So my wife and I were bored the other night so we decided to hit up Netflix for a movie. Since its Oscar season, Netflix had a section just for past Oscar Winners. We both like Nicholas Cage so we decided to watch 'Adaptation'. Apparently it won a ton of awards and was critically acclaimed... ...but it sucked. I mean look, I can appreciate Mozart. I don't think of myself as uncultured, but I just didn't get it. I thought The Avengers was a great movie. Honestly, I think that some of these 'artsy' movies are only popular because they involve big names in the business... ...or maybe I am just not hip enough. ~ J. J.
So-called 'arty' films just don't play it safe. It's not about being 'uncultured', it's about just finding what you like. I really like David Lynch's films, partly because he's unapologetic about the films he makes, and at the very least I've always respected that. Other 'art house' films I just don't care for. They just are not made for me I guess.
I haven't seen Adaptation so I can't comment on that, but have you seen Black Swan or Requiem for a Dream? I would consider both of them "artsy" films, and I thought both were good.
Your just not hip enough JJ. Face the truth. ~Jk couldn't help myself. Adaption...Never heard of the movie. I think that there is a certain point where you don't cross in writing or in movie making and that is to duplicate the action inside an action like a movie about a person making a movie and add onto that about a woman writing a book. It just seems pointless unless the movie is about a guy making a documentary on a woman writing a book. I still think it would be boring and uninteresting. If it was more fictional as in adding acting scenes from the book while the woman writes the book then that might work. Sounds to me like that approach is kinda like Inception except movie and writer form lol. The movie sounds different, and inventive. I watched the trailer and it looks really good. My guess wasn't far off, but I've also learned move trailers can be utterly deceiving. Now I want to watch this movie to see if I like it. But I do have one question for you JJ. Did your wife like the movie?
????? I'm dissapointed that you, as a budding scriptwriter, can't see what an incredible script Adaptation really is and how clever it is. It basically pulls apart all the fundamentals of screenwriting and film-making in Hollywood, both as part of it's own core narrative and as a narrative external to the plot. It's a movie for screenwriters. The 'real' film has nothing to do with the orchid thief.
Artsy movies suck because you're not watching them the right way. You're supposed to analyze them critically and memorize key points with which to show off to your intellectually inferior friends at the coffee shop.
See, now people are just being rude. Artistic films are fantastic if that's what you like. If not, that's fine too. But not everything has to explode.
I like artsy films but Adaptation isn't a favorite, I found myself bored watching it. I also hate watching some movie where the star looks like some depressing slouch I'd avoid in a coffee shop. For five bucks I'm then supposed to listen to him for two hours - not my idea of entertainment.
I've always had this theory about action vs artsy, and my own preferences in regards to both. If a movie spends too much time on the action bits - explosions, gunfire, cheesy one-liners, etc. - and no time on anything emotional or creative - such as plot, storyline, character-building, clever ways to film and use lenses and effects - then it's not for me. Likewise, if a film spends too much time focusing on the small details and has no action or bigger ways to move the plot forward, it's not for me. I've always thought that action films tend to spend too much time on explosions and not on anything that would make a story good, but I've also felt that artsy films focused too much on unique and fancy angles and lenses and the smaller details of the sort to actually have anything in the way of substance. It's either speeding along by glossing over small things or getting so muddled up in small things you can't see the bigger picture. My perfect movie is one that balances both - action and story. The Avengers was good for that. As was Drive. And anyway, to each their own. If you don't like arthouse, that's fine, but if you don't like action, that's also fine.
I'm with Gigi on this one. I have pretty varied taste in movies but they all have common things in them. If it has a good story, is visually pleasing, or just generally has something about that it that grabs me I'll love it. It doesn't matter what genre it is.
"Artsy" is usually subjective. I thought Adaptation was genius and I didn't care much for the Avengers. I would say this applies more to the Avengers than it does for Adaptation.
I think I've seen just about every main stream movie thats appeared in the cinema in the last 3 years - 99% dissapoint me so much my wife is just waiting for the "what a crap film" about a second before the credits roll. Am I a grouch or are films crap? Artsy or action or whatever genre you want to include? Excluding musicals such as Les Mis/Phantom I think the last film I hugely enjoyed was The Tourist, JD and AJ - kept me guessing right till the end - its all I want in a movie - or a book!
The films are crap. The fact that kids today think The Dark Knight trilogy are great films, and that Skyfall was considered the best ever Bond, makes me lament for what is happening to film culture. Those movies were utter garbage, but they looked good so people got seduced by the noise and flashing lights. If you start to even remotely think about the idiotic plots and garbage dialogue then it just falls apart into nothing. A good action film doesn't need to have an idiotically poorly thought out plot. It just doesn't.
Artsy movies suck because you have to think? I don't see how provoking discussion can be a bad thing. And who says movies with artistic merit can't be entertaining? I don't think they're mutually exclusive.
I've always considered The Natural Born Killers artsy, and I bet it won't bore anyone. I also liked the Funny Games, I dunno, I'd consider it pretty arty-farty. And two shorts by Jiri Barta are absolutely, positively intriguing: The Club of The Laid Off and The Last Theft. David Lynch... not so much. I mean, I love Twin Peaks, but his movies are a little "too" artsy to my taste. I'm unable to derive brain food from his works. I'm open for everything and anything, but unfortunately I too am not hip or smart enough to be a big fan of, I dunno, the more experimental. But since I can't define artsy, I can't agree with the sentiment artsy movies are horrible. Even if I could, I probably still wouldn't. Sometimes you gotta be at the right state of mind to enjoy something less mainstream and artsier.
Isn't the definition of an artsy film a film that bores you and that you don't understand? If so, then I suspect artsy movies will tend toward horrible. 'Round and 'round we go...
Here's a few I haven't ploughed through yet - 'Tokyo Story' is supposed to be the greatest film ever made. 'Salo' for controversy - a film buff's film. Pornography v art, Italian. I mentioned it to my son and naturally he watched it that night. I don't think I have the stomach for it. ... I treated myself to a Bergman sofa season and found 'Wild Strawberries' - well, delicious. 'Persona' is also beautiful. 'Seventh Seal' - which again, is supposed to be one of those greatest films...dunno disappointing or disappointed in myself. Check out 'Easterns'....old Soviet cowboy films. As for modern cinema, I've never seen a Lucas Moodysson film so I'm about 10 years behind, reckon. I get very frustrated or irritated/bored with most popular cinema and distressed that I just don't enjoy it as a shared pleasure. With writing particularly, when you see the scriptwriter's hand, when the idea fizzes out after the half hour, when the car chase begins, pfffff. What a curmudgeon, eh?
Who are you? My girlfriend? I can't really remember adaptation, but I think I enjoyed it. Spoiler Is it the one where Cage plays a set of twins? One who's a kind of social invalid and the other takes a script writing course and winds up making a shit film everyone loves? It's been years since I've seen it. From memory I didn't think it was particularly artsy - just complex. Though I think you might be using the term quite liberally; Artsy films are essentially directorial masturbation. Look at me, I'm doing shit you don't understand Three cheers for Caesar! Nobody cares. It's exactly the same with literature. People write literary novels then stare smugly over their cigarello at the best-sellers. Watch The Artist, haven't seen it because it looks incredibly boring and stupid - That is an artsy film. The Avengers was the cinematic equivalent of being beaten with a plank of wood... the same plank of wood Transformers 3 used.
You just got mad over him having an opinion. Let's now blow fuses over that either. As a big move buff and a potential future screenwriter i also find those movies to be too generic and slow. Not everyone is going to find joy in what you think is joyful. I deal with it that on FPS shooters and RTS games, everybody hates them but i don't. That's just how it is.
Wtf? How on earth is saying its fine to like either sort of film even close to eluding to your point? I dont care if people like them or not. I respect his tastes, but name calling of people who like certain films is rude.
I didn't detect any disrespectful tone in how he wrote in his post. He was showing his dislike for artsy films, that was simply it.
