Board 8 > 5 > 4 > 3 > 8 > 7 > 6 > 1 > 2 >> 9

(+) Yeah! (+)

CasanovaZelos posted...

insulting and reductionist

This effectively summarizes every post I've seen from you in this topic

---

Lopen posted...

A movie that has exceptional cinematography can be taken to another level.

I'm not saying cinematography is meaningless-- that's you, either intentionally or unintentionally, missing my point. My point is that cinematography alone doesn't make a film worth watching as a consumer. It is in fact probably the most expendable part of what makes a movie good. If the only thing you can say as praise for a movie is that it has good cinematography, then the movie is no better than popcorn tripe.

So if you're saying "well The Last Jedi has a generic narrative but OH MAN THE CINEMATOGRAPHY" that just feels like you're a film school student who has nothing better to do with their training than be pretentious on an Internet forum. And if you're trying to say that The Last Jedi and Star Wars are similar in any way, then that explains why I'm calling you a film school student and not a graduate and why you have nothing better to do currently.

You see the Green Knight?

I feel like it would drive you crazy

---

No but I want to now.

---

Lopen posted...

This effectively summarizes every post I've seen from you in this topic

Based on what, exactly? I said I liked the cinematography and you have literally blown up at me over it.

---

Like, all I have said is that The Last Jedi stands out among other blockbusters due to its visual details. Stop acting like I'm saying it's high art or something when I'm not.

---

CasanovaZelos posted...

Star Wars in general is based around a rather generic premise

Reductionist

CasanovaZelos posted...

I don't get why people act like the plot has ever been the selling point.

Insulting (indirect, form of being condescending)

And if you need me to explain why post #43 is insulting and reductionist we may have a real communication breakdown here

---

BlueCrystalTear posted...

8 is definitely underrated. People hated that they took risks and tried to do something a little different,

I don't hate 8 because it's different. I hate 8 because it's bad.

---

CasanovaZelos posted...

Like, all I have said is that The Last Jedi stands out among other blockbusters due to its visual details. Stop acting like I'm saying it's high art or something when I'm not.

So it sounds a lot like you agree with my take on it, with the caveat that the visual effects alone actually make it really worth seeing.

Which I mean, if you just said it that way to begin with, wouldn't feel like you're trying to present your opinion on what makes film worth watching as superior. But yeah keep telling yourself that I'm the only one being insulting here.

---

Lopen posted...

Reductionist

Insulting (indirect, form of being condescending)

And if you need me to explain why post #43 is insulting and reductionist we may have a real communication breakdown here

How is saying the plot isn't the selling point a form of condescension?

---

Like, to me, the selling point of Star Wars is the way it takes the common good vs. evil storyline and filters it through a space setting with western and samurai influences; for the original trilogy, I think the strong cast of characters is also a major part that the other two trilogies lack.

So, to me, the plot is generic but elevated by key stylistic choices. And, really, I think the simple design of Star Wars is part of what makes the original movie so great. 'Generic' is not an innately negative thing when combined with other elements; it's why the original trilogy spoke to so many people. The story was familiar but the presentation was like nothing people had seen before. It's the difference between plot and storytelling, and my point of view is that The Last Jedi is a questionable story told well (while the first two are average stories told incredibly well)

---

Lopen posted...

No but I want to now.

I..... Liked it?

There were people in my theater who walked out at around the hour mark of nothing happening

---

I think I might actually prefer The Last Jedi to The Green Knight? Which feels like an odd statement...

Like, The Green Knight is absolutely beautiful and I appreciate adapting a classic legend and doing basically nothing to make sense of it for a modern audience but I wanted a little more oomph. But I also found A Ghost Story underwhelming so maybe something about David Lowery rubs me the wrong way despite working in a style I usually love.

---

azuarc posted...

I don't hate 8 because it's different. I hate 8 because it's bad.

Thats how I feel too. SW 8 and 9 are the two worst movies Ive seen in a while along with Wonder Woman 84, but somehow even that was less painful to watch

CasanovaZelos posted...

How is saying the plot isn't the selling point a form of condescension?

There is nothing actually wrong with the plot of Star Wars and comparing it to TLJ which has a lot of problems is condescending and reductionist to the issues people have with the film. There are elements to the plot that are absolutely a selling point to people in Star Wars-- notably as said the rich setting and fun characters, but the beats on the story itself are an excellent lesson in the basic elements a story needs to be good as well.

Simple is not always bad and simple doesn't preclude something from being an appeal to someone.

Like the source of possibly the most infamous spoiler of all time is from OT Star Wars, and you're saying that plot wasn't a selling point to anybody and comparable to generic blockbuster tripe? Self-important much?

---

Lopen posted...

There is nothing actually wrong with the plot of Star Wars and comparing it to TLJ which has a lot of problems is condescending and reductionist to the issues people have with the film. There are elements to the plot that are absolutely a selling point to people in Star Wars-- notably as said the rich setting and fun characters, but the beats on the story itself are an excellent lesson in the basic elements a story needs to be good as well.

Simple is not always bad and simple doesn't preclude something from being an appeal to someone.

Like the source of possibly the most infamous spoiler of all time is from OT Star Wars, and you're saying that plot wasn't a selling point to anybody and comparable to generic blockbuster tripe? Self-important much?

I said 4 and 5 are all-time classics, though; and part of what makes 5 so good is that it took the simple narrative of the first film and expanded it into something greater. And I will still hold that the plot was not the selling point - like, you keep saying 'blockbuster tripe' when Jaws and the original Star Wars are what kicked off the blockbuster era in the first place. Star Wars was sold on the visual elements but happened to go beyond that in the actual work, which is why it has endured when so many that followed have failed to last.

And I literally said in post #60 that "And, really, I think the simple design of Star Wars is part of what makes the original movie so great." I like the simplicity of it!

---

Listen man I think we agree overall

I'm just saying your first post came off as a bit condescending with how you expressed your thoughts

So when I say "blockbuster tripe" it means stuff that's just all effects, no substance whatsoever. You apparently inferred a meaning in my words I'm not sure where you got it from, then proceded to defend THE CINEMATOGRAPHY which is like, the definition of what I meant by tripe, a movie that is all cinematography and glitz with nothing behind it. Then you turned around and tried to say the original trilogy was in the same boat as it relates to plot as TLJ, and tried to claim I was saying cinematography didn't matter when I wasn't, and yeah, I'm not the one who came in here looking for a fight, that was you. I just didn't thinly veil my jabs.

So to make it clear I'm not saying all blockbusters are bad, emphasis is on the tripe not the blockbuster-- I freaking love a lot of them, but I also realize that there are some that are formulaic attempts that fill in the dots on basics and try to paint it over by looking shiny and say "well it's a good movie now." So when you then turn around and say "well the plot of Star Wars was never the draw" while praising the cinematography of TLJ as something that makes it a great movie it makes you sound like you don't get why Star Wars was a good movie to begin with. Like I hate to bring up Transformers as that's everyone's punching bag by now, but if you want the textbook example of what I mean by "blockbuster tripe" that's it and I'd say TLJ has a lot more in common with your Transformers of the world than your A New Hopes or Jaws.

I'm not sure how you argued with me so much while apparently mostly agreeing. Like you say you actually praised Star Wars in POST 60 but this is way after we were taking jabs at each other so *shrug

---

Episode 6 is bad, and as soon as everyone admits that it doesn't deserve the sacred protection it gets from being part of the OT, we will advance as a society.

Republicans and Democrats will get along. Peace in the Middle East. Pandas off the endangered species list.

And all everyone has to do is admit episode 6 sucks except for the fight at the end.

---

all the prequels suck

---

Lopen posted...

Listen man I think we agree overall

I'm just saying your first post came off as a bit condescending with how you expressed your thoughts

So when I say "blockbuster tripe" it means stuff that's just all effects, no substance whatsoever. You apparently inferred a meaning in my words I'm not sure where you got it from, then proceded to defend THE CINEMATOGRAPHY which is like, the definition of what I meant by tripe, a movie that is all cinematography and glitz with nothing behind it. Then you turned around and tried to say the original trilogy was in the same boat as it relates to plot as TLJ, and tried to claim I was saying cinematography didn't matter when I wasn't, and yeah, I'm not the one who came in here looking for a fight, that was you. I just didn't thinly veil my jabs.

So to make it clear I'm not saying all blockbusters are bad, emphasis is on the tripe not the blockbuster-- I freaking love a lot of them, but I also realize that there are some that are formulaic attempts that fill in the dots on basics and try to paint it over by looking shiny and say "well it's a good movie now." So when you then turn around and say "well the plot of Star Wars was never the draw" while praising the cinematography of TLJ as something that makes it a great movie it makes you sound like you don't get why Star Wars was a good movie to begin with. Like I hate to bring up Transformers as that's everyone's punching bag by now, but if you want the textbook example of what I mean by "blockbuster tripe" that's it and I'd say TLJ has a lot more in common with your Transformers of the world than your A New Hopes or Jaws.

I'm not sure how you argued with me so much while apparently mostly agreeing. Like you say you actually praised Star Wars in POST 60 but this is way after we were taking jabs at each other so *shrug

I think the only 'jab' I took was in #43, and that was me just trying to point out that there are classic films that largely achieved that status almost entirely through their cinematography. I admit the second part was rather crude and apologize for that, but I also honestly have never seen anyone associate modern blockbusters with strong cinematography. It is almost always art films that get praised in that regard, while most blockbusters fall back on visual effects - that's the difference (well, one of many) between Transformers and The Last Jedi for me. The actual way in which scenes are framed in The Last Jedi is like something I rarely see in high budget movies these days. Too many blockbusters fall back on pure visual spectacle over more nuanced elements; it's all flash presented in the most basic way possible.

The Last Jedi does shot composition well - luckily, Rian Johnson followed it up with Knives Out, which shows off all the same techniques while also having a legitimately impressive story to go with it.

---

CasanovaZelos posted...

almost entirely through their cinematography

I think you're very wrong about that

Cinematography is a big part of what made them get the attention they did but the difference is you can't JUST have that and have a good movie. Film IS a visual medium but ultimately if the underlying story isn't there there is nothing to be the backbone of. I know you think I'm just being snarky but it actually is true-- you can have the most clever angle in your scene that adds a feeling of dread or whatever that you would have never thought of or expected, but if you don't care about the characters or story then what does it actually matter, really.

Also Cinematography to me doesn't particularly matter in a way that merits mention unless it evokes feelings that wouldn't normally occur in the scene without it-- again, I struggle to think of any scenes in TLJ where it's like "well now I have a feeling of ____ where it wouldn't have existed before"

And I dunno maybe this isn't a common opinion but think a lot of modern blockbusters do Cinematography well-- the reason it's not mentioned often is because so many of them do it well so it's not interesting to be a talking point aside from the ones that are more creative about it. I guess you're saying "well they have budget and are entirely spectacle and TLJ is exceptional" but then I'm not really seeing where it's done all that much in TLJ either aside from things just looking generally crisp and the shots not being distracting. (which for me is actually not something that can just be assumed for the record)

Like two scenes pop to me in terms of "wow that's an interesting shot"-- the hyperdrive scene (which I actually hate conceptually in a Star Wars sense but I digress) and then there are some parts of that battle in the throne room (which you can find people picking apart in terms of the fight choreography making sense which to me is picking nits at some level but on the other hand I somewhat agree)

But yeah maybe I'm just someone who doesn't "get it" too. Which is fine. But then it should be up to you to elaborate on what you mean rather than just say "the cinematography is excellent"

---

Lopen posted...

I think you're very wrong about that

Cinematography is a big part of what made them get the attention they did but the difference is you can't JUST have that and have a good movie. Film IS a visual medium but ultimately if the underlying story isn't there there is nothing to be the backbone of. I know you think I'm just being snarky but it actually is true-- you can have the most clever angle in your scene that adds a feeling of dread or whatever that you would have never thought of or expected, but if you don't care about the characters or story then what does it actually matter, really.

Also Cinematography to me doesn't particularly matter in a way that merits mention unless it evokes feelings that wouldn't normally occur in the scene without it-- again, I struggle to think of any scenes in TLJ where it's like "well now I have a feeling of ____ where it wouldn't have existed before"

And I dunno maybe this isn't a common opinion but think a lot of modern blockbusters do Cinematography well-- the reason it's not mentioned often is because so many of them do it well so it's not interesting to be a talking point aside from the ones that are more creative about it. I guess you're saying "well they have budget and are entirely spectacle and TLJ is exceptional" but then I'm not really seeing where it's done all that much in TLJ either aside from things just looking generally crisp and the shots not being distracting. (which for me is actually not something that can just be assumed for the record)

Like two scenes pop to me in terms of "wow that's an interesting shot"-- the hyperdrive scene (which I actually hate conceptually in a Star Wars sense but I digress) and then there are some parts of that battle in the throne room (which you can find people picking apart in terms of the fight choreography making sense which to me is picking nits at some level but on the other hand I somewhat agree)

But yeah maybe I'm just someone who doesn't "get it" too. Which is fine. But then it should be up to you to elaborate on what you mean rather than just say "the cinematography is excellent"

The problem is actually citing specifics would involve rewatching The Last Jedi which I would rather not do...it's a lot easier to talk about narrative since we can just look at the Wikipedia page as a refresher. But to compare it to other blockbusters, I think most of the Disney remakes are the most obvious example. They rely almost entirely on shot-reverse shot for dialogue, cutting way more than necessary while doing nothing more than centering the person speaking in the shot. Or there are other spectacle films like Godzilla: King of the Monsters where the images are so close that actually making out the action itself is sometimes difficult. It's hard for me to think of many blockbusters that don't rely on cookie-cutter framing, yet some moments in The Last Jedi are legitimately jawdropping - namely the hyperdrive and throne room scenes, but I remember even the basic scenes do a lot to showcase the surrounding environments when most blockbusters keep too neatly centered on the central figure of any individual moment. There is a sense of scale and space to the imagery of The Last Jedi that many films neglect.

I also heavily disagree that cinematography is just a backbone to narrative - films like Koyaanisqatsi and Man With a Movie Camera have no traditional narrative to speak off. A message might be inferred by both, but that is done almost entirely through the camerawork.

---

CasanovaZelos posted...

A message might be inferred by both, but that is done almost entirely through the camerawork.

I'm not saying the story needs to be spoonfed and amazing for a movie to be worthy of watching but framing and camera tricks can only do so much to salvage a steaming wreckage, particularly in the case of The Last Jedi where the story is actively bad and distracting.

Like I will say it can do a lot. I like the movie Silent Hill quite a bit (I'm the only one) and it's almost entirely due to how it's shot. The plot is a bunch of who cares but it just feels really creepy to me throughout, which is excellent.

But for the record would actually take a movie with "no narrative to speak of" over what TLJ is. Also outside of a few scenes I can't really say the cinematography salvages much of anything in it.

Ultimately it comes down to emotions, regardless of what evokes them, and watching TLJ I just feel dead inside. If the cinematography was good enough, that wouldn't be the case, and that's no fault of the camerawork, but the plot is just too heavy.

---

I mean, I also don't agree with The Last Jedi being a bad story - I think it's a flawed one, but the only parts that actively detract from the experience for me are the casino planet subplot and the treatment of Luke's character. Most of the other issues I see people bring up don't really bother me and a couple I think are actually good (at least, until they were 'corrected' in IX).

So, as someone who finds the story average with some flaws, the cinematography does do enough to make up for the flaws for me. And, it's been my general experience that people who are not as invested in Star Wars like me tend to like 8 a lot more than people who are invested - which is a problem for a franchise film, but I do think it explains the massive gulf in reception.

---

CasanovaZelos posted...

So, as someone who finds the story average with some flaws, the cinematography does do enough to make up for the flaws for me. And, it's been my general experience that people who are not as invested in Star Wars like me tend to like 8 a lot more than people who are invested - which is a problem for a franchise film, but I do think it explains the massive gulf in reception.

Definitely some truth in this, though I personally was hugely invested and loved it anyway. It went to exactly the places it needed to go after episode 7 imo and did it (mostly) very well. Then episode 9 killed all that

Episode 9 has no scene to match the one where Rey meditates and feels the force on the island, and Luke calls out the bullshit idea that it's only the Jedi's to control, or the scene with Yoda. Not even close. It's too busy trying to "fix" shit that didn't need fixing.

---