Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

A career in film: destroying the magic of films forever?

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie Musings >> A career in film: destroying the magic of films forever? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
A career in film: destroying the magic of films forever? - 6/6/2012 11:47:42 AM   
st3veebee


Posts: 2353
Joined: 3/9/2006
From: 9303 Lyon Drive
I always considered some form of career in film, and after I lost interest in my intial degree in Forestry (no comment), I decided that I have to find a profession in something I love otherwise I will never advance far. My best mate has his degree in Film Studies and has done a decent amount of "intern" like work on sets etc. over the last few years. His opinion towards films in general, however, has completely changed since his degree (as you would expect), but in my opinion it has changed for the worse.

Essentially my friend just doesn't view movies the same way at all anymore: constantly scanning every scene for background detail that lends more insight into the film, or framing of the image. (For example in Drive: he went on and on about how the painting of a boat in a storm forecast the future violence in the film). If you are spending that much time looking past the characters and looking at how the set is arranged: you surely aren't getting involved enough in the film, no? I also part time in a film studies course with the most pretentious of people (I hate that word but nothing else fits) who never seem to get caught up in the emotions conveyed and instead sit about discussing what the signifiance of the colour red was in the wallpaper.


Whether or not there is anything wrong with this is impossible to estimate: we both always go to the cinema still and will always adore film but whereas I go in and get lost in the story and characters, he will sit back stroke his chin while contemplating the complexities of the creation of every aspect of the script, camera and frame. I love the idea of interpretation but I wonder whether it is possible to be a master in film analysis but still get that childhood feeling of getting lost in another world?

_____________________________

Latest Films:

Two days in New York: 4/5

Prometheus: 3.5/5

Abe Lincoln: VH 3/5

Twin Peaks: FWWM 3.5/5
Post #: 1
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 6/6/2012 11:56:32 AM   
Hobbitonlass

 

Posts: 11914
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Westeros

quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee
I also part time in a film studies course with the most pretentious of people (I hate that word but nothing else fits) who never seem to get caught up in the emotions conveyed and instead sit about discussing what the signifiance of the colour red was in the wallpaper.

This is exactly why I ditched my part time film studies course that I started to do a few years back at Westminster Uni. It got to a point where I just thought I'm not enjoying the films any more. I understand why people want to get more involved with the process and the final detail but it just wasn't for me.

_____________________________

Come join in the Photo competition http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=3116407&mpage=1&key=

(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 2
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 6/6/2012 12:18:06 PM   
OPEN YOUR EYES

 

Posts: 4259
Joined: 5/2/2012

quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee

I always considered some form of career in film, and after I lost interest in my intial degree in Forestry (no comment), I decided that I have to find a profession in something I love otherwise I will never advance far. My best mate has his degree in Film Studies and has done a decent amount of "intern" like work on sets etc. over the last few years. His opinion towards films in general, however, has completely changed since his degree (as you would expect), but in my opinion it has changed for the worse.

Essentially my friend just doesn't view movies the same way at all anymore: constantly scanning every scene for background detail that lends more insight into the film, or framing of the image. (For example in Drive: he went on and on about how the painting of a boat in a storm forecast the future violence in the film). If you are spending that much time looking past the characters and looking at how the set is arranged: you surely aren't getting involved enough in the film, no? I also part time in a film studies course with the most pretentious of people (I hate that word but nothing else fits) who never seem to get caught up in the emotions conveyed and instead sit about discussing what the signifiance of the colour red was in the wallpaper.


Whether or not there is anything wrong with this is impossible to estimate: we both always go to the cinema still and will always adore film but whereas I go in and get lost in the story and characters, he will sit back stroke his chin while contemplating the complexities of the creation of every aspect of the script, camera and frame. I love the idea of interpretation but I wonder whether it is possible to be a master in film analysis but still get that childhood feeling of getting lost in another world?



What your friend is doing is fundamentally working, basically not switching off.

He has got into the mere mechanical side of film production that his wishfull,relaxed viewing of a film is somewhat lost.
But I wont necessarily see this as a negative or bad thing, in some regards he is looking at the bigger picture and if the film does its job interms of solid script then, you could argue, he has got more out of the Film.
I personally find it refreshing that he is looking at the other, underrated , aspects of Film making.
After all a filmmaker is not only trying to portray a story but also a world.

What his problem might be is the fact that he could, in the end, apply this to more mediums say Art, Music, Gaming, TV, Reading and for you, personally, could find it annoying and irritating. And he could get himself into a hole of over thinking.

He could very much just be a going through a slight phase.
Maybe so much new information has been thrown at him that he cant wait to get this new method of thinking off his chest, and it seems you are the one witnessing it more than most.

I have no answer to how you deal with this because I feel very much like your friend on occasions. I do over study my Art and others, I look deep into faults, positives, ideas, methods.
For me and your friend it is simply a question of natural development.


(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 3
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 6/6/2012 12:28:24 PM   
st3veebee


Posts: 2353
Joined: 3/9/2006
From: 9303 Lyon Drive
He finished his degree 3 years ago and from about halfway through he had changed....perhaps forever.


 But seriously: I have had this arguement with him a few times and he willingly admits that he misses getting caught up in a film as much as he used to, but also has learned to appreciate certain aspects even more: perhaps he picks up more subtle touches that I don't.

I also quite like the contrast of opinions coming out of a film: leads to very ineresting (and often heated) debates. The fact that he is not quite at the really upper end of the pompous-film-wanker spectrum is great too.

Walking out of Prometheus Friday morning we over heard a pony-tailed assortment of hipsters discussing the "phallic-symbolism  and some other word I don't quite understand" and he turned to me and said. " What a bunch of wankers"

I breathed a sigh of relief.

_____________________________

Latest Films:

Two days in New York: 4/5

Prometheus: 3.5/5

Abe Lincoln: VH 3/5

Twin Peaks: FWWM 3.5/5

(in reply to OPEN YOUR EYES)
Post #: 4
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 6/6/2012 12:45:30 PM   
OPEN YOUR EYES

 

Posts: 4259
Joined: 5/2/2012

quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee

He finished his degree 3 years ago and from about halfway through he had changed....perhaps forever.


 But seriously: I have had this arguement with him a few times and he willingly admits that he misses getting caught up in a film as much as he used to, but also has learned to appreciate certain aspects even more: perhaps he picks up more subtle touches that I don't.

I also quite like the contrast of opinions coming out of a film: leads to very ineresting (and often heated) debates. The fact that he is not quite at the really upper end of the pompous-film-wanker spectrum is great too.

Walking out of Prometheus Friday morning we over heard a pony-tailed assortment of hipsters discussing the "phallic-symbolism  and some other word I don't quite understand" and he turned to me and said. " What a bunch of wankers"

I breathed a sigh of relief.


Aslong as he's not one of these "Im right your wrong" opiniated types then you'll be alright.

Wow,sounds like you walked by a bunch of cliched hipsters.
Movies are always right.

(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 5
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 6/6/2012 12:46:19 PM   
jobloffski

 

Posts: 1886
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: elsewhere

Some people kill a film with over analysis, others can love analysis, but turn it off, at least on a first view, and just suspend disbelief and get caught up in it

Anyway, you can, for example, instinctively love the comparing scars/quint's speech/show me the way to go home segment of Jaws and understand every single emotion the film wants you to feel without noticing that

Quint and hooper and Brody are framed in individual shots at first, but as Hooper and Quint are comparing scars and having a laugh, they are then seen more in a two shot (characters less isolated). Brody thinks about showing his scar, but then stays where he is. In terms of being where he is on the boat and being framed alone, he remains more isolated from the group than Hooper now.

Quint gets serious, does the speech, and is alone in the frame, isolated again. Hooper, newly close to quint rescues the mood with the song, and Brody finally joins with the group and we see all three in the same shot, singing together, totally together, all rivalries forgotten, the togetherness of the scene amplified by the artistry that has them all on the screen, at the same time. They are men at peace and have forgotten all the rivalry between, them and momentarily forgotten about the shark (and having worked so hard to create this coming together of the characters, and make the audience feel in on that feeling, the film then cuts to outside the boat to make it all the more dramatic/tragic that the shark is now going to be threatening that unity).

You don't have to notice the cutting, framing, etc to 'get' what is happening but in even a basically mainstream film, the more you notice about how it is put together, and how that CREATES those things that you feel instinctively, the more admirable a masterpiece of skillful film making making it reveals itself to be, and once you start noticing these things, you can become a bit more demanding generally and notice when the level of care taken to marry up content/emotion with technique/style isn't as skillful.

Which might sound a bit 'someone's head has gone up their arse' but it doesn't kill the magic.

Talking about this stuff with someone who doesn't really care to look at the framing, placement of character, the way the soundtrack changes to intensify the mood created, etc might kill the magic for them, though.



< Message edited by jobloffski -- 6/6/2012 2:34:03 PM >


_____________________________

Yes, dreamers dream and doers do. But if dreamers DON'T dream, doers don't have anything TO do. Everything that is only here because people exist, only exists because someone thought of it., or in other words, dreamed it.

(in reply to OPEN YOUR EYES)
Post #: 6
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 6/6/2012 12:59:16 PM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hobbitonlass


quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee
I also part time in a film studies course with the most pretentious of people (I hate that word but nothing else fits) who never seem to get caught up in the emotions conveyed and instead sit about discussing what the signifiance of the colour red was in the wallpaper.

This is exactly why I ditched my part time film studies course that I started to do a few years back at Westminster Uni. It got to a point where I just thought I'm not enjoying the films any more. I understand why people want to get more involved with the process and the final detail but it just wasn't for me.


I think the early stages of film studies can do this to people. There's the infamous Psycho analysis which many students are forced to do in the first semester of many film studies courses, in which they have to take apart the Psycho shower scene cut by cut. It killed that scene for me for years. Once you get beyond the "rules" tho it really does open up a world tho. Its similar to the relationship between Shakespeare and students forced to read it at school in a way.

I've spent much of my life studying film, and now teach it, and can happily sit back and switch off and enjoy a movie. Some of my colleagues however, can't. For some I think it comes down to passion - over analysis can really kill passion. I've even seen it happen to friends who run websites focussing on a specific area (football, music, etc), and it happens to me occasionally (very poor work/life balance).

(in reply to Hobbitonlass)
Post #: 7
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 6/6/2012 1:04:39 PM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee
Essentially my friend just doesn't view movies the same way at all anymore: constantly scanning every scene for background detail that lends more insight into the film, or framing of the image. (For example in Drive: he went on and on about how the painting of a boat in a storm forecast the future violence in the film). If you are spending that much time looking past the characters and looking at how the set is arranged: you surely aren't getting involved enough in the film, no?



I wouldn't say that, I think your friend is invested in the film too (and thats a nice little observation). In fact, that he looked further and deeper in to the frame than simply at the characters would say to me that he was actually deeper invested in the film than yourself, in a way. Its not a case of one or the other is it? Look at the painting ignoring the characters? Cant we do both? Drive is such a slow, languid film that I'd be surprised if the directors intentions were simply for the audience to spend the film looking at the characters faces, waiting for them to speak.

(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 8
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 6/6/2012 1:09:55 PM   
Whistler


Posts: 2946
Joined: 22/11/2006
You make a good point. I've just finished a degree in film studies, and I have noticed it change me to an extent. Because for the last three years I've been learning all about the behind-the-scenes of film-making, I've noticed that sometimes when I'm watching a film I begin to read too much into the little details like the framing, lighting, symbolism etc, which in turn disconnects me from the main story. (Sometimes I even picture the camera crew filming the scene, which really pulls me out of the flm).

But I think there's a place for both. While the first time I watch a film I love to get lost in the story and connect with the characters, I like to use the second or third viewing to look closer at the little details that I might have missed the first time, things that might subtly be manipulating emotions or giving away future plot turns. Basically what I'm saying is, I think both sides of the film should be admired. The story/characters/dialogue etc is essentially admiring the writer for laying everything out and the director for piecing it all together coherently, while reading into the framing/lighting/symbolism etc is admiring people like the cinematographer, and basically everyone working behind the camera.

I've never once felt that films have been ruined in any way due to my studies, but then I can't really imagine anything ruining them (apart from Uwe Boll).

_____________________________

Eddy's Film Review
Latest: Need For Speed, Under The Skin, 300: Rise Of An Empire

(in reply to jobloffski)
Post #: 9
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 6/6/2012 2:24:43 PM   
jackcarter


Posts: 1824
Joined: 12/1/2006
quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee

He finished his degree 3 years ago and from about halfway through he had changed....perhaps forever.


 But seriously: I have had this arguement with him a few times and he willingly admits that he misses getting caught up in a film as much as he used to, but also has learned to appreciate certain aspects even more: perhaps he picks up more subtle touches that I don't.

I also quite like the contrast of opinions coming out of a film: leads to very ineresting (and often heated) debates. The fact that he is not quite at the really upper end of the pompous-film-wanker spectrum is great too.

Walking out of Prometheus Friday morning we over heard a pony-tailed assortment of hipsters discussing the "phallic-symbolism and some other word I don't quite understand" and he turned to me and said. " What a bunch of wankers"

I breathed a sigh of relief.



to paraphrase from another movie (with an Alien connection i might add)...Prometheus is going to be one of those movies that will be puzzled over and studied...etc like BladeRunner, 2001 etc (at least until Prometheus 2 answers everything)

i sense a BFI modern classics out soon (do they still do those?)


< Message edited by jackcarter -- 6/6/2012 2:26:00 PM >

(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 10
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 6/6/2012 2:55:49 PM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: jackcarter

quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee


Walking out of Prometheus Friday morning we over heard a pony-tailed assortment of hipsters discussing the "phallic-symbolism and some other word I don't quite understand" and he turned to me and said. " What a bunch of wankers"

I breathed a sigh of relief.



to paraphrase from another movie (with an Alien connection i might add)...Prometheus is going to be one of those movies that will be puzzled over and studied...etc like BladeRunner, 2001 etc (at least until Prometheus 2 answers everything)



And to be fair to the 'pony-tailed wankers', there is tons of phallic imagery in Prometheus. And Alien. They are films about birth and creation after all.

(in reply to jackcarter)
Post #: 11
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 6/6/2012 3:34:13 PM   
st3veebee


Posts: 2353
Joined: 3/9/2006
From: 9303 Lyon Drive
quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


quote:

ORIGINAL: jackcarter

quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee


Walking out of Prometheus Friday morning we over heard a pony-tailed assortment of hipsters discussing the "phallic-symbolism and some other word I don't quite understand" and he turned to me and said. " What a bunch of wankers"

I breathed a sigh of relief.



to paraphrase from another movie (with an Alien connection i might add)...Prometheus is going to be one of those movies that will be puzzled over and studied...etc like BladeRunner, 2001 etc (at least until Prometheus 2 answers everything)



And to be fair to the 'pony-tailed wankers', there is tons of phallic imagery in Prometheus. And Alien. They are films about birth and creation after all.


Oh I completely agree, there is nothing wrong with what they were saying: it's just that this must have been the  first or second thing they said about the film after walking out of their cinema seats. The first questions I usually hear are: "well, what did you think?" or "Excellent!!/Awesome!!/Awful!" and then proceeding to " I loved the bit where yada yada took the ding dong and whatsits.."



_____________________________

Latest Films:

Two days in New York: 4/5

Prometheus: 3.5/5

Abe Lincoln: VH 3/5

Twin Peaks: FWWM 3.5/5

(in reply to adambatman82)
Post #: 12
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 9/6/2012 2:07:57 AM   
tommyjarvis


Posts: 6632
Joined: 2/11/2005
From: Caught somewhere in time
To be honest, even reading Empire now and then and spending six years on these forums is destroying the magic of films. I used to just enjoy a film for entertainment value, now I have all these views on the morals or the technical skills behind things which end up spoiling things for me. Films are just fun, after all, and I keep having to remind myself to get back to that viewpoint.

_____________________________

"I've been too honest with myself, I should have lied like everybody else"

My Top 101 Rock Songs - The first Audiophile list to actually get completed!

(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 13
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 9/6/2012 3:09:34 AM   
Spaldron


Posts: 10485
Joined: 6/10/2006
From: Chair
I always try to quietly distance myself from the pseudo analytical subtext bullshit that comes with being a film nerd and frequenting film forums. I generally try to enjoy a film and write about why I like it, I cant stand all the film thesis university explanations on the existential reasoning behind the motivations of Biff Tannen etc. He's just a cunt, accept it!

_____________________________

And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts
And I looked and behold, a pale horse
And his name that sat on him was Death
And Hell followed with him.

(in reply to tommyjarvis)
Post #: 14
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 9/6/2012 10:16:27 AM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron

I always try to quietly distance myself from the pseudo analytical subtext bullshit that comes with being a film nerd and frequenting film forums. I generally try to enjoy a film and write about why I like it, I cant stand all the film thesis university explanations on the existential reasoning behind the motivations of Biff Tannen etc. He's just a cunt, accept it!


Thats a bit of a limited, one-sided way to look at things. Sure, enjoy your movie for what it is, but why be so judgmental towards those of us that do want to look further? I wouldn't ever hold "film as entertainment" against anyone who chooses to watch a film for what it is, in the same way that I wouldn't judge anyone who only wants to look at paintings that they deem look nice (as opposed to being led by subtext), or music that only sounds melodic (which is what naturally sounds "good" to the human brain). Do you feel the same way about all forms of art?

And how can something be "pseudo analytical" anyway? You're either analysing it or you're not, the "pseudo" comes with the findings, not the process surely?

(in reply to Spaldron)
Post #: 15
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 9/6/2012 10:17:47 AM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: tommyjarvis

To be honest, even reading Empire now and then and spending six years on these forums is destroying the magic of films. I used to just enjoy a film for entertainment value, now I have all these views on the morals or the technical skills behind things which end up spoiling things for me. Films are just fun, after all, and I keep having to remind myself to get back to that viewpoint.


If you want to remain as context free when watching movies then why subject yourself to something that impairs that (reading empire, spending time on the forums)?

(in reply to tommyjarvis)
Post #: 16
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 9/6/2012 10:22:22 AM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005
What I think is being taken a little for granted in this thread is the idea that it has to be one or the other: the notion that you can't look at films academically and enjoy or be passionate about them, which simply isn't true. Passion for subject drives good academia. Accessibility can be an issue, sure, but thats something that the entire industry is attempting to tackle at the moment, but in which good headway is being made (just look at the work the BFI has done in the last two weeks, its inspiring stuff).

(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 17
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 9/6/2012 10:56:02 AM   
Dpp1978


Posts: 1150
Joined: 2/4/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron

I always try to quietly distance myself from the pseudo analytical subtext bullshit
that comes with being a film nerd and frequenting film forums. I generally try to enjoy a film and write about why I like it, I cant stand all the film thesis university explanations on the existential reasoning behind the motivations of Biff Tannen etc. He's just a cunt, accept it!


If only you'd take that approach to your pet conspiracy theories...

I kid (mostly), but the obsession with subtext is what turned me off film studies when I took it at A' level.

I rapidly came to the conclusion that readings of subtext usually said more about the reader than the author.

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82

Thats a bit of a limited, one-sided way to look at things. Sure, enjoy your movie for what it is, but why be so judgmental towards those of us that do want to look further? I wouldn't ever hold "film as entertainment" against anyone who chooses to watch a film for what it is, in the same way that I wouldn't judge anyone who only wants to look at paintings that they deem look nice (as opposed to being led by subtext), or music that only sounds melodic (which is what naturally sounds "good" to the human brain). Do you feel the same way about all forms of art?


That, by and large, describes me. If something engages me I am happy. I don't try to analyse it too much: I have no pressing urge to replicate the result so what happens behind the curtain is irrelevant.

That isn't to say I don't find deeper meaning in the subtext, I just don't go looking for it.

quote:

And how can something be "pseudo analytical" anyway? You're either analysing it or you're not, the "pseudo" comes with the findings, not the process surely?


I'd say that it is about the method. If you reached your conclusion before you did the analysis, and then looked for facts to back it up that would be pseudo analysis. You use analytical tools but don't use the objective analytical process.

But as a primary reaction to art tends to be visceral rather than intellectual; subjective rather than objective, it is hard to apply strict analytical methods to it. If art were so easily analysed one would be able to draw up a formula to what makes great art and there would be less bad art from good artists.

It just doesn't work that way. Something can objectively have all the right ingredients and still subjectively fail. It is why it is called art rather than science.

So by that measure all artistic analysis, and therefore all film analysis, is probably in some way pseudo analysis as it will be touched by some level of subjectivity. But it is no less valid for it.


(in reply to Spaldron)
Post #: 18
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 9/6/2012 10:58:56 AM   
Dirk Miggler


Posts: 1080
Joined: 14/1/2009
I don't mind it, when it's warranted but I suppose even then it's just a matter of opinion. I think we can all agree that we all have read or listened to people discussing a movie at some point and just rolled our eyes in disbelief at the utter bollocks thats spilling from their brain.

I've got a couple of family members who are trying to break into the film industry and have just made their short film in to a feature length production, listening to an interview one was giving on YouTube it certainly would seem being a pretentious twat is endemic of the the film industry


(in reply to adambatman82)
Post #: 19
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 9/6/2012 2:19:36 PM   
great_badir


Posts: 4653
Joined: 6/10/2005
From: A breaking rope bridge in the middle of the jungle
Whilst I can't personally relate, I can understand - someone who I was good mates with at school always wanted to be a professional chef, having aced and loved home economics. When he left school he went to work in McDonalds full time, developing an understanding of a working kitchen, customer service and food as business. After a few years there he went to a (no longer there, but one time famous) restaurant in Bristol and worked as a kitchen assistant, eventually working his way up to sous chef. He then moved to London and we lost touch (and grew apart I guess), which was about ten years ago. I saw him again a few months ago whilst he was visiting his brother (who is still close friends with another mate of mine) and, upon asking how it was all going, he said that he's been fairly successful and was on the brink of heading up his own kitchen, but the whole experience had completely put him off food in terms of his own enjoyment of it and he now just eats to live.

On the plus side, he did used to weigh about seventeen stone and now looks more like eleven.

All depends on the person, though, as others have said.

_____________________________

FAVE FILMS
BO BOMBS

(in reply to Dirk Miggler)
Post #: 20
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 9/6/2012 2:57:28 PM   
Spaldron


Posts: 10485
Joined: 6/10/2006
From: Chair

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron

I always try to quietly distance myself from the pseudo analytical subtext bullshit that comes with being a film nerd and frequenting film forums. I generally try to enjoy a film and write about why I like it, I cant stand all the film thesis university explanations on the existential reasoning behind the motivations of Biff Tannen etc. He's just a cunt, accept it!


Thats a bit of a limited, one-sided way to look at things. Sure, enjoy your movie for what it is, but why be so judgmental towards those of us that do want to look further? I wouldn't ever hold "film as entertainment" against anyone who chooses to watch a film for what it is, in the same way that I wouldn't judge anyone who only wants to look at paintings that they deem look nice (as opposed to being led by subtext), or music that only sounds melodic (which is what naturally sounds "good" to the human brain). Do you feel the same way about all forms of art?

And how can something be "pseudo analytical" anyway? You're either analysing it or you're not, the "pseudo" comes with the findings, not the process surely?


Actually I was only joking with that post.

_____________________________

And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts
And I looked and behold, a pale horse
And his name that sat on him was Death
And Hell followed with him.

(in reply to adambatman82)
Post #: 21
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 9/6/2012 6:02:37 PM   
Hood_Man


Posts: 12116
Joined: 30/9/2005
I envy people who can watch a film and pick up on all those things first time, it always takes me about 2-3 viewings (sometimes more), and even then I'm not that confident in what I'm saying.

One thing I notice straight away though are any technical things, whether it's a green screen (obvious or not), lighting, the focus pulling etc. Or when a certain camera manoeuvres is being performed I'm thinking about how the crew are pulling it off.

That can be a bit distracting sometimes.

Basically I have a really easy measure of whether I'm enjoying a film or not. Arse numb? Film's dull. Arse not Numb? Great film.

< Message edited by Hood_Man -- 9/6/2012 6:27:55 PM >

(in reply to Spaldron)
Post #: 22
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 9/6/2012 6:06:47 PM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron


quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron

I always try to quietly distance myself from the pseudo analytical subtext bullshit that comes with being a film nerd and frequenting film forums. I generally try to enjoy a film and write about why I like it, I cant stand all the film thesis university explanations on the existential reasoning behind the motivations of Biff Tannen etc. He's just a cunt, accept it!


Thats a bit of a limited, one-sided way to look at things. Sure, enjoy your movie for what it is, but why be so judgmental towards those of us that do want to look further? I wouldn't ever hold "film as entertainment" against anyone who chooses to watch a film for what it is, in the same way that I wouldn't judge anyone who only wants to look at paintings that they deem look nice (as opposed to being led by subtext), or music that only sounds melodic (which is what naturally sounds "good" to the human brain). Do you feel the same way about all forms of art?

And how can something be "pseudo analytical" anyway? You're either analysing it or you're not, the "pseudo" comes with the findings, not the process surely?


Actually I was only joking with that post.


Oh right. Hilarious.

(in reply to Spaldron)
Post #: 23
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 9/6/2012 6:10:33 PM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hood_Man
Basically I have a really easy measure of whether I'm enjoying a film or not. Arse numb? Film's dull. Arse not dumb? Great film.


I think it was Jack Warner used to have the "piss test" for when approving films that his studio were putting out. He'd give them a rating based on how many times he had to leave the room to go to the bathroom, the lower the number of trips the better the film.

< Message edited by adambatman82 -- 9/6/2012 6:14:30 PM >

(in reply to Hood_Man)
Post #: 24
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 9/6/2012 6:12:46 PM   
Spaldron


Posts: 10485
Joined: 6/10/2006
From: Chair

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hood_Man

Basically I have a really easy measure of whether I'm enjoying a film or not. Arse numb? Film's dull. Arse not dumb? Great film.


Never knew it was possible to have a dumb arse before.

_____________________________

And I heard a voice in the midst of the four beasts
And I looked and behold, a pale horse
And his name that sat on him was Death
And Hell followed with him.

(in reply to Hood_Man)
Post #: 25
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 9/6/2012 6:29:20 PM   
Hood_Man


Posts: 12116
Joined: 30/9/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hood_Man

Basically I have a really easy measure of whether I'm enjoying a film or not. Arse numb? Film's dull. Arse not dumb? Great film.


Never knew it was possible to have a dumb arse before.

Fixed

It's possible to know many though

(in reply to Spaldron)
Post #: 26
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 11/6/2012 2:58:35 PM   
st3veebee


Posts: 2353
Joined: 3/9/2006
From: 9303 Lyon Drive
Personally I believe that film always works best when it engages you on the most primal level. I suppose there isn't much wrong with deconstructing a film or finding hidden details that can end up enhancing the overall experience. The only problem with this approach is that it creates something of a barrier between the viewer and the film. Treating a film as a subject means you will inevitably don't get lost within the world created: instead standing back and critiquing.


I have seen Prometheus twice now: the first time I lost myself in the narrative (what little there was of it) and the tense scenes hit me all the harder etc. I walked out talking about that sequence and about how fantastic Fassbender was, but inevitably how little the film moved me. However the second time I could sit back and take in all the character nuances and minor details. The shocks were less effective (of course they would be with prior knowledge) but the film was engaging on a different level. Maybe not as immersive but enjoyable none the less.

This is, in my opinion, the best way of watching films: and hence why I thought those students were slightly arsehole-ish.

_____________________________

Latest Films:

Two days in New York: 4/5

Prometheus: 3.5/5

Abe Lincoln: VH 3/5

Twin Peaks: FWWM 3.5/5

(in reply to Hood_Man)
Post #: 27
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 11/6/2012 3:51:10 PM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee

Personally I believe that film always works best when it engages you on the most primal level. I suppose there isn't much wrong with deconstructing a film or finding hidden details that can end up enhancing the overall experience. The only problem with this approach is that it creates something of a barrier between the viewer and the film. Treating a film as a subject means you will inevitably don't get lost within the world created: instead standing back and critiquing.

I have seen Prometheus twice now: the first time I lost myself in the narrative (what little there was of it) and the tense scenes hit me all the harder etc. I walked out talking about that sequence and about how fantastic Fassbender was, but inevitably how little the film moved me. However the second time I could sit back and take in all the character nuances and minor details. The shocks were less effective (of course they would be with prior knowledge) but the film was engaging on a different level. Maybe not as immersive but enjoyable none the less.

This is, in my opinion, the best way of watching films: and hence why I thought those students were slightly arsehole-ish.


I dont understand why you're dealing in absolutes tho: you're presupposing that anyone who likes to deconstruct a film does so at the behest of being involved on what you deem to be a "primal" level. Cant we do both? Why does it have to be one or the other?

(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 28
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 11/6/2012 4:23:12 PM   
st3veebee


Posts: 2353
Joined: 3/9/2006
From: 9303 Lyon Drive
quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee

Personally I believe that film always works best when it engages you on the most primal level. I suppose there isn't much wrong with deconstructing a film or finding hidden details that can end up enhancing the overall experience. The only problem with this approach is that it creates something of a barrier between the viewer and the film. Treating a film as a subject means you will inevitably don't get lost within the world created: instead standing back and critiquing.

I have seen Prometheus twice now: the first time I lost myself in the narrative (what little there was of it) and the tense scenes hit me all the harder etc. I walked out talking about that sequence and about how fantastic Fassbender was, but inevitably how little the film moved me. However the second time I could sit back and take in all the character nuances and minor details. The shocks were less effective (of course they would be with prior knowledge) but the film was engaging on a different level. Maybe not as immersive but enjoyable none the less.

This is, in my opinion, the best way of watching films: and hence why I thought those students were slightly arsehole-ish.


I dont understand why you're dealing in absolutes tho: you're presupposing that anyone who likes to deconstruct a film does so at the behest of being involved on what you deem to be a "primal" level. Cant we do both? Why does it have to be one or the other?



Perhaps, but I am just speaking from experience. Presuming I am watching a film once, for the first time, I simply cannot lend myself to analyse every scene from a critical standpoint, and at the same time invest in the characters (as much anyway): I can't have two frames of mind running at the same time. If I am swept away by the emotions on screen, the chance of me being able to appreciate the subtext/ symbolism of any given frame is definitively reduced.


In regards to working on sets taking away from the film viewing experience: I guess it is a bit like learning a magicians tricks. You lose the thrill of not knowing.

_____________________________

Latest Films:

Two days in New York: 4/5

Prometheus: 3.5/5

Abe Lincoln: VH 3/5

Twin Peaks: FWWM 3.5/5

(in reply to adambatman82)
Post #: 29
RE: A career in film: destroying the magic of films for... - 11/6/2012 4:27:08 PM   
adambatman82

 

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee

quote:

ORIGINAL: adambatman82


quote:

ORIGINAL: st3veebee

Personally I believe that film always works best when it engages you on the most primal level. I suppose there isn't much wrong with deconstructing a film or finding hidden details that can end up enhancing the overall experience. The only problem with this approach is that it creates something of a barrier between the viewer and the film. Treating a film as a subject means you will inevitably don't get lost within the world created: instead standing back and critiquing.

I have seen Prometheus twice now: the first time I lost myself in the narrative (what little there was of it) and the tense scenes hit me all the harder etc. I walked out talking about that sequence and about how fantastic Fassbender was, but inevitably how little the film moved me. However the second time I could sit back and take in all the character nuances and minor details. The shocks were less effective (of course they would be with prior knowledge) but the film was engaging on a different level. Maybe not as immersive but enjoyable none the less.

This is, in my opinion, the best way of watching films: and hence why I thought those students were slightly arsehole-ish.


I dont understand why you're dealing in absolutes tho: you're presupposing that anyone who likes to deconstruct a film does so at the behest of being involved on what you deem to be a "primal" level. Cant we do both? Why does it have to be one or the other?


Perhaps, but I am just speaking from experience. Presuming I am watching a film once, for the first time, I simply cannot lend myself to analyse every scene from a critical standpoint, and at the same time invest in the characters (as much anyway): I can't have two frames of mind running at the same time. If I am swept away by the emotions on screen, the chance of me being able to appreciate the subtext/ symbolism of any given frame is definitively reduced.


In regards to working on sets taking away from the film viewing experience: I guess it is a bit like learning a magicians tricks. You lose the thrill of not knowing.


I appreciate that this is all based upon your personal approach to watching films, but its your assumptions about others ("The only problem with this approach is that it creates something of a barrier between the viewer and the film. Treating a film as a subject means you will inevitably don't get lost within the world created: instead standing back and critiquing." etc) that is a little too presumptuous. I have many friends that analyse the hell out of a movie, but still get caught up in the moment in the same way that any viewer might. I also have friends that go the other way too. Everyone's approach is different.

Agree about working on a set tho. I've struggled with judging a film fairly when having interviewed directors and cast, so tend to try and keep away from that aspect of late.

(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Movie Musings >> A career in film: destroying the magic of films forever? Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.109