Movies/Cinematography I: Discussions, Q&A

[Kennigit]

Movie & Cinematography I​

picture open for suggestions
​

So we all know that detailed discussion of any particular movie/film, director, or filming technique obviously belongs in A&E. E.g. "what is your favorite movie set in the 18th century that makes reference to Nero" should belong there, as would a thread of "All things Star Wars". Clearly.

Here in OT space, we have a lively enough recently seen movie series to discuss movies you have recently seen.

But a thread that is open for casual discussion, unlike the rigorous merits of A&E or the red diamond, has it's home too . Some previous iterations generally died out due to smaller traffic trying to be too specific (e.g. "help me identify this movie" serial threads)

I can put links in second post to particularly good discussions or posts, or those could split off into their own threads

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please discuss topics of interest, various genres, comparisons between films, and all aspects of cinema

Please feel welcome to ask for movie recommendations, q&a (anyone recognize X film?), and give advice

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
​

OP to start: What are 5 films that represent your taste in movies?

I've posted about it before, snipping a bit out:

So this tries to take into account stylistic things, etc:
Full metal jacket (1987)
Drive (2011)
Contagion (2011)
-----------------------------
28 days later (2002)
tangled (2010)

first 3 I'd include; otherwise I could interchange a lot of movies. I try to like "low-key" plot development and bleak/darker themes. Though I also like the disney/pixar/etc musicals & animated films. Although tip top favourites will rotate around, films that stick around in my mind as "really a+" feel "complete" (emotionally, plot, character development, etc).

 

[Kennigit]

Oh yea

Reserved

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Well for starters, I have developed a very weird method of going about my movies.

That is, I cultivate a list of all movies I have seen since a certain date, and in that list I rank them within 20 designated categories (top to bottom).

Yes, some of my hobbies feel very sad. They are kinda said. But they are like a bad habit in so far as that no matter what I do will not get loose of it. I am afraid this list is with me to stay - and I am destined to forever apologize for having such a thing.

But at least there is something I intend to inherit to my future son. (everything else will get blown one way or another, I am confident to say)

Now, the thing is, my list makes it relatively easy for me to name you my five favorite movies.



But my five top movies which characterize my taste?

There is a difference between the two. One just is 'like x movie'
Another is 'x movie represents x taste'

So...Hugh!

I had to think about that.

But, after due consideration and excitement about putting my utterly useful list to - oho - use - there it is


In no particular order


- Adaptation (2002) - represents my taste in unconventional movies

- Flight ( 2012) - represents my taste in emotional movies focusing on a single person

- Into the Wild (2007) - represents my taste in free-spirited movies

- 28 Weeks Later (2007) - represents my taste in movies going for primal fears

- The Green Mile (1999) - represents my taste in sentimental movies

Honestly, this knows no system nor relevance. I just stopped at five. But I could go on an on.

Really, to be painfully honest - a true dorky movie lover can not be fit into buzzfeed categories!

 

[Kyriakos]

I don't like movies much, mostly because (in direct contrast to literature) they force a large part of what is going on to be deemed in specific form (by and large). However i did like some movies (of those i regard as more 'serious' at least), so maybe this would be a list of them...:

-Spider (2002. Great film about mental disorder, with a good cast, starring Ralph Fiennes)
-A beautiful mind (well, it suffers from Holywood disease, but still had its moments)
...? Not sure, really. The 2014 'Lord of Tears' had potential, but it clearly also had a tiny budget, and the ending was not what i would have liked (moving away from purely psychological explanation)

Inland Empire (by Lynch) was interesting for some parts (it lasts for 3 hours), but suffers from the usual Lynch issues of almost always having a female victim and violence against her as a subplot, coupled with rather not that obviously needed over-sexual scenes. I like some things in Lynch, but dislike others.

 

[sophie]

I don't like movies much, mostly because (in direct contrast to literature) they force a large part of what is going on to be deemed in specific form (by and large). However i did like some movies (of those i regard as more 'serious' at least), so maybe this would be a list of them...:

I cannot, for the life of me, figure out what you're trying to say here.

I love film, and I especially love cinematography and editing, which are the things I tend to focus most on when evaluating film. If anyone wants a great primer on what cinematography is and why it's important (perhaps the most important thing in film), they should read this:

http://floobynooby.blogspot.com/2013/12/the-cinematography-of-incredibles-part-1.html
part 2

Really just wonderful.

 

[Kyriakos]

^It's ok, in one of the myriad parallel worlds i am sure i did not readily view that as a bait, and so posted some further response

 

[sophie]

^It's ok, in one of the myriad parallel worlds i am sure i did not readily view that as a bait, and so posted some further response

No genuinely. Not a troll. I just don't know what you're trying to say. This sentence right here:

[movies] force a large part of what is going on to be deemed in specific form (by and large).

I want to respond to it, but I don't actually know what this is supposed to mean.

 

[Kennigit]

Less freedom to use your own imagination

People are very visual. You "see" something, and that is the only way to "see" it until proven strongly otherwise

 

[sophie]

Less freedom to use your own imagination

People are very visual. You "see" something, and that is the only way to "see" it until proven strongly otherwise

I guess that makes sense. I disagree, but it makes sense. To me the visual medium presents so many more opportunities for expression. In literature you work from what the author literally tells you. In film the director can add extra details or symbolism to a shot without necessarily distracting from his ultimate narrative or artistic point.

Obviously there are places that film just cannot go that books can. Books can be longer and have the opportunity to dwell on things that a movie simply couldn't dwell on. But a powerful movie is manyfold more resonating to me than a powerful novel.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

What are the artistic merits of shaky camera?

 

[Kyriakos]

Sometimes decent cinematography gets lost in the overall lack of any plot to speak of. Eg in most of Dario Argento's work

 

[warpus]

To me the visual medium presents so many more opportunities for expression.

I disagree, because the mind is the most powerful imaginative tool known to man, and literature allows the reader to use more of it. If the author is good, he has a lot more power than a cinematographer does, because he isn't limited by any visual medium at all, but only by the flexibility of the English language (or by whichever one he's using)

 

[EgonSpengler]

What are the artistic merits of shaky camera?

I think its one, good use (so far) has been in the "you are there" movies, where being unable to see or follow the action clearly is part of the point. Cloverfield is the first thing that comes to my mind as an example. I saw a good use of the 'shaky-cam' in a non-action, conversation scene just recently, and I remember thinking "hey, that's good", but now I can't remember what it was.

 

[Kennigit]

Terx I keep a list as well

But just today I was wondering, what death in a film struck you as the most interesting?

I will have time to ponder this myself