|
Tripwyre posted:This is one of the most technically stunning movies of the year, you are correct. Pretty well every single frame in the movie pops with bright comic book primary colour, and the sound design and score are similarly well-done. The problem is the script is such a god drat mess of slapped-together hodge-podge that no one gives a poo poo. Considering the "Bad Shot of the Day" series going on in the Comic Megathread, this movie is the anti-Avengers. I guess I liked it so much because my cinematic priorities are how a film looks, sounds and is edited - the bits that set film apart from other media. If I wanted to enjoy a story I'd go read a book.
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 14:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 15:51 |
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:I guess I liked it so much because my cinematic priorities are how a film looks, sounds and is edited - the bits that set film apart from other media. This is bizarre to me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 15:34
|
|
|
It's also just hard to take at face value because a lot of London City Nights reviews of pop films spend a lot of time on the politics of these films - which has more more to do with "story" than presentation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
Jonny Angel posted:It's also just hard to take at face value because a lot of London City Nights reviews of pop films spend a lot of time on the politics of these films - which has more more to do with "story" than presentation. Well the meaning of the images shown (and sound, editing etc etc) and how they contribute to the themes of the film are important to me. But what actually happens plotwise is largely irrelevant. This is going to sound super pretentious, but my idea of cinematic perfection is Koyaanisqatsi and its ilk. No plot, no dialogue, no characters - just images, music and sound and the way they fit together.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 15:50
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:This is going to sound super pretentious, but my idea of cinematic perfection is Koyaanisqatsi and its ilk. No plot, no dialogue, no characters - just images, music and sound and the way they fit together. I would agree, but Koyaanisqatsi this bullshit was not.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 15:54
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I would agree, but Koyaanisqatsi this bullshit was not. drat right, but I could quite happily watch enjoy watching this film with just the score and sound effects accompanying the images. Perhaps it'd be better that way. That said I know that wouldn't be everyone's cup of tea, so irrelevant minutia like Spider-Man having to deal with Gwen Stacy going to university, two planes crashing into each other or Harry Osborn being sick etc are a necessary evil to keep the audience engaged. Fortunately when a film looks and sounds this good it's easy to ignore the plot. Necrothatcher fucked around with this message at 16:08 on Aug 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 16:05
|
|
|
I will say it was less the plot that I hated the gently caress out of, but it was the characters, particularly Peter Parker himself.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:This is going to sound super pretentious, but my idea of cinematic perfection is Koyaanisqatsi and its ilk. No plot, no dialogue, no characters - just images, music and sound and the way they fit together. That's actually the opposite of pretentious. You enjoy films the way an invalid or child would. I've honestly never heard someone appreciate film in such a simple way. Don't you do reviews for a living? Who the gently caress would hire someone like you? Who is your audience? "I couldn't tell your anything about the plot because I don't care about such things but dis movie had some purty colors and sounded good! 10/10! would watch again!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 20:21
|
|
|
Personally I gave it a 10/10 because Gwen is kawaii. I don't know if the sound design helped that but it was pretty great either way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I will say it was less the plot that I hated the gently caress out of, but it was the characters, particularly Peter Parker himself. I mean Gwen loving owns in this, but I never found myself able to get invested in her as a character or trust that the movie would do right by her, because, y'know. This movie is cowardly as gently caress. Sounded good and colors were def purdy, though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
Emma Stone could do all that crap in her sleep, and Sally Field is fabulous (so good that she made me mad at the character Peter Parker acting like a little gently caress), but I can't stand Andrew Garfield and his coke-sniffles. gently caress Richard Parker, too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
I loved this dumb movie but I actually do think Peter's the weakest major character. Electro, Harry, and for his short time on screen Rhino were all extremely fun to watch for the nightmare campiness. Gwen and May work very well as actual humans in this insane world. Peter is kind of stuck in between.
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
Y Kant Ozma Diet posted:That's actually the opposite of pretentious. You enjoy films the way an invalid or child would. Yes actually. I do alright in the whole film critic game by and large. The less you write about the plot the better - the audience despises spoilers and I hate talking about it. It's a winning combination. You end up talking more about mood and tone, something influenced by cinematography, sound design and editing. Makes for a better review than: "X happened which I didn't like." Who gives a poo poo about that?
|
|
#
?
Aug 8, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:Makes for a better review than: "X happened which I didn't like." Who gives a poo poo about that? Anyone who cares about story? That's what films do, they tell stories. I realize cinematography and sound design are important but they're only part of the equation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 02:05
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:If I wanted to enjoy a story I'd go read a book. Similarly, if I wanted to be amazed by bright lights and sound, I'd go see Laser Zeppelin at the Planetarium. Film is more than a light-show.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 02:13
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:I guess I liked it so much because my cinematic priorities are how a film looks, sounds and is edited - the bits that set film apart from other media. this is a loving amazingly retarded way to dismiss issues with a film's awful construction and/or narrative Y Kant Ozma Diet posted:That's actually the opposite of pretentious. You enjoy films the way an invalid or child would. also this
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
ASM2's merits or failures aside, it's completely bizarre to suggest that visual and auditory art is the exclusive domain of children. It implies either complete tunnel-vision or an insane dismissal of some of the greatest art ever created (which, to be clear, I am not claiming this movie is).
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 03:11
|
|
|
Dismissing a films ability to bring together audio and visuals to make art, regardless of story, is stupid. Dismissing a narrative films ability to tell a story as inconsequential is also stupid. ASM2 is not an art film, and should not be judged on the same level as something like Koyaanisqatsi or other art films that are not narratives (although I could see an argument made that Koyaanisqatsi IS a narrative film, just told in a different way than most narratives).
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 03:23
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:Yes actually. I do alright in the whole film critic game by and large. Good writers discuss themes, values, and subtext of story without just listing a sequence of events. Cinematography and sound and editing is obviously crucial to those things too but it's not divorced from them. This whole argument's really weird on both sides! But then again I'm someone who has no real issue with spoilers in reviews.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 04:46
|
|
|
I think you're a bunch of meanies who should step back and enjoy/appreciate the fact that Spiderman(and superman, etc.) can now be fully/realistically realized in motion video, and not in a cheesy way. We will never have movies as poorly realized as that Silver Surfer thing again. It seems like with each passing movie directors/whoever else just get it a little bit more.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 05:33
|
|
|
TheJoker138 posted:Dismissing a films ability to bring together audio and visuals to make art, regardless of story, is stupid. Dismissing a narrative films ability to tell a story as inconsequential is also stupid. ASM2 is not an art film, and should not be judged on the same level as something like Koyaanisqatsi or other art films that are not narratives (although I could see an argument made that Koyaanisqatsi IS a narrative film, just told in a different way than most narratives). Can I judge it on the same level as Spring Breakers? Because that's one of my favorite movies and it's primarily thanks to the soundtrack, lighting design, audio design and cinematography; the story is essentially ancillary. People get their nuts in a bunch for story, but, at least for me, story isn't always near the top of my list of things I'm looking for in a movie. A lot of my favorite movies are much more visually interesting/audibly interesting than anything, because movies are pretty good at putting pretty pictures and pretty sounds together in a pleasing way, art film or pop film.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 06:01
|
|
|
All that cinematography and sound design and poo poo is in service of the story so you should care (story is different from plot, even Koyaanisqatsi has a story). Without a story you have nothing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 08:03
|
|
|
Yoshifan823 posted:Can I judge it on the same level as Spring Breakers? Because that's one of my favorite movies and it's primarily thanks to the soundtrack, lighting design, audio design and cinematography; the story is essentially ancillary. Spring Breakers is a perfect example - wish I'd thought it of it. Only God Forgives is another where the plot is something that hums away harmlessly in the background in service of everything else going on in the film. But anyway, one of the main reasons why story isn't important is because the vast majority of films, especially superhero films, have the same drat story over and over again. After you've seen your masked hero overcoming personal problems, briefly get with the woman he can't have before sacrificing her for her own safety, then having a climactic fight with a masked villain with something personal at stake for the umpteenth time there's really not much new to say - and this basic template has been present in pretty much ever superhero medium or another since the 1960s. The minute differences between stories in superhero media are equivalent of Malibu Stacy getting a new hat. What IS interesting is the way in which different directors and studios approach the material - so you writing about how the film's editing, colour-grading and cinematography makes the idea of a colourful, upbeat urban acrobat appealing. Something Amazing Spider-Man 2 has in spades - that opening chase sequence is a marvellous, joyous bit of cinema. If a film goes out of its way to do something narratively interesting I appreciate that - Boyhood for example, or Pulp Fiction. But films like them are vanishingly rare. Necrothatcher fucked around with this message at 11:07 on Aug 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 11:03
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:I guess I liked it so much because my cinematic priorities are how a film looks, sounds and is edited - the bits that set film apart from other media. This is an odd and dumb post. What sets a book apart from a film is words. The book uses only words, sentences, paragraphs, to convey thoughts, evoke feelings, etc. Film uses images, sound, editing. It's not 'story'. There is no reason why a person couldn't simply reword your post to say "I liked it so much because my literary priorities are how a book uses words and only words to convey its meanings, which is what sets it apart from other media. If I wanted to enjoy a story, I'd go watch a movie". Pedro De Heredia fucked around with this message at 12:14 on Aug 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 12:08
|
|
|
Pedro De Heredia posted:What kind of idiot post is this. Great books are largely so because of the feelings and thoughts they convey through words and sentences, not because they have enjoyable stories. Christ. I generally enjoy a story more in a book than I do in cinema.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 12:13
|
|
|
Your criticism here is really bizarre, unless you are defining 'story' in an incredibly narrow way. Like, yes, it is true that what makes a movie interesting is how the director approaches the material, but how the director approaches the material is related to the story, it's not to 'make an urban acrobat' appealing. I mean I didn't even like Only God Forgives, but how can you even say the plot 'hums away harmlessly'?!? The plot is intricately related to every single image we see and every mood and theme the movie is trying to evoke!
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 12:23
|
|
|
Pedro De Heredia posted:Your criticism here is really bizarre, unless you are defining 'story' in an incredibly narrow way. Correct, but when you boil away the extraneous elements there is only ever one Spider-Man story told in a series of slightly different ways. This Ur-Spidey story essentially is the character, by now everyone's familiar with it and ASM2 (correctly) uses it as the foundation on which to construct a wonderful kaleidoscope of sound and colour that I enjoyed very much. It's not that I don't think the film couldn't be improved upon. If ASM2 could have a better script or story and keep the same cinematic panache then fine. But as it stands what's good here is so good that I don't give a poo poo about the plot one way or another.
|
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 12:33
|
|
|
The nightmare narrative in Spring Breakers is really compelling and was a great example of using a narrative to subvert expectations about character. The dream-like audio/visual aspects made that narrative way stronger but they're not disconnected. For ASM2, yeah I loved the audio/visual elements, but I legit thought Max and the way society abused him was an interesting story with some good social commentary, even if it wasn't written brilliantly. I loved every hammy piece of dialogue the Rhino screamed out. I liked all of the father and son issues for both Harry and Peter and how the two reflect each other. I'd still like all of these things even if the art style wasn't as strong, but its existence strengthens them. A True Jar Jar Fan fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Aug 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 9, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
If you're in the Midwest, 24 hour retailer Meijer has a $5 coupon on copies of the DVD and Blue Ray.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2014 14:43
|
|
|
Just seen this, and enjoyed it immensely, even through the glaring flaws. loving weird score though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
I was surprised they killed Emma Stone because she's such a famous actress I'd think they would want her in the next one
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 19:52
|
|
|
Thankfully she's still alive and still sassy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
tbp posted:I was surprised they killed Emma Stone because she's such a famous actress I'd think they would want her in the next one I think I read that it was one of those cases where she'd only take the role if they killed her off in the same way as the comics. VVV oops VVV bring back old gbs fucked around with this message at 20:39 on Aug 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
How about some spoiler tags, fellas?
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
homo punching bag posted:VVV oops VVV Well, I laughed. And yeah, she only took the role because of the events of this film to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
My main memory of seeing this is saying to my housemate "this is like One Tree Hill: the movie" during one of the insufferably soapy Gwen scenes and then 45 seconds later there being a shot of Peter in silhouette against an orange sunset background, like the opening to One Tree Hill.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
Dazzling visuals certainly can excuse a poor plot but it's not always the case. I think tone was a problem here- it's not just that the various plot threads are awkward, but that they made the film keep shifting in look and feel.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 01:04
|
|
|
Did anyone actually buy the DVD here? I'm curious what those 13 deleted scenes are, but not curious enough to actually own the movie.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
I grabbed the blu-ray but haven't popped it in yet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 03:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 15:51 |
|
|
JT Smiley posted:Did anyone actually buy the DVD here? I'm curious what those 13 deleted scenes are, but not curious enough to actually own the movie. There are some pretty big scenes that are cut, but most of them aren't particularly well done, even by this movie's writing standards. -Peter's dad appears in the graveyard at the end as an alternate ending and barfs out some pretty weak philosophy that's meant to sound deep but doesn't deliver. It goes on way too long. It's a fairly bad ending. To make this make more sense, the opening fight on the plane is slightly different and we see Richard grabbing but not using a parachute. -Flash hangs out with Peter and Gwen at graduation. I liked this one. -Max's mother appears. She's abusive and treats him pretty badly. As Max gets established as a sort of anti-Peter, his mom is an anti-May, so I wish she'd stayed in the film. That said: Her writing isn't good. -Max accidentally kills a morgue worker when waking up for the first time. -Gwen is shown talking to the Oxford acceptance board. After, she visits Peter's house and talks to Aunt May about leaving instead of leaving Peter a voice mail. -Felicia gets an introduction scene with Peter when he goes to visit Harry. The entire Harry and Peter discussion is massively different, and goes into the fact that Norman Osborne has been watching Peter for 14 years. Harry then shows Peter the video of their dads discussing the super spiders and looks smug. -Harry terrorizes the Oscorp building after his transformation. Felicia has a moment of conflict over whether to run to help him or run away. He spares her. Instead he tracks down and kills the Oscorp guy who set him up to get busted. So this makes two ASM movies where the villain killing a corrupt Oscorp officer is cut. -There's a bunch of unfinished CGI that's kind of funny.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2014 04:38
|
|