Post subject: Re: Film: The Tree of Life (Malick-Penn-Pitt-May 27th)
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2012 5:31 am
Coast to Coast
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:21 am Posts: 23078 Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina Gender: Male
Harmless wrote:
I mean, the storytelling on Prometheus wasn't great, but it did 'have a plot'. What I don't get is how you could say worth making a movie about. That's one heck of a subjective call. Is any movie worth making? Why? Couldn't it be argued that no sci-fi is worth making, when we haven't got much money and we could be making more important films to raise awareness of shit? In this case, 'a plot worth making a movie about' is just 'a plot that I like'.
Also, a lot of movies are just not necessarily plot-driven. Cinema, as an audiovisual medium, allows for a wide range of expression, some of which is heavily story-driven and a lot of which isn't. A lot of the great, influential European films of the past barely had enough story to fill out the allotted synopsis space on the back of a DVD box. Sometimes the value is elsewhere, and to close yourself off from movies that aren't traditional narratives is to deny a lot of what makes film a powerful medium. We talked about Tarkovsky earlier in this thread. "The Mirror" is one of the greatest movies ever made by anyone, ever, and has a rather esoteric approach to storytelling.
_________________ For more insulated and ill-informed opinions, click here.
Post subject: Re: Film: The Tree of Life (Malick-Penn-Pitt-May 27th)
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2012 5:56 am
The Snowboy
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:53 pm Posts: 11395
theplatypus wrote:
Harmless wrote:
I mean, the storytelling on Prometheus wasn't great, but it did 'have a plot'. What I don't get is how you could say worth making a movie about. That's one heck of a subjective call. Is any movie worth making? Why? Couldn't it be argued that no sci-fi is worth making, when we haven't got much money and we could be making more important films to raise awareness of shit? In this case, 'a plot worth making a movie about' is just 'a plot that I like'.
Also, a lot of movies are just not necessarily plot-driven. Cinema, as an audiovisual medium, allows for a wide range of expression, some of which is heavily story-driven and a lot of which isn't. A lot of the great, influential European films of the past barely had enough story to fill out the allotted synopsis space on the back of a DVD box. Sometimes the value is elsewhere, and to close yourself off from movies that aren't traditional narratives is to deny a lot of what makes film a powerful medium. We talked about Tarkovsky earlier in this thread. "The Mirror" is one of the greatest movies ever made by anyone, ever, and has a rather esoteric approach to storytelling.
Yeah. My movie-watching friends used to tease me for apparently liking movies 'where nothing happens'. It's true, I like my plots to stay out of the way, or just be really streamlined, whilst I'm wowed at script, cinematography, art direction, and just the layering of concepts. I like poetry on film, if I can get it, which is why I think I'm going to really like Tree of Life, and I'm also desperately looking forward to Beasts of the Southern Wild. I have trouble recalling movies I've loved with these aesthetics -- I'm certain you'll have seen more movies of every ilk than me -- but there have been plenty of them, and they're usually not even showing at my local cinema, NOT because I'm a hipster, but because I look for emotional poignance most of all. Sometimes 'plot' can mean a clinical approach. Life itself doesn't really have a plot except for 'what ends up happening, completely by accident', ya know?
I mean, the storytelling on Prometheus wasn't great, but it did 'have a plot'. What I don't get is how you could say worth making a movie about. That's one heck of a subjective call. Is any movie worth making? Why? Couldn't it be argued that no sci-fi is worth making, when we haven't got much money and we could be making more important films to raise awareness of shit? In this case, 'a plot worth making a movie about' is just 'a plot that I like'.
Also, a lot of movies are just not necessarily plot-driven. Cinema, as an audiovisual medium, allows for a wide range of expression, some of which is heavily story-driven and a lot of which isn't. A lot of the great, influential European films of the past barely had enough story to fill out the allotted synopsis space on the back of a DVD box. Sometimes the value is elsewhere, and to close yourself off from movies that aren't traditional narratives is to deny a lot of what makes film a powerful medium. We talked about Tarkovsky earlier in this thread. "The Mirror" is one of the greatest movies ever made by anyone, ever, and has a rather esoteric approach to storytelling.
So, yeah. But this approach can be tricky to do successfully. There are many films out there that intend to approach things from the convey-emotions-through-visual-art-not-plot approach and fall flat or are so personal to those involved in the production that the emotion doesn't translate. IMHO, "The Tree of Life" is unappealing to many people because of overly personal nature of the story. It wasn't until the scenes with the new born baby that I attached to the film, because I could closely identify with what the director and cinematographer were showing us. Otherwise I may have ended up with the impression that the director simultaneously resented his childhood and missed it and now needed to show us some shitty CGI dinosaurs to prove it to us.
Post subject: Re: Film: The Tree of Life (Malick-Penn-Pitt-May 27th)
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2012 11:38 am
The Snowboy
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 2:53 pm Posts: 11395
broken iris wrote:
theplatypus wrote:
Harmless wrote:
I mean, the storytelling on Prometheus wasn't great, but it did 'have a plot'. What I don't get is how you could say worth making a movie about. That's one heck of a subjective call. Is any movie worth making? Why? Couldn't it be argued that no sci-fi is worth making, when we haven't got much money and we could be making more important films to raise awareness of shit? In this case, 'a plot worth making a movie about' is just 'a plot that I like'.
Also, a lot of movies are just not necessarily plot-driven. Cinema, as an audiovisual medium, allows for a wide range of expression, some of which is heavily story-driven and a lot of which isn't. A lot of the great, influential European films of the past barely had enough story to fill out the allotted synopsis space on the back of a DVD box. Sometimes the value is elsewhere, and to close yourself off from movies that aren't traditional narratives is to deny a lot of what makes film a powerful medium. We talked about Tarkovsky earlier in this thread. "The Mirror" is one of the greatest movies ever made by anyone, ever, and has a rather esoteric approach to storytelling.
So, yeah. But this approach can be tricky to do successfully. There are many films out there that intend to approach things from the convey-emotions-through-visual-art-not-plot approach and fall flat or are so personal to those involved in the production that the emotion doesn't translate. IMHO, "The Tree of Life" is unappealing to many people because of overly personal nature of the story. It wasn't until the scenes with the new born baby that I attached to the film, because I could closely identify with what the director and cinematographer were showing us. Otherwise I may have ended up with the impression that the director simultaneously resented his childhood and missed it and now needed to show us some shitty CGI dinosaurs to prove it to us.
But not even the best films resonate with everybody. You can't possibly hope to do that, and there are far too many people who are too ready to pronounce a film complete crap just because they themselves didn't identify. There has to be a level of objectivity with this kind of film, and it has wowed certain people I've spoken to, particularly those of a spiritual / religious bent. That's not going to be everyone's cup of tea, but that's OK. It sounds like a lot of this film works by visual symbolism and very minimal dialogue. It also sounds strange that dinosaurs / the origin of the universe, is juxtaposed with domestic, suburban life. But that's what poetry does, puts disparate imagery together for an overall message, albeit a mysterious and elusive one. It very often works with these kinds of contrasts. So I think some audiences are more used to that than others. I think I'm going to really dig it. I hope so, anyway.
Post subject: Re: Film: The Tree of Life (Malick-Penn-Pitt-May 27th)
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2012 11:53 am
Coast to Coast
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:21 am Posts: 23078 Location: Buenos Aires, Argentina Gender: Male
broken iris wrote:
So, yeah. But this approach can be tricky to do successfully. There are many films out there that intend to approach things from the convey-emotions-through-visual-art-not-plot approach and fall flat or are so personal to those involved in the production that the emotion doesn't translate. IMHO, "The Tree of Life" is unappealing to many people because of overly personal nature of the story. It wasn't until the scenes with the new born baby that I attached to the film, because I could closely identify with what the director and cinematographer were showing us. Otherwise I may have ended up with the impression that the director simultaneously resented his childhood and missed it and now needed to show us some shitty CGI dinosaurs to prove it to us.
Sure. I'm not saying everybody needs to like this movie. My post was about the fact that, out of the broad range of things one can find objectionable about a film, "there was very little story" or "the story is unoriginal" is a silly one for a movie of this type.
_________________ For more insulated and ill-informed opinions, click here.
Post subject: Re: Film: The Tree of Life (Malick-Penn-Pitt-May 27th)
Posted: Wed Jul 11, 2012 2:03 pm
Supersonic
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 5:55 pm Posts: 11320 Location: Brooklyn Gender: Male
theplatypus wrote:
Also, a lot of movies are just not necessarily plot-driven. Cinema, as an audiovisual medium, allows for a wide range of expression, some of which is heavily story-driven and a lot of which isn't. A lot of the great, influential European films of the past barely had enough story to fill out the allotted synopsis space on the back of a DVD box. Sometimes the value is elsewhere, and to close yourself off from movies that aren't traditional narratives is to deny a lot of what makes film a powerful medium.
Post subject: Re: Film: The Tree of Life (Malick-Penn-Pitt-May 27th)
Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 5:23 pm
Got Some
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:37 am Posts: 2465 Location: A dark place
This reminded me that Malick has three movies in post-production and all are slated to come out in 2013. I don't think they are supposed to be connected in any way.
_________________ Do you like crappy amateur photography? Check out my photo blog here.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
