhero movie since Spider-man 2. It isn't even the best superhero movie in its own trilogy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:20
|
|
|
SolidSnakesBandana posted:Its easily the best superhero movie since Spider-man 2. Strange how I hear this every year.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:20
|
|
|
Can someone remind me what the good superhero movies are then? Because I'm pretty sure this thread hates each individual one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:22
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Strange how I hear this every year. You didn't hear it in 2003. Check. Mate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
The Phantom, Batman 1966, The Green Hornet 1930 serial, and Our American Cousin
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:25
|
|
|
Blade is legitimately one of the greatest genre films of all time
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
SolidSnakesBandana posted:Can someone remind me what the good superhero movies are then? Because I'm pretty sure this thread hates each individual one. Civil War was great, but I still gotta say I prefer Guardians of the Galaxy, Deadpool, Winter Soldier, probably a few others. Still...great movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:28
|
|
SolidSnakesBandana posted:Can someone remind me what the good superhero movies are then? Because I'm pretty sure this thread hates each individual one. Also your issue here is that you are, by exclusion, trying to paint superhero films as special delicate snowflakes that shouldn't be judged by the same standards one applies to, say, independence day 2. Even if a film is good "by superhero standards," it should still be rightly called out as poo poo if the shoe fits.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
Civil War was merely good but forgettable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
The more distant I get from it, it just seems nonsensical, but not in the good way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
mr. stefan posted:Also your issue here is that you are, by exclusion, trying to paint superhero films as special delicate snowflakes that shouldn't be judged by the same standards one applies to, say, independence day 2. I think its fair to judge based on genre. It would be the same if I were to ask what some good romantic comedies were. I'm not asking which movies are objectively good, I'm asking which are the best among this genre. In the thread for the genre of movie in question no less. Phylodox posted:Civil War was great, but I still gotta say I prefer Guardians of the Galaxy, Deadpool, Winter Soldier, probably a few others. Still...great movie. I like this list.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
Hat Thoughts posted:Well first of all my bad Picard Day pointed out what I was talking about is called invisible editing. But like, would you agree that you define good editing as being unnoticeable and any edit that you absolutely notice is bad because it "takes you out of the story"? I'm the dumb person who puts story and character above almost all else, so let me see if I can take a crack at my POV that you all will hate. Honestly, bad editing feels like watching a movie on cable. You catch it in the middle of the night, and you just start to get into it. The story is really engaging, the characters are interesting. The story is building and building and then WHAM! GIECO commercial, McDonalds ad, here buy some loving As Seen On TV poo poo! Okay well back to your movie now. The movie isn't ruined, but that feeling you felt, the excitement...is just deflated. To me, the worst cut I've ever seen in a film is in Batman V Superman, both versions. It's that fuckin Wonder Woman scene where she watches all the Justice League stuff. It sucks so bad because of where it's placed. At that point in the film, all the plot points have converged. Batman just fought Superman. Lex Luthor is about to unleash Doomsday into the world. poo poo is about to go down. And then WHOOP! Here's a scene of someone in their hotel room watching videos for 5 minutes! Cool? Alright! Now back to the movie! I don't get why it needed to be there. You could've plugged it into the scene where Bruce finds the picture of Diana. I'm almost tempted to do it myself. You can still have the scene where Bruce is like "Who are you!??" later on, but you don't need her looking at that poo poo. It doesn't serve the story. It's less about noticing edits, because it's fine to notice them. But it becomes a problem when it just doesn't feel like it was in the right place. And I know, this isn't the way you guys watch your films. But, hey, I can only speak for myself here. Also, for the record, I don't think I've ever had the thought "Oh, this sucked, it made me realize I was watching a movie.". I just enjoy storytelling. It's neat. quote:Like isn't the camera & the editing & everything the story? Also, just gonna highlight this part and say yeah it is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:47
|
|
SolidSnakesBandana posted:I think its fair to judge based on genre. ID4:2 and Avengers are of the same genre and of similar quality, and yet one of these films is judged much less harshly by largely the same people. There is a difference between judging on genre and playing franchise favorites.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
SolidSnakesBandana posted:I think its fair to judge based on genre. It would be the same if I were to ask what some good romantic comedies were. I'm not asking which movies are objectively good, I'm asking which are the best among this genre. In the thread for the genre of movie in question no less. Blade, X2, Spider-Man 2, Superman: The Movie, Batman, Batman Returns, Captain America, The Winter Soldier, Darkman, Fasts 5 through 7
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
So the Shadow serial made in the 40s- is that worth tracking down? I've heard good things about it
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:54
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:Also, for the record, I don't think I've ever had the thought "Oh, this sucked, it made me realize I was watching a movie.". I just enjoy storytelling. It's neat. This can be done really well. Inglorious Basterds comes to mind, when the Germans are watching the German Chris Kyle propaganda movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
I liked The Shadow with Alec Baldwin.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:Civil War's problem is not that it's a mess, but that it's a depressing mess. Would you say it made you feel...bad?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
Detective No. 27 posted:This can be done really well. Inglorious Basterds comes to mind, when the Germans are watching the German Chris Kyle propaganda movie. Oh totally.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:I liked The Shadow with Alec Baldwin. It has its moments
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:It has its moments Yeah, it's one of those "almost" movies.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:It has its moments Like a lot of those movies, Dick Tracy and The Phantom among them, they have really great set and costume design which were shown the way by Burton's Batman.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:Civil War was great, but I still gotta say I prefer Guardians of the Galaxy, Deadpool, Winter Soldier, probably a few others. Still...great movie. I liked Civil War a ton but the more I follow the super hero movie genre and the internet's reactions the more it's like well to use a food analogy which I know CD loves, it's like people are arguing over places like TGIFridays, Applebees, Outback Steakhouse, Bennigans, etc. And some people are saying "Applebees is the worst restaurant in the world! TGIFs is the best place I've ever eaten!" and others are disagreeing and getting into blood feuds over it. And the truth is none of them are as bad as actually lovely restaurants or fast food, and none of them are like 4 star restaurants that take actual care with your food. Like obviously I can't speak to Suicide Squad just yet but it blows my mind how completely different the general reaction to BvS and CW is. They're such incredibly similar movies, not only in themes, budgets, ambition, etc but also they have similar story structure, similar handling of secondary and tertiary characters, a similar antagonist, similar flaws with editing and some shaky CGI at points. I can even see greatly preferring one over the other but I feel like there are people who think CW is one of the greatest in the superhero genre while BvS is if not the worst among the truly bad ones, and I just honestly don't get that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
I don't think it's a great mystery, marketing is extraordinarily effective. If people don't get what they expect, it's a problem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
The depressing part about Civil War is it quickly revealing itself to be "spinning wheels, the movie" because it's not time to punch up things for Infinity War but they still need a movie for the summer. So nobody who'll actually need to be okay for the next Avengers gets hurt or even gets a glancing blow, they sacrifice one of the "unimportant" characters the audience has now sunk cost fallacied themselves into caring about (poor Don Cheadle, having one movie where he gets to do much of anything in and it being practically erased by the ongoing "continuity" of the movies), and they leave a blatant hook for that next Avengers movie with a loving burner phone in a UPS envelope so that people feel like something happened.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I don't think it's a great mystery, marketing is extraordinarily effective. If people don't get what they expect, it's a problem. There's an article in the Hollywood Reporter today about how Warner Bros freaked out about Suicide Squad after their teaser trailer got a huge online reaction and forced Ayer to cut the movie to be like the teaser trailer. The problem we're having now is that Marvel has established a certain status quo and people are expecting that in all comic book cinema. If the Marvel Way is violated and filmmakers try to move out of the "quippy status-quo worshipping power fantasy" box they get enormous amounts of critical venom and vocal abuse, all of which drag down the movie's box office. So the economic pressure is to cave to the Marvel model and make lightweight cinematic junk food. Edit: the real interesting thing about BvS and Suicide Squad is that WB pulled the trigger on them so impulsively, as 120 million dollar movies go. Ayer got 6 weeks to write his script. When Batman v Superman was announced at Comic Con 2013 they had literally made the decision 3 days prior. Megaman's Jockstrap fucked around with this message at 16:25 on Aug 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:The more distant I get from it, it just seems nonsensical, but not in the good way. YMMV but I really liked Film Crit Hulks kind of evisceration of it and everything Marvel past their Phase 1 movies. There is a genuine joy to some of it, but despite the best efforts of the Russo's it feels kinda cynical. It's unearned crowd pleasing. It's a shame too because they've had the best villain they had in a while.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Honestly, I kind of like the idea that it's a family trait that if you come at a Wayne they're coming at you. Especially considering the Wayne family is so tied up in the very creation of Gotham city, the fact that they're aggressive sort of makes sense. Kind of more sense than the usual depiction of them being somewhat passive and the mugging just goes bad.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 23:08 |
|
|
Civil War is a Captain America movie that's not about America or being American.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2016 16:30
|
|