Film analyses

[Janus Whitefurr]

Funny, in my viewing of Cloverfield at the cinemas, my thoughts about the characters that yes, that is probably how people would act in that situation. And I liked the movie a bit more because of it. Even if there were moments where you could call something bad happening ("let me turn on the night vision" comes to mind), I saw nothing flawed with how the characters acted. They were delightfully regular joe-ish.

[Brunhidden]

that's funny, i spoke to two people who bought cloverfield and then were able to return the opened movie on the grounds that its so bad it hurts. aperantly the claim was substantial enough the stored actually refunded the money

[GabrielsThoughts]

I agree with Brunhiden: chibi lord of darkness... Cloverfeild was worse than Borat. I will shout it to the masses. You cannot convince me that that is how people would "really" react under those circumstances, because not everyone is the same or has the same preconceived notions or ideas. 

Q: What are some contemporary situations you are aware of where the concept of artistic authenticity is debated and questioned?

A: Hoaxes, works of parody, and  satire are often questioned for their originality.  Literature and  film  likewise share an affinity for using by the numbers plot formulas... could you really classify films such as  Blindness,  the Blair Witch, The Wikerman (2006),   and/or Cloverfeild as  authentically artistic when the themes of such horribly pretentious films are nothing more than half imagined copies of earlier successful projects. Success based on  fabricating not reality, but the idea that reality should be feared, or simply the  reality is that people will believe anything if you present it to them the right way.     

[Turnsky]

Funny, in my viewing of Cloverfield at the cinemas, my thoughts about the characters that yes, that is probably how people would act in that situation. And I liked the movie a bit more because of it. Even if there were moments where you could call something bad happening ("let me turn on the night vision" comes to mind), I saw nothing flawed with how the characters acted. They were delightfully regular joe-ish.

i'll agree with frrt that cloverfield was supposed to be from an 'eyewitness point of view' and how -real people- would act, cloverfield isn't meant to be the proverbial godzilla flick for pete's sake. Truth be told, was cloverfield up to the hype? no, is it a bad movie?, not really, not exactly a blockbuster, mind, but not really uwe boll bad, either.

[Zina]

I will shout it to the masses. You cannot convince me that that is how people would "really" react under those circumstances, because not everyone is the same or has the same preconceived notions or ideas. 

Doesn't that completely contradict your claim that a movie is "stupid" because the characters don't react "believably"?

I think it's odd you would say this, and then keep arguing why you think certain movies are bad, and that's a fact. When really, you just said everyone has a different opinion and Cloverfield might just be the "worst movie evar" to you.
Which is cool, debate is awesome and everyone should be able to share their opinions, but I really think you should have a better argument than just "I don't like it so it's bad."
You make a lot of claims. Give examples of where exactly you see such things in the movies themselves. Cloverfield was about how reality should be feared? Where is the reality in a giant monster destroying New York city? Half the time people go to movies because they enjoy seeing something they know is physically impossible to ever happen.
Cloverfield was pretentious? How so? How is it a half-imagined copy of an earlier film? Same with The Blair Witch. If you're going to claim people are wrong, tell us why exactly you think you're right. Because all I hear is "I'm right because I say so."

[Sunblink]

If you're going to claim people are wrong, tell us why exactly you think you're right. Because all I hear is "I'm right because I say so."

Zina, you're awesome. Just wanted to say that.

[GabrielsThoughts]

If you already know it's my opinion, and I've explained that its my opinion, and some if not all of my reasoning. Knowing full well I'm not making an argument but stating that I will "tell everyone I know,  ( and believe me if given the opportunity I will shout my disenting voice) "I will shout  to the masses" my belief that  Cloverfeild among other movies (THE RING,  A.I., Blair Witch, Borat, Wikerman, Brother Bear, Wall-e, Underdog  et al) is the worst movie ever, that is my right if not my argument. Wanting me to formulate an argument  to answer the  "why" requires more  time and effort. As I would have to both watch the horrendously bad movies again, and formulate arguments that prove my point. Which would therefore be a counter analysis. However, by stating that I disagree with someone's analysis of a film with a informed opinion in this discussion, it remains not an argument but an opinion. Opinions in any discussion are an unlimited resource. Logic however is not... what I mean when I say something holds a different meaning to others and myself. I'm not going to waste  time  arguing my point as to why they (the aforementioned movies) are bad, as I assume most if not all individuals reading and participating in this discussion also have informed opinions and are likewise entitled to share them without counterproductive arguments over the semantics of what was said or meant.

my only argument is that people derive their own meaning from what is stated, and all that is created. which needs no evidence since most everyone inherently knows this to be true. 

[Zina]

If you already know it's my opinion, and I've explained that its my opinion, and some if not all of my reasoning. Knowing full well I'm not making an argument but stating that I will "tell everyone I know,  ( and believe me if given the opportunity I will shout my disenting voice) "I will shout  to the masses" my belief that  Cloverfeild among other movies (THE RING,  A.I., Blair Witch, Borat, Wikerman, Brother Bear, Wall-e, Underdog  et al) is the worst movie ever, that is my right if not my argument. Wanting me to formulate an argument  to answer the  "why" requires more  time and effort. As I would have to both watch the horrendously bad movies again, and formulate arguments that prove my point. Which would therefore be a counter analysis. However, by stating that I disagree with someone's analysis of a film with a informed opinion in this discussion, it remains not an argument but an opinion. Opinions in any discussion are an unlimited resource. Logic however is not... what I mean when I say something holds a different meaning to others and myself. I'm not going to waste  time  arguing my point as to why they (the aforementioned movies) are bad, as I assume most if not all individuals reading and participating in this discussion also have informed opinions and are likewise entitled to share them without counterproductive arguments over the semantics of what was said or meant.

my only argument is that people derive their own meaning from what is stated, and all that is created. which needs no evidence since most everyone inherently knows this to be true. 

For someone that doesn't want to put in the effort of explaining why they feel the way they feel, you sure did put in the effort to write an extremely verbose response that basically boils down to "I don't wanna".
Really, you claim that a lot of movies are too pretentious for you, which is impressive considering the amazing job you've done as coming off as extremely pretentious. It really seems like you're just flinging out phrases you think sound intelligent while doing absolutely nothing to back them up. You say your opinion's informed, but you've done NOTHING to prove that. At certain points I have to wonder if you even watched the movie or paid any attention at all, considering you think Cloverfield is about how "reality should be feared". If you really feel so strongly about a movie to label is "worst movie ever", then it really shouldn't be difficult to explain why.
It just sounds like you want to say your opinion and not have anyone challenge it, which is not how discussions work. Yes, it's your right to say what you think. it's also the right of everyone else to disagree and ask you "why". If you don't want to deal with that, then stay out of discussions.
If someone writes an in-depth analysis of a film, and all you can say is "I didn't really read what you wrote, but I disagree" without giving any reasoning as to WHY, then don't waste that person's time. Because that is NOT contributing to the discussion, that is just stating what you think because you believe everyone needs to know.
Because honestly, if you are unable to come up with a reasoning behind your opinion, then why on earth should anyone care what you think?
Just a thought.

[Turnsky]

*words of Zina Awesome*

all i'm getting from Gabriel here, is a mean impression of Mr Horse: "No sir, i don't like it"

[Baal Hadad]

I really didn't mean to start this....

...so getting back on-topic....



I haven't seen the Alien movies yet (I don't count beyond the third, nor the AvP films), but I'm starting to take an interest in them--specifically the first one.  It's reviewed on the site I mentioned and, while I won't go into detail here as to how he interpreted it (not only because of possible content but also I don't want to pass his ideas off as my own, especially since I haven't seen it myself), I'm curious as to what others have to say about it/them.  I already know what happens, so I'm not afraid of spoilers.

[Turnsky]

I really didn't mean to start this....

...so getting back on-topic....



I haven't seen the Alien movies yet (I don't count beyond the third, nor the AvP films), but I'm starting to take an interest in them--specifically the first one.  It's reviewed on the site I mentioned and, while I won't go into detail here as to how he interpreted it (not only because of possible content but also I don't want to pass his ideas off as my own, especially since I haven't seen it myself), I'm curious as to what others have to say about it/them.  I already know what happens, so I'm not afraid of spoilers.

the Sequel, Aliens has the rare distinction of being as popular (arguably moreso) as the previous movie, they're a worthy view, a good classic sci-fi horror. it has some semblance of a larger story afoot, but it's never played upon by the rest of the francise.

Also, for good viewing, try John Carpenter's "The Thing" the paranoia component and the psychology of trust makes a good movie in amongst the gore and other fleshy things.

[Baal Hadad]

I really didn't mean to start this....

...so getting back on-topic....



I haven't seen the Alien movies yet (I don't count beyond the third, nor the AvP films), but I'm starting to take an interest in them--specifically the first one.  It's reviewed on the site I mentioned and, while I won't go into detail here as to how he interpreted it (not only because of possible content but also I don't want to pass his ideas off as my own, especially since I haven't seen it myself), I'm curious as to what others have to say about it/them.  I already know what happens, so I'm not afraid of spoilers.

the Sequel, Aliens has the rare distinction of being as popular (arguably moreso) as the previous movie, they're a worthy view, a good classic sci-fi horror. it has some semblance of a larger story afoot, but it's never played upon by the rest of the francise.

Also, for good viewing, try John Carpenter's "The Thing" the paranoia component and the psychology of trust makes a good movie in amongst the gore and other fleshy things.

XD

That film is also on that site.  I don't think we have that--I think we have the original, which I saw a LONG time ago and remember very little from....

I might have to look into that one sometime....

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

If you get to see Aliens, watch the Directors Cut version. It's significantly better, but was cut because theatres wouldn't play the longer version in those days.

Since then, a number of movies have come along that are way longer, and pushed the envelope somewhat, so that's now less of an issue.