The Criterion Collection

[Professor Echo]

Originally Posted by BenOswald

Yeah, it's all Music Video's fault that movies suck. lmao

I didn’t say that, I said that the penchant for over directed, grandiose imagery without substance could be traced back to the music video era. But I know any little remark that might cast aspersions, no matter how slight, on the all pervasive 80’s nostalgia on this site will not be popular so I’ll leave it at that. Enjoy your pretty pictures.

[Arawn]

Lorenzo's Oil was on today.

Why did Nick Nolte have to have a goofy accent in that movie? They let Susan Sarandon speak normally.

[baheidstu]

Originally Posted by Arawn

Lorenzo's Oil was on today.

Why did Nick Nolte have to have a goofy accent in that movie? They let Susan Sarandon speak normally.

Because the character Nolte was playing was from Italy and spoke with an accent in real life; the character Sarandon was playing was from the United States.

[BenOswald]

[IMG][/IMG]

Originally Posted by Professor Echo

I didn’t say that, I said that the penchant for over directed, grandiose imagery without substance could be traced back to the music video era. But I know any little remark that might cast aspersions, no matter how slight, on the all pervasive 80’s nostalgia on this site will not be popular so I’ll leave it at that. Enjoy your pretty pictures.

Yeah, words matter. Here's what it felt like you were saying:

[Professor Echo]

Originally Posted by BenOswald

[IMG][/IMG]

Yeah, words matter. Here's what it felt like you were saying:

You're right, my original post and follow up does read like that and I was definitely being more irritable and speaking in generalities than I intended. I for one haven't been too enamored where the film industry has gone since the late 70's, but I certainly didn't intend to blanket criticize entire eras. The truth is that there will always be great movies no matter when they are made and no matter what the prevailing trends are. I only meant to criticize the style over substance filmmaking I've seen in many instances since the 80's, but to categorically apply it everywhere without any qualifications was certainly yelling at cloud!

[BenOswald]

Originally Posted by Professor Echo

You're right, my original post and follow up does read like that and I was definitely being more irritable and speaking in generalities than I intended. I for one haven't been too enamored where the film industry has gone since the late 70's, but I certainly didn't intend to blanket criticize entire eras. The truth is that there will always be great movies no matter when they are made and no matter what the prevailing trends are. I only meant to criticize the style over substance filmmaking I've seen in many instances since the 80's, but to categorically apply it everywhere without any qualifications was certainly yelling at cloud!

Easy to do, reminds me of how some folks decry the advent and popularity of television and/or the code as the reason post-war Cinema was ruined.

I wish we had more of a say, but we can only vote with our wallets.

I'll admit, I'm a little defensive, as I've seen the Music Video Industry produce the likes of Spike Jones, David Fincher, Tony Scott, Tarsem, Michael Bay (lol), Francis Lawrence, Anton Corbijn, Antoine Fuqua, Rian Johnson, etc. All of whom have done good work above and beyond visualization.

[Dailyan]

I enjoy all decades. Each one has something different to offer.

[Banned User]

Really I think Music videos was a great place for directors to get their start. They allowed for a ton of experimentation and free range to try what they wanted with minimal studio or producer interference. Obviously the emphasis being placed on it is overblown as every one of those directors listed have their own unique styles.

I think the overall visuals of different decades has more to do with current culture and sensibilities.. As breakthrough films that are successful and popular, via their original ideas, styles, even unique individual camera moves and effects , gets copied and borrowed from other films until it becomes stale.

Then something else comes out completely original and changes the course. There are also always outliers that are original, but ignored on release and become cult favorites or more appreciated down the line for being ahead of their time. But the vast majority maintain a style, pacing and look that reflects current conventional and popular styles of their era.

I mean you can tell when a film is from the 70's, 80's, 90's etc. And I'm sure decades from now we will be cringing at all the so called fancy CGI of today's films and easily be able to place the dates of their creation. I'm not saying all films easily fit the mold, but I think the more mainstream popular ones do, while art films are mostly free of this as they are more artist driven and not producer driven to meet goals/profits.

[Kyle15]

Style IS substance and anyone declaring otherwise is a bump on a log.

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by Kyle15

Style IS substance and anyone declaring otherwise is a bump on a log.

I think style can both be substance and also accentuate substance.

But if you want to create something where style is substance, you'd better be amazingly talented at it.

[knuckles96]

i like movies

[baheidstu]

Originally Posted by knuckles96

i like movies

I love lamp.

[javy]

Not too bad for a meme...

[Show spoiler]20191002_173805.jpg

[Kyle15]

Originally Posted by AaronJ

I think style can both be substance and also accentuate substance.

Absolutely.

But if you want to create something where style is substance, you'd better be amazingly talented at it.

I disagree. There are many things that are stylistically substantial. How to spot them; when people pigeonhole them as all style and no substance.

[AaronJ]

Originally Posted by Kyle15

Absolutely.



I disagree. There are many things that are stylistically substantial. How to spot them; when people pigeonhole them as all style and no substance.

Heh. Well, I was using the term "style" slightly differently there. But I see what you're getting at.

I just don't think that Michael Bay really qualifies as "all style."

[kvnbhovis]

Is Criterion planning on having a sale this month?

[StarDestroyer52]

Originally Posted by kvnbhovis

Is Criterion planning on having a sale this month?

The month just started. The flash sale is usually in late October.

[kvnbhovis]

Originally Posted by StarDestroyer52

The month just started. The flash sale is usually in late October.

Thanks!!!

[Professor Echo]

Originally Posted by Kyle15

Style IS substance and anyone declaring otherwise is a bump on a log.

Originally Posted by AaronJ

I think style can both be substance and also accentuate substance.

But if you want to create something where style is substance, you'd better be amazingly talented at it.

Originally Posted by Kyle15

Absolutely.

I disagree. There are many things that are stylistically substantial. How to spot them; when people pigeonhole them as all style and no substance.

Originally Posted by AaronJ

Heh. Well, I was using the term "style" slightly differently there. But I see what you're getting at.

I just don't think that Michael Bay really qualifies as "all style."

Well, as the person who started this thread derail, I'm now leaving the digression for good, but after reading the above exchange you guys have caused me to reconsider my original post. I now stand by it wholeheartedly.

Originally Posted by Dailyan

I enjoy all decades. Each one has something different to offer.

For my money, this is the only worthwhile post in the past couple of days.

[belcherman]

Originally Posted by kvnbhovis

Is Criterion planning on having a sale this month?

Based on my order history, there has been a flash sale on October 17 the last three years.