|
Arist posted:Are you really having this much trouble understanding "it is a bad idea to make your movie four hours long"? Yes. Please explain why that's the case, in a world where people regularly binge watch 30 hours of The Office (U.S.).
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 05:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 14:26 |
|
|
Because the thing you have made up isn’t real.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 05:45
|
|
|
Long movies are cool. I like the Ultimate Cut of Watchmen, the extended editions of Lord of the Rings, Lawrence of Arabia. I guess in some universe "You're getting a very long movie by a director you like" is a serious gotcha moment and we've all been owned.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 05:46
|
|
|
Aphrodite posted:Because the thing you have made up isn’t real. What am I making up, exactly? Season 1 True Detective was like 8 hours long, and people absolutely loved that poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 05:48
|
|
|
If you really don't understand the simple difference the presentation can have on the viewing experience between the three act-structure of a movie spread over four hours versus the same three-act structure repeated individually over a dozen episodes of a sitcom, well, I'm sorry, but I don't think it's worth arguing this with you. It's not just about time commitment. e: episodes, by their very nature, are easier to digest
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 05:51
|
|
|
Arist posted:If you really don't understand the simple difference the presentation can have on the viewing experience between the three act-structure of a movie spread over four hours versus the same three-act structure repeated individually over a dozen episodes of a sitcom, well, I'm sorry, but I don't think it's worth arguing this with you. It's not just about time commitment. OK, so what if a movie has over 3 acts in it's presentation (Since you know, not all movies have 3 acts), and the egregious film in question gives you the ability to pause and continue over days or weeks? KVeezy3 fucked around with this message at 06:05 on Jan 31, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 05:53
|
|
|
Anyway, I'm still confused at the dude who's convinced I only talk about the Snyder Cut in here. Weird poo poo going down in this thread
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 05:53
|
|
|
There’s a difference yeah. But it doesn’t mean something is better or worse because it’s longer or shorter. You can have a 3 hour movie that feels like 90 minutes, and a 90 minute movie that feels like 3. It’s just all down to pacing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 05:53
|
|
|
Arist posted:Anyway, I'm still confused at the dude who's convinced I only talk about the Snyder Cut in here. Weird poo poo going down in this thread Ingmar Bergman made a 5+ hour cut of one of his later films; did he just not understand that movies have a specific act/length limit to adhere to?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 05:56
|
|
|
What everyone has to understand is that the indoctrination of Snyder's cult of personality is so complete that things that are usually seen as bad filmmaking decisions are always somehow warped into being good actually, as long as Snyder does it. If you don't like a character, you just don't get the point because unlikable characters are actually good, you see. That's the point. He did it on purpose! What's pacing? Films don't need pacing! Just put more film into a film 'cuz more film is good! More films should be four hours long!
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 05:59
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:Ingmar Bergman made a 5+ hour cut of one of his later films; did he not just understand that film has a specific act/length limit to adhere to? Again its not impossible to make a good 5 hour movie or whatever it's just incredibly hard. I am vocal about my dislike for Snyder films but nothing on his work makes me think the script or his directing will justify a 4 hour run time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 05:59
|
|
|
Monaghan posted:Again its not impossible to make a good 5 hour movie or whatever it's just incredibly hard. Okay, so what are we talking about again? An unreleased film you've arbitrarily decided to be already worthless in your mind?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:03
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:Okay, so what are we talking about again? An unreleased film you've decided is already worthless in your mind? So you can't say anything bad about an upcoming movie until you have seen it. I can't say " this seems like a bad idea" at publicly available information?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:05
|
|
|
FilthyImp posted:Arist just gets bent put of shape whenever Snyderfilms come up. ImpAtom posted:If the "actually we only brought everyone back for a very short scene" stuff is true then it's loving inexcusable that Snyder went out of his way to get Jared Leto to join the cast for one scene. It's the latter. Snyder had an idea for a scene with the Joker and he talked to Leto about it who agreed to do it. . Your feelings on the matter are absolutely understandable though, as the rumors around Leto are unpleasant. Zack did boot out Chris Delia for sending weird sexual dms to underaged women and replaced him with Tig Natarro for Army of the dead. I don't think he'd have been asked back if any official allegation had surfaced, for what it's worth. Monaghan posted:I am dying to know how the Snyder verse fans will try to spin a 4 hour movie not being a loving slog to get through. This isn't exactly the first four hour film, my dude. Return of the king extended edition comes to mind, and the irishman was 209 minutes as well. And this might surprise you, but there are plenty of folks who enjoyed BvS UE too. Snyder didn't invent 4 hour movies. Arist posted:Are you really having this much trouble understanding "it is a bad idea to make your movie four hours long"? Why are you so angry all the time? Jesus man, chill
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:07
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:OK, so what if a movie has over 3 acts in it's presentation? A film that you can pause and continue over days or weeks? Buddy, I'm not sure Visionary Director Zack Snyder has made some experimental fourteen act masterpiece here. Especially since, if anything we know about this movie is true, it had to be released in theaters at some point with at least 1.25 hours trimmed off of it. I find it much more likely that he's just dumping all the footage he has into one cut and releasing it because he knows his fans will go apeshit for it. Which, whatever, that's their prerogative. None of that, of course, is relevant to the ultimate quality of the finished product. But this is: they want to release this as a movie, so we need to judge it as one, not some weird experiment best digested by scientifically determining the perfect parts to pause and put it aside for three days so you don't get bored. CelticPredator posted:There’s a difference yeah. But it doesn’t mean something is better or worse because it’s longer or shorter. Yes, but if you make a four hour movie, I would say your job is much, much harder than if you were making something even just one hour shorter. KVeezy3 posted:Ingmar Bergman made a 5+ hour cut of one of his later films; did he just not understand that movies has a specific act/length limit to adhere to? This is a complete non-sequitur from the post you quoted. But also, comparing Snyder to Bergman is laughable. But also also, you couldn't pay me to watch a 5 hour Bergman film. Sorry to bring up Black Panther, but it's a good example here: there's a deleted scene near the middle of the film where W'kabi has a conversation with Okoye. W'kabi is rather underserved by the finished movie, and this scene does a lot for both characters, helping sell their relationship and W'kabi's headspace. I think it should have stayed in the movie, but I understand why it was cut, because it slows the movie down at a time when it needs to move very quickly. Scenes get cut for reasons like this all the time. I get why directors want to make vanity versions of their films that don't cut anything, but at the end of the day you have to make something people actually want to watch.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:07
|
|
|
It is sort of bewildering that "A four hour movie almost certainly is not edited as tightly as it could be" is somehow now considered a wild statement. Movies are designed differently from TV shows. You can see this in situations where television shows are cut to be movies and vice-versa. They do not have the same pacing and structure. "How can you say something is too long when people binge TV shows" ignores the fact that TV shows are structures to be watched that way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:08
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:What everyone has to understand is that the indoctrination of Snyder's cult of personality is so complete that things that are usually seen as bad filmmaking decisions are always somehow warped into being good actually, as long as Snyder does it. I also think it's good when Peter Jackson does it, and more four hour long movie epics would be cool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:08
|
|
|
Roth posted:I also think it's good when Peter Jackson does it, and more four hour long movie epics would be cool. Yes the Hobbit absolutely benefitted from being three loving movies. That absolutely was a good thing and not at all something that absolutely ruined it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:11
|
|
|
Monaghan posted:So you can't say anything bad about an upcoming movie until you have seen it. I can say " this seems like a bad idea and is a very weird decision." at publicly available information? Uh, you can say whatever you want, but also note that what you say can be called into question. The critical example here being that it, ostensibly, should it never be a creative decision to make a film 4 hours long? Arist posted:... lol, OK so what are even talking about? Bergman isn't forcing you watch the 5+ hour cut of one of his films.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:12
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Yes the Hobbit absolutely benefitted from being three loving movies. That absolutely was a good thing and not at all something that absolutely ruined it. Consider if it had been one, four hour long movie instead.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:13
|
|
|
Lawrence of Arabia is my favorite film. The problem isn't the length. The problem is that it's going to be a four hour Justice League film by Zack Snyder. I'm someone that actually enjoys Man of Steel and I want nothing to do with that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:13
|
|
|
Roth posted:Consider if it had been one, four hour long movie instead. That would both have been better than what we got and worse than a well-edited film. The original animated Hobbit was an hour and 30 minutes and covered almost everything. Even adding an hour to that would be stretching
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:14
|
|
|
X-O posted:Lawrence of Arabia is my favorite film. The problem isn't the length. The problem is that it's going to be a four hour Justice League film by Zack Snyder. I'm someone that actually enjoys Man of Steel and I want nothing to do with that. O.K., but no one is forcing you to watch the oppressive 4+ hour cut of Justice League.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:14
|
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:O.K. but no one is forcing you to watch the oppressive 4 hour cut of Justice League. No poo poo. Nobody is forcing you to post dumb things either. But here we are.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:15
|
|
|
The best example of extra movie making a movie worse is probably the extra Return of the King stuff in LotR, where there are extra whole plot points that actively worked against the storytelling. Aragorn's appearance with the army of the dead, for instance, loses a lot of its umph in the extended cut because the exact scene already happened earlier with an unnecessary pirate boat capture. And like, I wanted to see Gandalf face off against the Witch King too but it hosed with the time frame of the battle and forced them to literally recolor a bunch of the other scenes into an ugly graytone in order to line it up. Oh man that reminds me of the scene in Two Towers where Eowyn feeds Aragorn bad soup and he lies to make her feel better. That was...real anime. Cutting it in the theatrical was a good idea. edit: Roth posted:I also think it's good when Peter Jackson does it, and more four hour long movie epics would be cool. BrianWilly fucked around with this message at 06:21 on Jan 31, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:15
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:That would both have been better than what we got and worse than a well-edited film. The original animated Hobbit was an hour and 30 minutes and covered almost everything. Even adding an hour to that would be stretching Well edited and long are not mutually exclusive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:16
|
|
|
Roth posted:Well edited and long are not mutually exclusive. Right, the absurd part of this 'argument' (And what exposes the fantastical nature of what we're discussing), is the unnecessary excess of a film that none of us have seen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:18
|
|
|
Roth posted:Well edited and long are not mutually exclusive. While this is true the number of films that go over three hours and are well-edited can probably be counted on one hand with fingers left over.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:19
|
|
|
The idea that the response to "a four hour Justice League movie sounds like a bad idea" is "Well no one's FORCING you to watch it" is mind boggling to me yeah dog no one's forcing me to watch the Jared Leto Morbius movie either and I will still voice my opinion that it sounds really loving bad
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:20
|
|
|
I'm looking forward to that one actually 
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:24
|
|
|
BrianWilly posted:I'm looking forward to that one actually Please don't support the lovely awful person's movie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:25
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:While this is true the number of films that go over three hours and are well-edited can probably be counted on one hand with fingers left over. And? Justice League is not yet out, and while much of this thread thinks a four hour Zack Snyder movie sounds like a slog, I think it sounds rad. By contrast, I found Force Majeure, a movie that is just under 2 hours, a miserable slog that I wish was 30 minutes long. There is nothing wrong with Zack Snyder, or any filmmaker, making a long movie like this, unless hating said filmmaker is a core part of your identity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:26
|
|
|
Roth posted:And? Justice League is not yet out, and while much of this thread thinks a four hour Zack Snyder movie sounds like a slog, I think it sounds rad. By contrast, I found Force Majeure, a movie that is just under 2 hours, a miserable slog that I wish was 30 minutes long. Alternately one could say that there is nothing wrong with pointing out the flaws in that concept unless loving said filmmaker no matter what is a core part of your identity. It is in fact just as lovely to make that accusation. There's nothing wrong with doing an entire movie in negative too but it is still something that is most likely to be flawed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:27
|
|
|
Roth posted:There is nothing wrong with Zack Snyder, or any filmmaker, making a long movie like this, unless hating said filmmaker is a core part of your identity. It's almost like the people saying "this seems like a bad idea" have some kind of... history... of film(????) to work off of?
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:28
|
|
|
Primarily that a four hour action movie sounds more exhausting than anything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:30
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Alternately one could say that there is nothing wrong with pointing out the flaws in that concept unless loving said filmmaker no matter what is a core part of your identity. It is in fact just as lovely to make that accusation. Oh don't mind me, I am actually just having a little fun at the expense of the thread regulars that start whining about cultists at the drop of a hat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:34
|
|
|
Considering the original Justice League was boring and it only had 50% of the runtime of this mysterious Snyder cut I’m gonna say 4 hours is way too long for a superhero action movie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:35
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:It is sort of bewildering that "A four hour movie almost certainly is not edited as tightly as it could be" is somehow now considered a wild statement. Wolf of Wall Street feels 2 hours shorter than Infinity War despite being a few minutes longer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:41
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Alternately one could say that there is nothing wrong with pointing out the flaws in that concept unless loving said filmmaker no matter what is a core part of your identity. It is in fact just as lovely to make that accusation. The presumption that Snyder would film a 4+ hour cut as a form of retribution to his haters is entirely part of the overall fantasy of 'doing an entire movie in negative'. Mr. Humalong posted:Considering the original Justice League was boring and it only had 50% of the runtime of this mysterious Snyder cut I’m gonna say 4 hours is way too long for a superhero action movie. FYI, the theatrical cut that we've seen constitutes less than 10% of ZSJL.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 14:26 |
|
|
KVeezy3 posted:The presumption that Snyder would film a 4+ hour cut as a form of retribution to his haters is entirely part of the overall fantasy of 'doing an entire movie in negative'. It is a good thing literally nobody said that? The most likely outcome is that Snyder is given the chance to make a film without having to kill his darlings which is potentially fun but even the best creators know that usually you have to do that for a reason. That does not necessarily mean it will be bad but it certainly is a warning sign that people have understandable reasons to be cautious about. Like I can say this about a lot of movies. Even movies I love sometimes are reluctant to let things go even when they work against the film as a whole. This is an extremely common criticism of film. Acting like it's being Unfairly Applied To Zach Snyder is being way too weirdly defensive, ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 06:48 on Jan 31, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2021 06:44
|
|