Entertainment > Other Entertainment
Seriously Overrated Stuff
Kuhns:
--- Quote ---i actually sorta disagree with the Avatar thing...If ya want a story, read an effing book. Star Wars story sucked. And almost all movies with a good story were that way because they were pulled from a book or graphic novel of some-sort. Movies are eye candy, and not much else, and for this, Avatar was and always will be a great stepping stone in movie history.
--- End quote ---
Spirited Away had an amazing storyline, and it wasn't based on a book. Movies use pictures to tell a story the same way a book uses words. Saying that a movie's quality is based on visuals is the same as saying a book's quality is based on the covers and what kind of font the author decided to use. I saw nothing in Avatar that I hadn't seen in a video game before. I almost was expecting a 'skip scene' button to appear, and sadly it never did. Avatar is not a stepping stone in movie history (IMO) it's just an overinflated fad that proved that people can be easily wowed by lame storyline, flat characters and pretty graphics.
--- Quote ---People complaining about Twilight. If you didn`t like it then you didn`t but no need to go on and on about it. It gets really really irritating. No offense to you dude!
--- End quote ---
Complaining about Twilight is fair game, as this is a rant thread...kinda. :B
*Note: Oops, accidentally deleted the next reply. >_>; Feel free to reply again L & S.
chocobo:
--- Quote from: Kuhns on April 29, 2010, 07:34:42 AM ---
--- Quote ---i actually sorta disagree with the Avatar thing...If ya want a story, read an effing book. Star Wars story sucked. And almost all movies with a good story were that way because they were pulled from a book or graphic novel of some-sort. Movies are eye candy, and not much else, and for this, Avatar was and always will be a great stepping stone in movie history.
--- End quote ---
Spirited Away had an amazing storyline, and it wasn't based on a book. Movies use pictures to tell a story the same way a book uses words. Saying that a movie's quality is based on visuals is the same as saying a book's quality is based on the covers and what kind of font the author decided to use. I saw nothing in Avatar that I hadn't seen in a video game before. I almost was expecting a 'skip scene' button to appear, and sadly it never did. Avatar is not a stepping stone in movie history (IMO) it's just an overinflated fad that proved that people can be easily wowed by lame storyline, flat characters and pretty graphics.
--- End quote ---
There is so much truth to that, it's ridiculous. Movies are a visual representation of a story. To think you believe they are solely made to look good is completely absurd. So many classic films didn't "look great" but told amazing stories, had great actors, and amazing development. It's people who believe a movie's merit should be based on visuals that are killing films today. So many movies are being made to please the eye, so much that it'll draw from the other lacking components in the film. Transformers is a good example. The movies could have been good. However, Michael Bay focused way too much on explosions and pretty cgi to make up for the lack in acting ability, plot, dialogue, and characters overall.
Lord and Savior:
--- Quote from: chocobo on April 30, 2010, 07:55:10 AM ---
--- Quote from: Kuhns on April 29, 2010, 07:34:42 AM ---
--- Quote ---i actually sorta disagree with the Avatar thing...If ya want a story, read an effing book. Star Wars story sucked. And almost all movies with a good story were that way because they were pulled from a book or graphic novel of some-sort. Movies are eye candy, and not much else, and for this, Avatar was and always will be a great stepping stone in movie history.
--- End quote ---
Spirited Away had an amazing storyline, and it wasn't based on a book. Movies use pictures to tell a story the same way a book uses words. Saying that a movie's quality is based on visuals is the same as saying a book's quality is based on the covers and what kind of font the author decided to use. I saw nothing in Avatar that I hadn't seen in a video game before. I almost was expecting a 'skip scene' button to appear, and sadly it never did. Avatar is not a stepping stone in movie history (IMO) it's just an overinflated fad that proved that people can be easily wowed by lame storyline, flat characters and pretty graphics.
--- End quote ---
There is so much truth to that, it's ridiculous. Movies are a visual representation of a story. To think you believe they are solely made to look good is completely absurd. So many classic films didn't "look great" but told amazing stories, had great actors, and amazing development. It's people who believe a movie's merit should be based on visuals that are killing films today. So many movies are being made to please the eye, so much that it'll draw from the other lacking components in the film. Transformers is a good example. The movies could have been good. However, Michael Bay focused way too much on explosions and pretty cgi to make up for the lack in acting ability, plot, dialogue, and characters overall.
--- End quote ---
First off, Hiyo Miazaki is a god, and is in no way to be compared to any film maker EVER. Secondly, I'll say it again, if you want a story, READ A BOOK. Movie's, has you said, are a visual representation of a story, so my point is not that they should have no story, rather that they depend less on their story. Instead, movies rely on expressions, and imagry, has poetry utilizes diction and syntax.
Story means very little, it's just there so you know how to feel, because the Entertainment buisness (music, movies, writting and arts etc.) are only to inspire emotions. How the emotions are inspired, depends on the form of entertainment. In a novel, it's important because there's very little else to go off of (not to say there is NOTHING else). In movies, my point is that the inspiration of choice emotions is derived MORE so from visuals and appearant tones.
The characters in Avatar were exeplairy (misspelled probably haha). The steady decline and decay of mind and morals, expressed through Jake Soule could only be expressed through his "Video updates", his expressions, eyes, tone. The cinematography, the symbolism of the falling tree. The computer animation even, all support to the tone and feel of what little story is there, and that is what makes it such a great film.
An example of how not to make a movie or show would be like, almost ALL ANIMES. Look at DeathNote, or Naruto. Both have pretty good story lines, still, the visuals are nothing more than enough to remind millions of nerdy-metal-monkeys that they're still "cool" by some standards. The lines are HORRIBLY WRITTEN, the facial expressions are no more than angry or confused, and the character developement and design (mental, not phsyical) is nothing more that immature. "but there's story", and NOTHING else. Story is just the surface value of the art, to be taken by shallow sharks, hungry for a reason to indulge in their taste.
There's too much focus on story, to little on everything else. Story is just another aspect of entertainment, a little one, to keep you on track. Too much more story in that movie, and it would have easily been overkill.
And if you don't believe it's "such a stepping stone", then just look at all the up-coming 3D films, filled identicly, and yet nowhere near the quality. That's what makes a stepping stone, when it's set a new bar, high and more diffecult to grasp. The visual effects are better than any in the past, that's what made Matrix and STAR WARS so great.
chocobo:
I understand your reasoning and appreciate you taking the time to explain, but being such a fan of classic movies visuals were never anything too important to me. It was more of the qualities found elsewhere. The writing, the acting, the music, etc... I appreciated the cinematography in films before cgi. Not say I don't enjoy cgi, because I really do, I just felt movies were much more authentic before it came along. The filming industry is always going to be a bustling industry of advancements, especially in the age of the digital formats. More and more directors/cinematographers and converting to the digital format over film. As someone who appreciates film more than digital, it's hard to let go of resentment I have, if you can understand those feelings.
It just bothers me when I see films being praised solely on the fact that they have beautiful visuals. It almost makes a mockery of everything I've come to love about film. It's just that people are allowing themselves to be bought over with great graphics over the things that made classic films so wonderful. Again, don't get me wrong, I love to see the world advance and bring more technology to the industry I love so much, but I just wish new directors would go back to focusing on the roots of film. Every year I see a number of films. Most of them are bad, but I usually catch one or two (generally indie, but not always) that still impress me. Avatar was not one of those.
However, I can say that we agree on one thing with no exception, Hayao Miyazaki is definitely a God. There is no other director, artist, animator, story writer, etc... that is on the same caliber, nor do I think there ever will be. His films will live on to be the best animated work ever done not only in the anime genre, but in animation as a whole.
Kuhns:
--- Quote ---First off, Hiyo Miazaki is a god, and is in no way to be compared to any film maker EVER.
--- End quote ---
:B
--- Quote --- Secondly, I'll say it again, if you want a story, READ A BOOK. Movie's, has you said, are a visual representation of a story, so my point is not that they should have no story, rather that they depend less on their story. Instead, movies rely on expressions, and imagry, has poetry utilizes diction and syntax.
--- End quote ---
I disagree, but can see where you are coming from. <:
--- Quote ---Story means very little, it's just there so you know how to feel, because the Entertainment buisness (music, movies, writting and arts etc.) are only to inspire emotions.
--- End quote ---
....I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here. Without the story of something, there would be no something. It would just be...a string of pictures/words/whatever. And while I agree that the entertainment business is all about running with cheap thrills, a good story (doesn't matter if it's a book, movie or even a comic book) has the potential of inspiring thought, as well as emotion. However, thought has to come from a good story--a good set-up.
--- Quote ---How the emotions are inspired, depends on the form of entertainment. In a novel, it's important because there's very little else to go off of (not to say there is NOTHING else). In movies, my point is that the inspiration of choice emotions is derived MORE so from visuals and appearant tones.
--- End quote ---
Okay, I'm seeing where your coming from here...again.
--- Quote ---The characters in Avatar were exeplairy (misspelled probably haha). The steady decline and decay of mind and morals, expressed through Jake Soule could only be expressed through his "Video updates", his expressions, eyes, tone.
--- End quote ---
Those video blogs were actually, in my opinion, cheap ways for the director to tell the audience what was going on rather than showing what was going on, as most of the visuals you were talking about earlier were wasted on the lush landscape of Pandora. ;P
--- Quote --- The cinematography, the symbolism of the falling tree. The computer animation even, all support to the tone and feel of what little story is there, and that is what makes it such a great film.
--- End quote ---
Good graphics (and this applies to any visual media) cannot make up for a rotten storyline. I agree that movies have it easier setting up the tone and atmosphere, but without an equally as strong story to back it up, Avatar is simply an alien version of Planet Earth. All they need to do is cut the characters out and get some deep-voiced narrator to explain the rain cycles and already it would be a better 'film'.
--- Quote ---An example of how not to make a movie or show would be like, almost ALL ANIMES. Look at DeathNote, or Naruto. Both have pretty good story lines, still, the visuals are nothing more than enough to remind millions of nerdy-metal-monkeys that they're still "cool" by some standards. The lines are HORRIBLY WRITTEN, the facial expressions are no more than angry or confused, and the character developement and design (mental, not phsyical) is nothing more that immature. "but there's story", and NOTHING else. Story is just the surface value of the art, to be taken by shallow sharks, hungry for a reason to indulge in their taste.
--- End quote ---
Can't say anything for Deathnote (never watched it), but your constant proposal that better graphics=better in general is shallow. Manga to Anime is the same as Book to Movie, its almost never as good as the original. You wanna talk about immature character development, then look at Avatar--oh wait, there is no character development. Everyone in that movie are either evil, gun-blazing tree killers, or kind, wiser-than-thou tree huggers who could do no wrong. Jake gets his legs back either way, no matter what evils he does everyone will always forgive him, and despite having no prior training, he goes in, learns their language, marries the tribal princess, uses rocks and sticks to defeat highly advanced technology and even gets to ride that...giant red dragon thingy (>_>). But, of course, that doesn't matter because everything looks pretty.
....
I'd also like to add that I am talking about good story lines, in general. Neither Avatar nor Naruto fit the bill on that one. Lots of pretty graphics and lots of storyline are both bad in my book, they both do the same thing for a story:bog it down.
--- Quote --- There's too much focus on story, to little on everything else. Story is just another aspect of entertainment, a little one, to keep you on track. Too much more story in that movie, and it would have easily been overkill.
And if you don't believe it's "such a stepping stone", then just look at all the up-coming 3D films, filled identicly, and yet nowhere near the quality. That's what makes a stepping stone, when it's set a new bar, high and more diffecult to grasp. The visual effects are better than any in the past, that's what made Matrix and STAR WARS so great.
--- End quote ---
Actually, there isn't enough focus on the story, the plot, the characters, why they are doing the things they do and/or why we should care. 3D films...so what? I'll say this as my final point, because I can see we'll never agree on this:
Good writing can save bad visuals. Good visuals cannot save bad writing. The only thing Avatar inspired in me was the irritating feeling that the makers of the film thought the audience were a bunch of idiots. You don't think, you're not surprised at any of the 'plot twists', you aren't left with any mind-numbing-stay-up-for-hours-thinking-about-it-thoughts. You simple sit there, soaking up the pretty graphics like a spoon-fed child, to dazzled to actually form a coherent thought other than 'more please'.
----
Mac computers are so freaking overrated. >:U Why do I have to use them for my computers and art class? *Smashes Mac*
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version