Post by orius on Jul 22, 2018 8:27:35 GMT -8
So I've been watching many reviews of "YourMovieSucksDOTorg" (because I've been f***ing bored outta my mind) and while I disagreed with quite a number of his reviews (*cough*Toy Story 3*cough*), it does get me thinking about a point I've raised yesterday in a previous post of mine: how we judge movies, and our standards for movies. So I decided to finally create a thread for that topic that's been bugging me and hope to start a discussion... or something.
To start, there seems to be a few criteria I've observed when it comes to people's criticisms of movies. I'm no expert, and I'm kinda sick right now with a cold, so I won't be able to coherently break down all of the criteria every single person has (because my mind's fuzzy af), but I'll try to list as many as possible. I'm going to begin with YMS' criteria. It's also a criteria I used a lot in the past, but lately, I'm not as stringent any more and could at least come to a compromise.
"Intelligent" Movies
In other words: Does it have a deep message? Does it make sense? Does it make you think about the relevancy of our social issues? In spite of most Marvel movies being shallow action comedies, there are actually quite a lot of audience members who still prefer the more thought-provoking kind of films over the Hollywood blockbusters of the month. They prefer those (relatively) obscure award winners like "The Artist" or "The Great Gatsby". Bonus points if they are based on historical figures. Double bonus if it's a 2deep4me kind of film that sends you down a mind-trip.
A reason why people like those and (once upon a time) myself like these films is because we hold a certain belief that films can be more than just mindless entertainment that only serve to give you a good time. There's something to be said about a film teaching you something meaningful about life itself, or let you see life in a new and amazing way you never did. Having that said, I kinda got tired of that one day. I mean, deep movies are all well and good, but nowadays, I've had a greater appreciation for movies that feed our emotions as opposed to our minds (more on that later). And sometimes, people just want to relax and chill and have a great time, not attend some philosophical lesson, jeez.
One thing these fans hate is when movies don't make any f***ing sense. You can be sure they will nitpick the hell out of these films and ignore any redeeming quality the film has to offer (sort of like Cinema Sins, but unironically nitpick). As opposed to appreciating what message the film has to offer to a certain demographic other than themselves, they will tell you why that message is wrong, stupid, generic or boring, that the film is therefore just another rehash of the countless other films out there. This is often my complaint of Marvel films because they all feel samey, so I do fall into this bad habit. Sometimes, we do need to call out blatantly stupid movies like "50 Shades of Suck", but there are times when we just dismiss underrated films like "Treasure Planet" or "Speed Racer" because they are not "original" or "intelligent" enough. I mean hey, if you're going to criticize "Death Note" Netflix for being a pile of dumped on the anime's front door, then you shouldn't dismiss Speed Racer for being a dumb family movie. It's based on a battle shounen anime! What did you expect?! It was supposed to be cheesy and colorful, way before "The Avengers" made that work and everybody liked it anyway (Speed Racer review coming soon in the future; I love this movie).
And speaking of The Avengers:
This was the reason for this thread creation, because I'm reminded that, "Hey! Not everyone loves Marvel films or the first Avengers!" Btw, I'm one of those. I wasn't that hot about the first Avengers either while everyone was going gaga over it. I think I gave it a 6 or 7 out of 10 too. I was like, "It's about superheroes stopping aliens from taking over the world! How generic can you get?"
But then you have to listen to the other side as well and understand why they liked it - the characters. And guess what? Listening to them, I realized they had a great point and I came to like it too, and half of MCU's catalog that isn't Iron Man-centric. Which brings me to my next point...
Great Characters
Characters > Plot. This is the school of belief I'm of over the past few years. While the "deep thinkers" prefer complex messages in their movies, there's the other party of movie-goers who prefer complex or interesting characters. In fact, there are many movies out there with a terrible plot but redeemed themselves with charismatic and lovable characters people couldn't help but like. Many Marvel films come to mind...
So why is character so much more important than the plot in a film? Because characters are our connections to the story. The story can only happen when there are characters doing something. Of course, as with all things in film, there are special exceptions to be made where a movie is made up of empty stock characters or even no characters at all, but generally speaking, good characters are fairly important as they are the driving force that links the audience to the story you are telling. In short, it's just so much easier to relate to characters than a plot or an event. You aren't worried about someone's house being on fire; you're worried about the inhabitants of that house on fire. There's a difference.
There's also one particular reason why they they appeal to people so much - they make us feel emotions of joy or sadness as fellow human beings who relate to them. You root for Captain America because he's just some scrawny kid trying to do the right thing. You root for Iron Man because he's funny and sometimes even has a great pragmatic point. You root for Darth Vader because he's a motherf***ing badass, that's why! Characters matter because there's a lot more meaning in caring about individuals like you and me than the scientific/philosophical plot trying to lecture you.
When it comes to characters, there's another factor worth considering: demographics. Not every "bad character" is without merit. Edward Cullen might just be a pretty boy who's an insult to the entire mythios of vampires, but teenage girls like him for a reason, and to be honest, it isn't even that stupid of a reason. It's hormones. It's the same reason why guys are turned on by hot chicks. It's superficial, but eh, they are just teenagers. Cut them some slack.
Demographics
I've already touched on this one slightly, but allow me to explain further. There are many groups of audience that form in their mind the kind of story they would like to see, whether it's a sappy love story where the dashing prince saves the beautiful girl, or an action movie with lots of explosions, or a suspense thriller that keeps you on your toes. There's a YouTube video out there that explains this better by using "The Last Jedi" as an example. Fans of Star Wars already knew what they want when they go to a Star Wars movie, so to see something so fundamentally different makes their blood boil.
When it comes to demographics, it's a fascinating factor we use to judge movies, because it's one criteria that differs greatly depending on our age, gender, and race. In terms of the demographic of age, we like silly cartoons as a kid, then seek more mature action movies as teenagers, then crave for intellectually-nourishing films when we grow into adults. There's also the demographic of gender. While it might sound sexist, you have to admit that men and women have specific types of films they prefer on a general level. Finally, even our race matters, or more specifically, where and how you grow up as a person shapes your view on films. If you are an American who lived through WWII, how does your interest in war films compare to other non-Americans who never did? Then you have those who live in different generations like Gen X and the millennials, and there are films that cater specifically to the different generations' zeitgeist as well. So demographic is a really diverse factor that takes a lot of things into account.
At the same time, I think this is also one of the most important factors that define the type of movies we watch, Aside from hardcore film buffs who would watch every kind of movie, I believe most of us are only interested in certain types of movies. For example, most action junkies wouldn't be interested in love stories, or superhero fans would mostly be interested in only the colorful and comedic types of films. Of course, it's not always the case, as there are superhero fans who are interested in the more thought-provoking stuff, but it's easier to understand how people select the type of films they like when put under such generalization.
"Emotional" Movies
Though emotional and intelligent films are not mutually exclusive, they do mirror each other quite a bit. Most of the films that cater more to the "heart" than the "mind" can often be considered dumbed down or cheesy, but there's an argument to be made here that rather than being intellectually inferior, it's actually emotionally superior over intellectual films.
One great example of this is the 1998 Dreamworks animation, "The Prince of Egypt". The film's story about two brothers ending up in conflict with each other was hardly anything original or intellectually challenging, but on the emotional side of things, it's a brilliant and well-crafted masterpiece that brings the audience on this epic story with two very sympathetic main characters you might shed a tear or two for (Ramses in particular). The tale of Ramses struggling to uphold his father's name and glory was met against Moses' conviction to free his people from slavery, a very compelling conflict that panders more to your 'feels' than to your thoughts.
Over the past recent years, I've began to lean more towards such films rather than the thought-provoking ones, because 1) I realized I'm not actually that intelligent to begin with, and 2) I'm an emotional junkie who likes to feel extreme emotions while watching movies, whether it's excitement, happiness or sorrow. I find that I'm more capable of expressing myself towards a film that makes the audience feel things rather than think about things. I think one reason for that is because emotion is a very common factor that exists in everyone, and movies specifically made to tap into human emotions are therefore much easier to dissect for me because I could talk about the kind of things people like you and me would feel watching a movie like that. You don't need any prior knowledge to review that kind of movie; you just have to be a human being that feels.
Unless you're a sociopath, in which case, I apologize.
Originality
And finally, ah yes, probably one of the most common factors we attribute to the quality of a movie, especially for myself. When a movie feels like something I've seen before, I would usually label it with the m-word, "mediocre." It's recycled, it's a rehash, it's a tale I've already seen done countless times and done much better, yada yada yada. I've already used such criticisms for so many movies that I lost count. It's an inevitable cinematic sin that many movies, especially Hollywood movies, would commit. People need to put bread on their table, so they have to keep making movies using ideas that have worked in the past, sometimes not even bothering to update those ideas and just repeat them all over again.
As I've mellowed over the years, I've pretty much learned to just tolerate this flaw because it's one that's never going away. No one can be creative forever, especially in our modern era where creativity seems to be running dry. I'm of the belief that there will come a time when all of humanity will truly "run out of ideas." Maybe I'm just cynical, seeing all these movies and comics today that are just more colorful variations of past ideas. Eventually, anything we come up with would have already been came up by someone else already.
With our modern generation of remakes and reboots, I'm afraid this notion is becoming even more true today. A lot of movies nowadays are just modern updates of past stories for a new generations, as if movies are some form of news we have to keep our children updated instead of letting them explore those older films. Even the so-called MCU is just a collection of stories that have been told over the past 50 years in the comics, comics that have undeniably shaped other movies and stories as well through their ideas ("With great power comes great responsibility," "dead parents turn kid into vigilante," "messianic figure sent from another planet to save the world, " all that good stuff). Or how about those movie adaptations of literature for that matter, literature written hundreds of years ago?
So yeah, one simply cannot be absolutely original. Someone must have already thought of your idea by now in 2018.
Conclusion
And that's pretty much it. I just wanted to share my thoughts on the various ways we criticize movies and what factors we use to deem them good or bad or fun or interesting. Feel free to contribute anything I've missed or correct me on any of my points. Have fun!
To start, there seems to be a few criteria I've observed when it comes to people's criticisms of movies. I'm no expert, and I'm kinda sick right now with a cold, so I won't be able to coherently break down all of the criteria every single person has (because my mind's fuzzy af), but I'll try to list as many as possible. I'm going to begin with YMS' criteria. It's also a criteria I used a lot in the past, but lately, I'm not as stringent any more and could at least come to a compromise.
"Intelligent" Movies
In other words: Does it have a deep message? Does it make sense? Does it make you think about the relevancy of our social issues? In spite of most Marvel movies being shallow action comedies, there are actually quite a lot of audience members who still prefer the more thought-provoking kind of films over the Hollywood blockbusters of the month. They prefer those (relatively) obscure award winners like "The Artist" or "The Great Gatsby". Bonus points if they are based on historical figures. Double bonus if it's a 2deep4me kind of film that sends you down a mind-trip.
A reason why people like those and (once upon a time) myself like these films is because we hold a certain belief that films can be more than just mindless entertainment that only serve to give you a good time. There's something to be said about a film teaching you something meaningful about life itself, or let you see life in a new and amazing way you never did. Having that said, I kinda got tired of that one day. I mean, deep movies are all well and good, but nowadays, I've had a greater appreciation for movies that feed our emotions as opposed to our minds (more on that later). And sometimes, people just want to relax and chill and have a great time, not attend some philosophical lesson, jeez.
One thing these fans hate is when movies don't make any f***ing sense. You can be sure they will nitpick the hell out of these films and ignore any redeeming quality the film has to offer (sort of like Cinema Sins, but unironically nitpick). As opposed to appreciating what message the film has to offer to a certain demographic other than themselves, they will tell you why that message is wrong, stupid, generic or boring, that the film is therefore just another rehash of the countless other films out there. This is often my complaint of Marvel films because they all feel samey, so I do fall into this bad habit. Sometimes, we do need to call out blatantly stupid movies like "50 Shades of Suck", but there are times when we just dismiss underrated films like "Treasure Planet" or "Speed Racer" because they are not "original" or "intelligent" enough. I mean hey, if you're going to criticize "Death Note" Netflix for being a pile of dumped on the anime's front door, then you shouldn't dismiss Speed Racer for being a dumb family movie. It's based on a battle shounen anime! What did you expect?! It was supposed to be cheesy and colorful, way before "The Avengers" made that work and everybody liked it anyway (Speed Racer review coming soon in the future; I love this movie).
And speaking of The Avengers:
This was the reason for this thread creation, because I'm reminded that, "Hey! Not everyone loves Marvel films or the first Avengers!" Btw, I'm one of those. I wasn't that hot about the first Avengers either while everyone was going gaga over it. I think I gave it a 6 or 7 out of 10 too. I was like, "It's about superheroes stopping aliens from taking over the world! How generic can you get?"
But then you have to listen to the other side as well and understand why they liked it - the characters. And guess what? Listening to them, I realized they had a great point and I came to like it too, and half of MCU's catalog that isn't Iron Man-centric. Which brings me to my next point...
Great Characters
Characters > Plot. This is the school of belief I'm of over the past few years. While the "deep thinkers" prefer complex messages in their movies, there's the other party of movie-goers who prefer complex or interesting characters. In fact, there are many movies out there with a terrible plot but redeemed themselves with charismatic and lovable characters people couldn't help but like. Many Marvel films come to mind...
So why is character so much more important than the plot in a film? Because characters are our connections to the story. The story can only happen when there are characters doing something. Of course, as with all things in film, there are special exceptions to be made where a movie is made up of empty stock characters or even no characters at all, but generally speaking, good characters are fairly important as they are the driving force that links the audience to the story you are telling. In short, it's just so much easier to relate to characters than a plot or an event. You aren't worried about someone's house being on fire; you're worried about the inhabitants of that house on fire. There's a difference.
There's also one particular reason why they they appeal to people so much - they make us feel emotions of joy or sadness as fellow human beings who relate to them. You root for Captain America because he's just some scrawny kid trying to do the right thing. You root for Iron Man because he's funny and sometimes even has a great pragmatic point. You root for Darth Vader because he's a motherf***ing badass, that's why! Characters matter because there's a lot more meaning in caring about individuals like you and me than the scientific/philosophical plot trying to lecture you.
When it comes to characters, there's another factor worth considering: demographics. Not every "bad character" is without merit. Edward Cullen might just be a pretty boy who's an insult to the entire mythios of vampires, but teenage girls like him for a reason, and to be honest, it isn't even that stupid of a reason. It's hormones. It's the same reason why guys are turned on by hot chicks. It's superficial, but eh, they are just teenagers. Cut them some slack.
Demographics
I've already touched on this one slightly, but allow me to explain further. There are many groups of audience that form in their mind the kind of story they would like to see, whether it's a sappy love story where the dashing prince saves the beautiful girl, or an action movie with lots of explosions, or a suspense thriller that keeps you on your toes. There's a YouTube video out there that explains this better by using "The Last Jedi" as an example. Fans of Star Wars already knew what they want when they go to a Star Wars movie, so to see something so fundamentally different makes their blood boil.
When it comes to demographics, it's a fascinating factor we use to judge movies, because it's one criteria that differs greatly depending on our age, gender, and race. In terms of the demographic of age, we like silly cartoons as a kid, then seek more mature action movies as teenagers, then crave for intellectually-nourishing films when we grow into adults. There's also the demographic of gender. While it might sound sexist, you have to admit that men and women have specific types of films they prefer on a general level. Finally, even our race matters, or more specifically, where and how you grow up as a person shapes your view on films. If you are an American who lived through WWII, how does your interest in war films compare to other non-Americans who never did? Then you have those who live in different generations like Gen X and the millennials, and there are films that cater specifically to the different generations' zeitgeist as well. So demographic is a really diverse factor that takes a lot of things into account.
At the same time, I think this is also one of the most important factors that define the type of movies we watch, Aside from hardcore film buffs who would watch every kind of movie, I believe most of us are only interested in certain types of movies. For example, most action junkies wouldn't be interested in love stories, or superhero fans would mostly be interested in only the colorful and comedic types of films. Of course, it's not always the case, as there are superhero fans who are interested in the more thought-provoking stuff, but it's easier to understand how people select the type of films they like when put under such generalization.
"Emotional" Movies
Though emotional and intelligent films are not mutually exclusive, they do mirror each other quite a bit. Most of the films that cater more to the "heart" than the "mind" can often be considered dumbed down or cheesy, but there's an argument to be made here that rather than being intellectually inferior, it's actually emotionally superior over intellectual films.
One great example of this is the 1998 Dreamworks animation, "The Prince of Egypt". The film's story about two brothers ending up in conflict with each other was hardly anything original or intellectually challenging, but on the emotional side of things, it's a brilliant and well-crafted masterpiece that brings the audience on this epic story with two very sympathetic main characters you might shed a tear or two for (Ramses in particular). The tale of Ramses struggling to uphold his father's name and glory was met against Moses' conviction to free his people from slavery, a very compelling conflict that panders more to your 'feels' than to your thoughts.
Over the past recent years, I've began to lean more towards such films rather than the thought-provoking ones, because 1) I realized I'm not actually that intelligent to begin with, and 2) I'm an emotional junkie who likes to feel extreme emotions while watching movies, whether it's excitement, happiness or sorrow. I find that I'm more capable of expressing myself towards a film that makes the audience feel things rather than think about things. I think one reason for that is because emotion is a very common factor that exists in everyone, and movies specifically made to tap into human emotions are therefore much easier to dissect for me because I could talk about the kind of things people like you and me would feel watching a movie like that. You don't need any prior knowledge to review that kind of movie; you just have to be a human being that feels.
Unless you're a sociopath, in which case, I apologize.
Originality
And finally, ah yes, probably one of the most common factors we attribute to the quality of a movie, especially for myself. When a movie feels like something I've seen before, I would usually label it with the m-word, "mediocre." It's recycled, it's a rehash, it's a tale I've already seen done countless times and done much better, yada yada yada. I've already used such criticisms for so many movies that I lost count. It's an inevitable cinematic sin that many movies, especially Hollywood movies, would commit. People need to put bread on their table, so they have to keep making movies using ideas that have worked in the past, sometimes not even bothering to update those ideas and just repeat them all over again.
As I've mellowed over the years, I've pretty much learned to just tolerate this flaw because it's one that's never going away. No one can be creative forever, especially in our modern era where creativity seems to be running dry. I'm of the belief that there will come a time when all of humanity will truly "run out of ideas." Maybe I'm just cynical, seeing all these movies and comics today that are just more colorful variations of past ideas. Eventually, anything we come up with would have already been came up by someone else already.
With our modern generation of remakes and reboots, I'm afraid this notion is becoming even more true today. A lot of movies nowadays are just modern updates of past stories for a new generations, as if movies are some form of news we have to keep our children updated instead of letting them explore those older films. Even the so-called MCU is just a collection of stories that have been told over the past 50 years in the comics, comics that have undeniably shaped other movies and stories as well through their ideas ("With great power comes great responsibility," "dead parents turn kid into vigilante," "messianic figure sent from another planet to save the world, " all that good stuff). Or how about those movie adaptations of literature for that matter, literature written hundreds of years ago?
So yeah, one simply cannot be absolutely original. Someone must have already thought of your idea by now in 2018.
Conclusion
And that's pretty much it. I just wanted to share my thoughts on the various ways we criticize movies and what factors we use to deem them good or bad or fun or interesting. Feel free to contribute anything I've missed or correct me on any of my points. Have fun!