|
Once showed a friend Muholland Drive. As it ended he announced “I’m going to punch you in the face. You are not allowed to pick the movie anymore.” We are no longer friends.
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 00:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 16:07 |
|
|
Walter Kovacs posted:Once showed a friend Muholland Drive. As it ended he announced “I’m going to punch you in the face. You are not allowed to pick the movie anymore.” We are no longer friends. Had a similar friendship arc with the guy that told me "but you have to admit that Raiders of the Lost Ark is actually objectively bad? It's extremely cheesy." edit: this was not what ended the friendship, but honestly should have been a huge red flag
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 00:21
|
|
|
feedmyleg posted:Keep in mind, in the real world this is like 90% of how people engage with movies. Incredibly depressing to think about. What is wild to me is that my mother and stepdad watch a lot of films and TV. Like... a lot. They're both retired. They go about their day doing their chores and then from about 3pm to 8pm every day, they watch films and TV shows. Every day. They'll burn through an entire series in a week. There literally isn't enough out there for them. Usually, they stick to action/adventure/horror/thrillers/dramas. They don't really dive into comedy at all (though I did get them to watch Only Murders in the Building). They watch some reality TV, but it's always ones like about gold miners or ocean fishers those kind of reality dramas. Whenever I talk to them, they'll list off the things they watch - some good, some bad. The thing that baffles me though, is that they usually understand when something isn't that good or isn't that well made. Their favorite films are all generally really well made films but they can't articulate why other than "I really liked it."
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 00:33
|
|
|
Mordiceius posted:Incredibly depressing to think about. A lot of film is made with the goal, in part, of eliding its production process and constructed nature. To this end, many pictures- good, skillful, enjoyable pictures- can be understood as quality by many viewers because nothing sticks out to them. They’re devices for seamless enjoyment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 00:45
|
|
|
making something "easy to follow" is the most important part of filmmaking
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 01:01
|
|
|
well why not posted:making something "easy to follow" is the most important part of filmmaking We need more movies that are intentionally difficult to follow.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 01:09
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:We need more movies that are intentionally difficult to follow.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 01:31
|
|
|
Wrong!
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 01:37
|
|
|
There is not an understanding that everyone should understand a novel on their first, second, or even third read; why should we hold film to that standard? To sacrifice all to the altar of easy accessibility and understanding is to rob the texture and elegance of the art form. Jean Stein posted:Some people say they can't understand your writing, even after they read it two or three times. What approach would you suggest for them? William Faulkner posted:Read it four times
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 01:45
|
|
|
Experimenting a bit with title cards and I think I'm on the right track.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 01:54
|
|
|
Gaius Marius posted:There is not an understanding that everyone should understand a novel on their first, second, or even third read; why should we hold film to that standard? To sacrifice all to the altar of easy accessibility and understanding is to rob the texture and elegance of the art form. This is different from “films should be intentionally difficult to follow.” Obscurantism is not a worthwhile aspiration.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 02:02
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:We need more movies that are intentionally difficult to follow. Are we talking tinker tailor soldier spy, or Wax or the discovery of television among the bees?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 02:02
|
|
|
Anonymous Robot posted:This is different from “films should be intentionally difficult to follow.” Obscurantism is not a worthwhile aspiration. Obscurantist and Disjointing are legitimate tools to portray theme and meaning; Infinite Jest is not the same novel if it is chronological, Foucault's Pendulum is not funny If it isn't intentionally obscure with its references and uses that to sneak in some sly jokes like the Sherlock Holmes joke, Pale Fire does not act as a mirror to literature criticism without the work itself being actively reinterpreted wrongly by the psuedocommentor. Likewise a straightforward version of The Color of Pomegranates would lose all the beauty and poetry of the work. Or a film like Under the Silver Lake where interpreting the film becomes a part of the film experience as much as watching Garfield gently caress around LA
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 02:13
|
|
|
Nightmare Cinema posted:I know a group of 18-23 year-olds who grew up with the 1st game and thought the film was a piece of poo poo. The fact that those 18-23 year olds thought the film was poo poo still kinda shows the point though. To think it was poo poo, it means they went to see it. People in that age range would have been kids or early/mid teens when the first games came out. It's enough of a cultural event for them to go suss it out and thus pay for a ticket even if they end up thinking it was kinda crappy. And the audience scores show enough of them thought it was actually good (I still have no interest in seeing this movie)
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 02:22
|
|
|
FreudianSlippers posted:Experimenting a bit with title cards and I think I'm on the right track. Love this but if I could make one suggestion, I'd have either more sea foam on the footage track matted in or flip it horizontal so the sea foam goes left to right because once it settles into regular ocean water the text becomes visually difficult to parse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 02:23
|
|
|
Video Games Thx posted:Are we talking tinker tailor soldier spy, or Wax or the discovery of television among the bees? The Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy thing pissed me off. My mom read a review before the movie saying the flashbacks were hard to follow but an easy cue is Gary Oldman gets new glasses very early on and he's wearing his old glasses in the flashbacks. You know what my cue was? we see his former boss die in the first scene and his former boss is in all of the flashbacks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 02:23
|
|
|
I'd be willing to bet most of the people who had difficulty with Tinker Tailor watched it at home. That film is dark as hell, and people speak quietly. Not a good situation for people who don't have their setup setup well
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 02:25
|
|
|
FreudianSlippers posted:Experimenting a bit with title cards and I think I'm on the right track. If you want constructive criticism you're out of luck because this rules.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 02:26
|
|
|
FreudianSlippers posted:Experimenting a bit with title cards and I think I'm on the right track. The first font feels a bit collegiate but other than that it's amazing
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 02:27
|
|
|
Gaius Marius posted:Obscurantist and Disjointing are legitimate tools to portray theme and meaning; Infinite Jest is not the same novel if it is chronological, Foucault's Pendulum is not funny If it isn't intentionally obscure with its references and uses that to sneak in some sly jokes like the Sherlock Holmes joke, Pale Fire does not act as a mirror to literature criticism without the work itself being actively reinterpreted wrongly by the psuedocommentor. The only work of these that I’ve read is Pale Fire. It’s a work that is highly unusual and challenging, but I don’t think I would qualify it as obscurantist. Everything is there in the text. That Kinbote is interpreting the poem in an invalid manner is not hidden, it isn’t a riddle, it is exactly what it seems. I would even say that Pale Fire is the opposite of “illegible,” rather, it unfolds into multiple readings readily and invitingly.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 02:35
|
|
|
Anonymous Robot posted:The only work of these that I’ve read is Pale Fire. It’s a work that is highly unusual and challenging, but I don’t think I would qualify it as obscurantist. Everything is there in the text. That Kinbote is interpreting the poem in an invalid manner is not hidden, it isn’t a riddle, it is exactly what it seems. I would even say that Pale Fire is the opposite of “illegible,” rather, it unfolds into multiple readings readily and invitingly. 1. Kinbote is not a real person anymore than the Zemblan king is. 2. The matter of actual authorship of the poem and the commentary are both highly controversial in Nabokvian studies. Some consider it to be Shade and Botkin respectively, some consider Shade as sole author with Kinbote a parody of his friend Botkin inserted as a joke turned writing exercise, and some consider the author to be the dead Hazel Shade, the evidence of which is primarily that interpreting the sign that Hazel receives from the ghost is a twisted warning to her father's death years later. https://alotovnabokov.blogspot.com/2009/10/pada-ata-lane-message-lost-in.html https://thenabokovian.org/sites/default/files/2018-01/NABOKV-L-0020477___body.html
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 03:05
|
|
|
I’m aware of the critical discourse surrounding Pale Fire. That doesn’t really have any bearing here. That Nabokov needed to use artifice in order to write Pale Fire does not mean that artifice is virtuous, it means that the greatest author in modern history, who had to invent new words to express himself, successfully utilized it to create space for meaning. Should every book also add new words to the English language? Artifice is to be avoided and minimized as much as possible while doing creative work. Where one does indulge in it, they should do so with the intention of expanding the meaning communicated to the audience, not foreclosing it. In most cases, films are intended to communicate meaning, and legibility is of principal importance in all but the most marginal of cases. Impenetrable pictures, generally, are quite boring.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 03:19
|
|
|
Anonymous Robot posted:Should every book also add new words to the English language? This would be pretty great honestly
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 03:22
|
|
|
Pale Fire's method of construction, and the games it plays with it's readers is the work, not just the words on the page. You keep saying communication but fail to understand that meaning can be communicated with more than just words on a page or dialogue on screen. Right now it feels like you are arguing to shield your ego rather than being forced to examine your own world view; as it is I've given numerous examples of works that are "complicated" and whose difficulty is inherent to the message it is trying to convey and you've ignored all but one and then tried to dismiss it out of hand rather than grasping the actual intention Nabokov had when writing the work and what he was trying to convey. What I want to be clear to you is this, your intentions in this argument are to argue a position that nobody who has any interest in criticism of a work would ever hold. There's a reason people laugh at Franzen's "Mr.Difficult" Essay. JR is a complicated and "difficult" work; and it doesn't work without being so.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 03:32
|
|
|
Well, I don’t think it’s a fault not to comment on works I haven’t read, and I certainly don’t think that there aren’t media critics other Jonathan Franzen that have praised works for having technical acumen in expressing meaning. Edit: I don’t mean to be quite so glib here. But I think that conflating having a rich text with ambiguity or challenging the audience with being illegible is really not in good faith.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 03:48
|
|
|
Just stop. You're now attempting tone arguments instead of doing the bare minimum effort to actually understand the opposing argument. You've ignored twice now the fact that Pale Fire is a direct refutation to your argument. And you keep saying borderline incomprehensible nonsense about works being illegible just because you might not know all the vocab, can you not see how ridiculous that is as an argument. Should we reduce our vocabulary to simple English in a worthless pursuit of universal understanding. To impress upon you the nonsensical nature of your argument look at the result of deliberately deleting the Avant Garde from cinéma. No Godard, no Tarkovsky, no Antonioni, half of Bergman is gone. Parajanov doesn't make Color of Pomegranates. Bakshi doesn't revolutionize independent animation with Fritz the Cat. Your insistence on accessibility does not let more people into the cinematic pool, it reduces the depth. Some people enjoy enigmatic, obscure, difficult and open ended works because they represent a challenge to one's understanding of both their view on cinema as well as their view on the world. Last Year at Marienbad not having a conclusion, or a "true" interpretation is just as important as Compson realizing that the truth of Sutpen's Hundred is less important than the "real" interpretation he feels in his bones in Faulkner's Absalom, Absalom! The work needs to be difficult to be great.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 04:21
|
|
|
Everything you have referenced is an intentional part of a text intended to create meaning and provoke a particular response. “Intentionally illegible,” the phrase invoked to begin this discussion, is not the same as distanciation, or ambiguity, or avant garde structure. Works of art are, with few exceptions, made to be understood. This is essential.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 04:27
|
|
|
Anonymous Robot posted:Everything you have referenced is an intentional part of a text intended to create meaning and provoke a particular response. “Intentionally illegible,” the phrase invoked to begin this discussion, is not the same as distanciation, or ambiguity, or avant garde structure. Works of art are, with few exceptions, made to be understood. This is essential. I didn't say intentionally illegible, I said intentionally difficult to follow. Difficult to follow and impossible to follow are two very different things.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 04:28
|
|
|
Anonymous Robot posted:Everything you have referenced is an intentional part of a text intended to create meaning and provoke a particular response. “Intentionally illegible,” the phrase invoked to begin this discussion, is not the same as distanciation, or ambiguity, or avant garde structure. Works of art are, with few exceptions, made to be understood. This is essential. The phrase Grip used was difficult to follow. Stop making poo poo up Gaius Marius fucked around with this message at 06:08 on Nov 1, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 04:29
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 04:57
|
|
|
This is performance art, right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 05:06
|
|
|
it’s all jazz
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 05:07
|
|
|
drat @ the ticket sales of FNAF. comic book movies are dead. the era of video game movies is coming/here. this is what we're gonna be for the next 20 years
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 06:06
|
|
|
We probably should've been expecting this after Sonic and Mario. Can't wait to see terrible Among Us and Roblox films
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 06:08
|
|
|
Was there ever a fan made Mario game that was based off of the bob hoskins movie? I’d probably play that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 06:19
|
|
|
Gaius Marius posted:We probably should've been expecting this after Sonic and Mario. Can't wait to see terrible Among Us and Roblox films And The Last Of Us. Among Us is already coming, but as an animated thang by the Infinity Train guy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 07:32
|
|
|
5% of the incoming flood of video game movies will be good and I choose to be excited for them rather than despair over the rest. Eventually video game adaptations will get their own movies as good as Dredd and Into the Spider-Verse and I can’t wait to see which ones those will turn out to be. It’ll be some random poo poo like Metal Arms: Glitch in the System or Second Sight.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 07:58
|
|
|
I still want my halo movie. They’re never gonna get to the titular halo in the tv series.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 09:56
|
|
|
They already made two adaptations of Metal Arms: Glitch in the System, they're called Avatar and Avatar 2.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 10:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 16:07 |
|
|
Is “Intentionally illegible,” real? What movies are that?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2023 13:05
|
|
