• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

What do YOU want the next OT title to be?

  • Babby On Twitter

    Votes: 36 12.1%
  • Good Luck Vinny

    Votes: 94 31.6%
  • When Someone Pings The Heavy Ammo, I Don't Feel Like They Care About Me As A Person

    Votes: 18 6.1%
  • We're Going From Four Shitters To Two!

    Votes: 87 29.3%
  • A Dark Hedgehog With A Fucking Machine Gun

    Votes: 21 7.1%
  • Lol

    Votes: 16 5.4%
  • SMART GAME GOING BAMMER

    Votes: 25 8.4%

  • Total voters
    297
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

FantaSoda

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,992
For me the camera is the star and the performances are part of what helps carry it, and as I said the acting aside from ridiculous cameos is convincing. My problem is how the long takes are utilized, the way there's rarely a real sense of progression through time and space and how the open bright setting mostly has everything looking completely flat and empty. The long-takes served almost no purpose here aside from maybe 2 or 3 scenes.

Also for me it's absolutely worth pointing out that the movie is not in fact one-long take, even ostensibly because there's a blatant cut to black in the middle and that contrasts with your second point about how the movie condenses 12 hours into 2 without noticing, to me it was glaringly obvious when it just jumped hours in time.

As for the direction, it really really let me down, Sam Mendes is just not a great visual storyteller and the fact that shots are seamlessly stitched together does not mean this movie did what it set out to imo.

On point 2, I was talking about aspects like the truck ride. Or immediately after the cut to black where it pans over the dead soldier, the camera follows through the window and we see George MacKay running through that fallen French (I think it was French) city.

Like it is almost dream-like in that if you actively think about it, it doesn't make sense but in the moment you accept it. It is like a magic trick, that if you are actively looking for how it is performed, you might notice the rabbit is already in the hat. But if you just go with it, you will smile when he pulls the rabbit out of the hat.
 

FantaSoda

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,992
Like using the argument of hey go read this article about a piece of media is like I'm just going to find an article that agrees with my opinion and we're going to circle a drain forever, because the general thesis is this is a gimmick for a movie that is otherwise soulless which I obviously don't agree with.

I don't have a problem with people using articles to validate their opinion. If you are coming here and saying a film with widespread critical and commercial acclaim is flawed, you know you are already fighting an uphill battle and are trying to justify your take by showing you aren't alone in it.

The problem that I have is that the take is that "Thing that everyone likes is actually bad" when the truth is "Thing that everyone likes is actually good, but not as good as everyone says it is", which is more reasonable.

With that said, I don't think getting into a article battle does anything to actually convince anyone. I think that our personal articulation of our points carries much more weight.
 
Sep 12, 2018
19,846
On point 2, I was talking about aspects like the truck ride. Or immediately after the cut to black where it pans over the dead soldier, the camera follows through the window and we see George MacKay running through that fallen French (I think it was French) city.

Like it is almost dream-like in that if you actively think about it, it doesn't make sense but in the moment you accept it. It is like a magic trick, that if you are actively looking for how it is performed, you might notice the rabbit is already in the hat. But if you just go with it, you will smile when he pulls the rabbit out of the hat.
Goddamn I wish I had that reaction instead of "okay there's a cut point" and "cool set-piece, now time to spend 15 more minutes with the characters wandering from place to place with generic war movie dialog filling the dead air". Also it's just hard for me to be all that impressed anymore with it when a movie like Victoria exists or even this scene which beats anything in 1917 imo.

The night sequence looked amazing though, I'll give you that.

The problem that I have is that the take is that "Thing that everyone likes is actually bad" when the truth is "Thing that everyone likes is actually good, but not as good as everyone says it is", which is more reasonable.
What if I actually think it's a bad movie though? :P
 
Last edited:

Avengers23

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
21,504
Victoria, Russian Ark, Macbeth, Utoya: July 22, Son of Saul all used it. Russian Ark was an actual one take movie, if we're going to be dazzled by the craft of the trick.
 

FantaSoda

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,992
What if I actually think it's a bad movie though? :P

Then we would disagree. Although the discussion would give me a much deeper appreciation for your ability to critique movies even if I don't agree. It also helps me solidify my own views on the film, which are positive but with reservations that you helped me better articulate.

The talk felt like what GB go through when they debate GOTY, and it was fun :)
 

Deleted member 203

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,899
I'm just going to assume sight unseen that 1917 is this year's Birdman in that it fucking sucks and its core conceit is a superficial gimmick don't @ me unless it's to agree that Birdman is dogshit and Inarittu is a hack

actually there's no way 1917 is as bad as Birdman. It simply cannot be.
 

deepFlaw

Knights of Favonius World Tour '21
Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,495
I was going to badly shitpost about 1917 but now I just want to know what Birdman's gimmick is
 

Poppy

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,273
richmond, va
i think vega's (claw) theme might be the best street fighter 2 music

I'm just going to assume sight unseen that 1917 is this year's Birdman in that it fucking sucks and its core conceit is a superficial gimmick don't @ me unless it's to agree that Birdman is dogshit and Inarittu is a hack

actually there's no way 1917 is as bad as Birdman. It simply cannot be.
birdman is definitely dogshit
 

DrArchon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,485
1917 can't be this year's Birdman because it won't win just because it's yet another film about the film industry.
 

TiamatSword

Chicken Chaser
Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,596
Movies
2946020-ben%20emoticon%20edit%205.png
2946020-ben%20emoticon%20edit%205.png
 

DrArchon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,485
Aye that's true. What's weird is that Chun Li probably has the least memorable theme relative to her prominence in the franchise. Her theme from EX is way better.
I immediately heard her theme in my head when I read her name, so I'm not going to say it's not memorable.

The only SFEX theme I can remember is Sakura's from EX3 (and that's 100% not because of the game).
 

efr

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account
Banned
Jun 19, 2019
2,893
Do y'all like any movies besides Sonic? Shit
 
Sep 12, 2018
19,846
Victoria, Russian Ark, Macbeth, Utoya: July 22, Son of Saul all used it. Russian Ark was an actual one take movie, if we're going to be dazzled by the craft of the trick.
Victoria was an actual one-take too, which is mind boggling when it goes from a Before Sunrise-like movie into an all out crime thriller with shoot outs and chases
 
Last edited:
Feb 12, 2019
1,429
I was going to watch Parasite with my dad last night, but instead we stayed home and watched the Australian Open. That is my official take on "movies"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.