|
TrixRabbi posted:The thing about manipulation is that literally every film does (or at least attempts) it. It's when a movie does it poorly that's the problem. Well, yeah, that's what I was trying to say. All movies are manipulative but most of the time you don't really notice it, at least while your watching it, because the movie the movie is in fact effectively manipulating you. If you're watching a movie and can see it manipulating you, then that can be a problem, especially if it's not actually working. Thinking about it, this creates this odd thing where the movies people tend to describe as "emotionally manipulative" are actually the ones that fail at manipulating their emotions.
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 15:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 17:49 |
|
|
One thing I will never retract the use of "manipulative" for is soundtracks, because so many movies use dumb, obvious swells to heighten stuff best left up to the viewer. A laugh track is manipulative in an incredibly weird way, not only does it tell you you're supposed to be laughing, but it makes you laugh at stuff that isn't necessarily funny. It's weird, nervous laughter that laughs for you so you don't have to do anything at all.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 15:48
|
|
|
axleblaze posted:Well, yeah, that's what I was trying to say. All movies are manipulative but most of the time you don't really notice it, at least while your watching it, because the movie the movie is in fact effectively manipulating you. If you're watching a movie and can see it manipulating you, then that can be a problem, especially if it's not actually working. Yeah, this is exactly what I've been saying. It's a poor phrase to use because it doesn't actually address the issue with the film, and is in fact, inaccurate. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:One thing I will never retract the use of "manipulative" for is soundtracks, because so many movies use dumb, obvious swells to heighten stuff best left up to the viewer. A laugh track is manipulative in an incredibly weird way, not only does it tell you you're supposed to be laughing, but it makes you laugh at stuff that isn't necessarily funny. It's weird, nervous laughter that laughs for you so you don't have to do anything at all. I suppose it's a fair point about laugh tracks, but it still goes back to arguing when its done poorly. What is the ambient soundtrack in Eraserhead doing? It's telling you to feel frightened. The opening score to Star Wars is telling you to feel excited. And I don't think either of those films would be anywhere near as effective without their soundtracks. Again, it comes down to shoddy uses of obvious swells clearly attempting to guide the viewer. It's a failure to manipulate. It drew too much attention to itself. TrixRabbi fucked around with this message at 15:54 on Apr 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 15:48
|
|
|
penismightier posted:I think the trouble with both of these is that while they're both valid problems to have with a movie, everyone (myself included) has a tendency for some reason to stop with those phrases and not go into the why/how of them. It's the same thing with "manipulative" really. Manipulative can be a positive or a negative, but it's a valid word when used right and with proper context, I don't think shunning the word from all criticism is a valid solution.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
On a different topic: Japan!
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 15:52
|
|
|
axleblaze posted:On a different topic: Japan! As the local ambassador to anime, goddammit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 15:53
|
|
|
axleblaze posted:On a different topic: Japan! My favorite is Grand Pa, the 12-year-old boygirl.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 15:55
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:It's the same thing with "manipulative" really. Manipulative can be a positive or a negative, but it's a valid word when used right and with proper context, I don't think shunning the word from all criticism is a valid solution. It's just that it's often used dismissively and goes unjustified. Hundu makes a good point about laugh tracks being a clear way of making somebody laugh without something being funny.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 15:56
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:I suppose it's a fair point about laugh tracks, but it still goes back to arguing when its done poorly. What is the ambient soundtrack in Eraserhead doing? It's telling you to feel frightened. Right, but part of what makes Eraserhead's soundtrack so good is that what it is doing is ambiguous - there are certainly frightening moments and it's a film soaked in dread, but the the soundtrack is not necessarily demanding that you be frightened. It's an uneasy soundscape for a deeply uneasy film. That's the difference to me, it's not cheap and cloying, but the Star Wars example is also good because it definitely is compelling a sense of adventure. The villain has a theme, the romantic moments have swells and so on, but it's not a substitute for the action.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 16:03
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:One thing I will never retract the use of "manipulative" for is soundtracks, because so many movies use dumb, obvious swells to heighten stuff best left up to the viewer. A laugh track is manipulative in an incredibly weird way, not only does it tell you you're supposed to be laughing, but it makes you laugh at stuff that isn't necessarily funny. It's weird, nervous laughter that laughs for you so you don't have to do anything at all. Laugh tracks were used excellently in Natural Born Killers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 16:33
|
|
|
TrixRabbi posted:It's just that it's often used dismissively and goes unjustified. I probably use manipulative a good amount in reviews, usually in relation to scores because I get easily annoyed by overbearing scores. I have something in mind when I write that. Sometimes I may or may not explain the precise details of why it doesn't work for me, but my inability to explain it doesn't invalidate or diminish my criticism. It might diminish the worth of my review to other people, but that would be true regardless of any particular terms I used.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 17:05
|
|
|
On the Beach would be one of the great films if it wasn't for such an overbearing score.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 17:25
|
|
|
penismightier posted:On the Beach would be one of the great films if it wasn't for such an overbearing score. What's worse is that it already has those great, melancholic sea sounds.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:What's worse is that it already has those great, melancholic sea sounds. It's one of the many late '50s movies that would've been improved if it had followed the musical example of Colossus of New York: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ig1HieY8qEs
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 17:29
|
|
|
Colossus of New York is so good. So good! You know, I often wonder if that was a choice out of necessity, so many lazier and more forgettable B-films (and famously, Night of the Living Dead) use instantly recognizable library music because they couldn't afford to be scored like the studio pictures. It's so much more interesting to just deal with the diegetic sound and get this kinda weird atonal piping here and there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Colossus of New York is so good. So good! The rumor was always that it was because of a musician's strike, but the producer denies that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
It's such an atmospheric movie.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
It was directed by an art director which is why it nails the atmosphere so well and also why it completely bungles the characters. Such a rare thing in that time, design-led sci fi. It's really one of a kind.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 17:55
|
|
|
I keep getting Mads Mikkelsen and Michael Madsen mixed up when reading about things they've been in that I haven't seen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 18:02
|
|
|
The only empty critical language that bugs me is when someone drops "all art is political" all on its lonesome as if it's a statement with any intrinsic value.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:The only empty critical language that bugs me is when someone drops "all art is political" all on its lonesome as if it's a statement with any intrinsic value. "Style over substance" with nothing else to back it up is up there too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:"Style over substance" with nothing else to back it up is up there too. Eeehhhh.... I mean, with nothing else to back it up, then sure I guess. But at least that's one of those things like "pretentious" where it actually has a real meaning even if 90% of the people that use it are doing it wrong.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 18:22
|
|
|
I think it's bullshit because being visually stimulating is a fine enough goal for a movie.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 18:24
|
|
|
penismightier posted:I think it's bullshit because being visually stimulating is a fine enough goal for a movie. I mean it is and it isn't, as they say. Like, "stimulating" is pretty broad. If a movie is just rapid fire stimulus, then yeah, I'd like a bit more out of that movie. But then I don't like Michael Bay or Spring Breakers so maybe I'm playing to the wrong crowd. It all depends what you want out of a movie is I guess what I'm saying. If you just want something that engages you on a visual, aesthetic level, then that's fine. But if you want a good story well-told, I think that's fine too. And once again, It's not always a negative thing. Redline is style over substance and it owns. Saw is style over substance and it blows.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 18:32
|
|
|
I think film writers tend to get bullshitty about it, though. Stan Brakhage is style over - or at least style AS - substance almost 100% of the time, and everyone has to run around pretending he's not.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 18:33
|
|
|
penismightier posted:I think film writers tend to get bullshitty about it, though. Oh without a doubt. Probably moreso even than any other art critics. And that's not to say substance over style isn't a thing too (insert your favorite boring documentary here, The Central Park Five is the first that came to mind).
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 18:39
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:Eeehhhh.... I mean, with nothing else to back it up, then sure I guess. But at least that's one of those things like "pretentious" where it actually has a real meaning even if 90% of the people that use it are doing it wrong. Yeah that's kinda what I'm talking about, just dropping those buzzwords without actually saying anything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 18:39
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:Eeehhhh.... I mean, with nothing else to back it up, then sure I guess. But at least that's one of those things like "pretentious" where it actually has a real meaning even if 90% of the people that use it are doing it wrong. 9 times out of 10 pretentious is used as an offhand dismissal rather than for any real point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 18:46
|
|
|
I think some critics that use 'pretentious' should just say what they really mean, which is 'artsy-fartsy.'
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 18:58
|
|
|
Basically, people want to be smarter than movies and get angry when movies trick them or try to be smart. Stupid movies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
I had a singing audition for the Portland Area Theatre Alliance last week and now have a callback for the main villain in a production of Parade. Since I thought I lost the tempo and blew the audition, this was really unexpected. I also didn't do a monologue or any of the dancing auditions, so the callback is based entirely on my rendition of "Marry Me a Little" from Company, which I admittedly am a really good match for vocally. I'm not getting my hopes up or anything since I have no idea if they're calling back dozens of people for the role, who else will be there, what exactly they're looking for, etc but it's still pretty drat rad and unexpected. Maybe I'm going to make Portland work for me after all.  Movie chat: I went to a meetup and watched Akira yesterday and two of the people there were so excited that I had more to say than "It was good" during our discussion that they're basically pushing for friendship status like they want to date me or something. Mainly because I didn't use the words pretentious, manipulative, problematic, etc I'm sure.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Geekboy posted:Movie chat: I went to a meetup and watched Akira yesterday and two of the people there were so excited that I had more to say than "It was good" during our discussion that they're basically pushing for friendship status like they want to date me or something. Stop. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200, all engines full reverse. You're an absolute mess and your personal life has been an absolute mess -- and given that your immediate reaction to people enjoying a discussion with you is "they want to date me or something," you're obviously not ready and still looking for validation from other people rather than yourself. Just stop. Spend a few months taking care of yourself.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
Timby posted:Stop. Do not pass Go, do not collect $200, all engines full reverse. You're an absolute mess and your personal life has been an absolute mess -- and given that your immediate reaction to people enjoying a discussion with you is "they want to date me or something," you're obviously not ready and still looking for validation from other people rather than yourself. I think that was supposed to be a joke.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 19:41
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:I think that was supposed to be a joke. Possibly. But consider the source.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 19:43
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:I think that was supposed to be a joke. It absolutely was. I'm not really into dudes. Much less awkward movie nerd dudes. At least not romantically.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 19:44
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:One thing I will never retract the use of "manipulative" for is soundtracks, because so many movies use dumb, obvious swells to heighten stuff best left up to the viewer. A laugh track is manipulative in an incredibly weird way, not only does it tell you you're supposed to be laughing, but it makes you laugh at stuff that isn't necessarily funny. It's weird, nervous laughter that laughs for you so you don't have to do anything at all. I'm not really disagreeing with you, but it makes me wonder why this is considered cheap in most genres but it's an essential and widely accepted part of horror films.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
CPL593H posted:I'm not really disagreeing with you, but it makes me wonder why this is considered cheap in most genres but it's an essential and widely accepted part of horror films. I dunno, horror movies almost get it the worst. Think of how many horror movies you've seen that were loaded with bullshit screeching-string-section musical stings.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 19:47
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:I dunno, horror movies almost get it the worst. Think of how many horror movies you've seen that were loaded with bullshit screeching-string-section musical stings. Absolutely true, but there are a lot of great examples too. The most referenced one would that scene in Jaws where Hooper is investigating that boat and a dead body pops out. Spielberg himself has often talked about how the musical que was what made that scene work so well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 19:52
|
|
|
CPL593H posted:Absolutely true, but there are a lot of great examples too. The most referenced one would that scene in Jaws where Hooper is investigating that boat and a dead body pops out. Spielberg himself has often talked about how the musical que was what made that scene work so well. Oh yeah, I mean, I'm an Italian horror fan so I'm definitely not knocking horror soundtracks on the whole.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 19:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 17:49 |
|
|
Geekboy posted:It absolutely was. Then what the gently caress are you doing here? That is what we're all here for, right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2014 19:56
|
|