Recent Viewing Part IV

You've got to be kidding me. Have you seen more than one film by him? The charactersw are paper thin, practically one demensional and the exploration of any human psyche or groupd dynamics, is weak if even explored seriously at all. And I cant' recall a time he broke new ground in any of those areas.

And so what if it's in combination with audio and visuals? Tehre's a phrase for that can of horse hockey: "Style over substance".

Yes, I've seen everything that he's done. Big fan.

You're (mostly) right about the characters etc., but that's part of the deal. It's all about the SPECTACLE, baby!

I think my point may have been a little confused. Just to elaborate, I'm talking about an idealised, strictly "visual" movie which literally has no script to tie any of the visuals together. It's just a series of moving paintings, which in a sense is how the mighty Thor seems to appreciate films. (This relating to my point that movies are not shown in art galleries, but rather cinemas.)

When I say "people go to watch a story", what I mean is they expect a story. Most people do not want some abstract experience, but rather a straight forward story which is inevitably told through a mixture of visuals, audio (AUDIOVISUALS!), and dialogue.

So although cinemas are largely enjoyed as a type of theme park ride where explosions and cgi sell more tickets than complex characters, if a film has a bad story or a bad script, people tend to notice that regardless of how impressive the visuals are. We want a good story, we want to be invested in the characters.

No amount of impressive imagery will save a film. Ever. Not one single film. If it has a bad script, it fails.

Easy. Because explosions and cgi sell more tickets. But people remember films like Jurassic Park and Star Wars because the impressive visuals actually tell a decent story thanks to a good script (or at the very least, a solid enough script to support the visuals without ruining the experience).

But even dumb films have scripts, and people wouldn't go to the cinema to literally see a series of action scenes without anything to relate them to one another (unless you're watching a showreel, but that's not what cinemas are for). There has to be some kind of thread to tie it all together, even if it's a weak, insipid thread in this case. (But then this is why Bay's movies suck.)

Just to elaborate for the umpteenth time, I'm not saying film isn't a visual medium, it is. That's why I love it. But no matter how much a film is about spectacle, we expect or at least hope those visuals actually relate to a decent story. This is my point, though I didn't realise it was a particularly controversial view!

But then I think we're talking cross paths here, hence the incredulity.

I'm slightly surprised at the ongoing discussion as well!
To my mind the horse Steven is flogging is quite dead.
He's passed on.
This horse is no more.
He has ceased to be. He's expired and gone to meet his maker. He's a stiff. Bereft of life, he rests in peace.
If you hadn't tied to the cart he'd be pushing up the daisies. His metabolic processes are now history. he's off the twig. he's kicked the bucket, he's shuffled off his mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisible.
This is an ex-horse.

No thanks.

Who wants the cock and balls?

Do you want me to send you a recipe?

I just saw Captain America - The Winter Soldier. It's more a thriller than a super hero movie and it's quite entertaining. The story bears some similarities to the last James Bond entry. The score is servicabel but largely anonymous. Good film.

As Martijn says, I'm flogging a dead horse and I think I've made something very basic needlessly convoluted. But let's continue.

I understand what film is and can be. (It can literally be anything.) But "movies" are inherently about stories, whether through imagery or dialogue-- usually both. Yes, there is always going to be intrinsic value to a well shot scene. Yes, film is a visual medium. But the images make much more impact when they're not only relevant to the story, but the story itself is compelling enough to warrant the imagery. And this is where I think you get me confused. For example, I could go out today and shoot all sorts of beautiful imagery. Depending on how good my camera is and how skilled a photographer I am, these images will have value. But do you think anyone would pay to see it in the cinema?

By all means enjoy AUDIOVISUALS on their own merits. All power to you. But 'good' films -and this is my whole point- are generally not considered 'good' purely on the merits of how 'pretty' they look, even if it's an important aspect of moviemaking. This is why Michael Bay can't make a good movie, because he only understands how to fill a shot with as much shit as possible - which is admittedly fun to look at in small doses, but ultimately insipid. (Michael Bay is not some misunderstood genius, he's a dumb jock with a bit of technical skill.)

FYI, I neither love nor hate Avatar. I love the score though.



…I still have some ribs left if anyone wants some?

Yesterday's Dr. Who version of Fantastic Voyage was quite enjoyable. Peter Capaldi looks like he's going to be a good Doctor and, perhaps even better, the storyline made time for some introspection for the Timelord.

This is my favourite film of the year. 10 out of 10 for me.

The way you explain pop hits. People are dumb.

I hope I'll come to like Capaldi more. Tennant had tons of boyish charm and was funny and excitable, Smith was funny too and was quirky and socially clumsy and Capaldi has...well... big eyebrows....

Peter

Capaldi is a fantastic actor who could easily live up to and exceed expectations, if - hopefully - he gets good scripts to work with. Those who watched Torchwood - Children Of Earth or The Thick Of It know what he´s capaldible of. He will get to you sooner or later, I´m sure about that.

RV: Guardians Of The Galaxy - German Dub
I´ll add that extra info because I think I would have enjoyed it even more in its original language. It´s a hell of a ride with a lot of humour, a couple of great ideas, some nice twists, and a good score, but... you could feel exactly where they had problems with the translations. Some lines just don´t roll as easily as they probably do in the original. But hey, that´s what BluRays are for.

Beside that, it has a machine-lasergun-wielding racoon and a talking tree. So what am I complaining about?!

Also...

RV: Penny Dreadful

Watch. This. It´s Timothy Dalton starring opposite an otherwordly Eva Green, who should get an Emmy for this (but won´t, of course), along with some fantastic veterans (David Warner) and other lovable actors (Josh Hartnett, Billie Piper, and many more) in a gothic horror setting that easily outclasses everything remotely similar that has been on TV recently (yes, I´m looking at you, Sleepy Hollow, Salem, and even NBC´s Dracula, which I did like a lot, and no, I haven´t seen American Horror Story, yet, so bear with me on this).

If you must know more, think League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen. For TV. And well done. Once you´ve seen it, you will change your mind about the score.