I like the thread. Will be back. Prepare yourself. ;)
hmmm….Why waste your time talking about bad films?
Good films need to be appreciated.
Well, some definitions aren’t definitive, and actually open up room for more exploration, more discovery. Still, with regards to acting or even directing, I think trying too hard to define everything might be constrictive. With analysis, though, why not? For me, letting the mystery unravel is so much fun that I can’t imagine not participating. I can’t think of one “great” film that hasn’t left some room for further contemplation.
Contemplation, certainly. Discussion though? Contemplating something you don’t necessarily have to form it into something solid, it is more like unformed clay or jello at this stage.
But once you speak it, that’s the hardening. Boom, you’ve said it, it’s out there now and there is no going back. Ever. And that’s the fear I think.
Contemplation is just speaking unspoken. I find great benefit in stating and reading others’ stated ideas on a film, and allowing them to evolve in my own mind from there on. I guess I don’t believe in that hardening, as you put it. I always allow for the possibility that I am completely wrong, so every idea is open-ended and ready for rebirth.
hmmm….Why waste your time talking about bad films?
Good films need to be appreciated.
I’m shocked to read something so Carneyesque coming from you, Robert.
I agree, I derive great pleasure and knowledge from discussions, they’re awesome. But isn’t there at least an element of a Magician’s magic trick at work here? I mean, you really want to know how they did that trick, you talk and talk about it you theorize and contemplate and it’s a lot of fun… but, at the same time… you don’t really want to know, because once you do, the party is over. It’s dead.
This is why I hate behind the scenes and commentary, or any supplements really. Because though you really want to see behind the curtain, you don’t actually want to see behind the curtain.
Unless, of course, your goal is to make films, not just watch them. If you want to become the magician, you have to learn the tricks.
And speaking as an aspiring filmmaker, that is a very sad, but perhaps necessary tradeoff =(
I haven’t found it to be a negative exchange—the more you learn the more you find there is still to learn, and the lesson is infinite. You get to create your own tricks. Just like writing—you have to learn the rules first, then break them, then make your own.
The second you think you’ve learned it all is the moment you are dead as a creator.
Hopefully there is a way to make your own tricks with only having maybe a vague notion of what those “other tricks” are ;)
The second you think you’ve learned it all is the moment you are dead as a creator.
@House of Leaves That’s a great thought. I remember hearing Quentin Tarantino saying something like each film is difficult to make and it’s just as hard to make the next one as you did the previous one. I believe he compared it to mountain climbing. Not that I like all of his films, but I thought that was a good analogy.
@Axelumog Yeah, it seems that bad films you can certainly learn a lot from. I remember watching Ebert’s worst of the year shows. Bad films can be so bad sometimes that they can be funny. A good film is more invisible and is finely woven. A bad film is where you can see the holes in the cloth. I remember seeing a film with a friend of mine and even though we thought it was a pretty bad film, he mentioned that just MAKING IT is a feat in and of itself. Films, even though I have no direct personal experience with this, are not easy to make.
Axel—For the right person with a vision, even a rudimentary knowledge can still yield greatness. For this reason, as it’s been stated before, film is the medium of the working class. All you have to do is point and shoot—how your vision is realized will determine its worth.
And of course, it really helps to understand people, if nothing else. If you can direct people your film is nearly done.
Lots to comment on.
The problem is first of all that there are not words yet invented by man capable of doing justice to a film that is truly wonderful. You can flounder around and attempt to describe it sure, but you are just doing the film a disservice by attempting to force it into the confines of words, and worse yet, words that you personally happen to be familiar with.
First, I think the danger is greatly minimized, if not eliminated, if the person recognizes the limitations of language. In other words, one can try to articulate his/her thoughts and feelings about a great film while understanding words can’t fully capture a film.
Second, while language can’t entirely capture a film, it can help people understand a film better. If this isn’t the case, film criticism would largely be pointless.
Third, in my experience, thinking about a great film—including discussing it with others—generally enhances my opinion and satisfaction of a film—not the opposite. Haven’t you gained new insights—insights that enhanced the film—through thinking and talking about it? If you’ve never tried articulating the reasons a specific film is great, I would recommend this (although I have trouble believing you’ve never did this). In my experience the process almost always deepens my understanding of the film, enriches my experience and elevates my opinion of the film. At the very least, it doesn’t diminish the film—and when it does, the film turns out not to be as good as I thought.
Having said this, I do think there are some aspects of great films that are ineffable, maybe even mystical—aspects that really define any type of explanation. In my experience, attempts to explain these aspects don’t lessen or harm the film(?). One can try to articulate the ineffable, and at best make some vague, incoherent statements, and at worst sound like an idiot. But there’s no harm in this—none that I can tell or none that I’ve experienced (not that I can recall, anyway.) I’d be curious to hear if you have an example of time when articulating the reasons a film was good or enjoyable stole the film’s greatness or robbed your enjoyment.
Even now, when I sometimes think of doing a play, I think of rehearsal rooms and people hugging and everyone talking over cups of coffee because they are nervous. It`s both very touching and it makes me a little nauseous and claustrophobic. Too much talk. I don`t rehearse at all in film if I can help it. In talking a character through, you define it. And if you define it, you kill it dead.”
As for this DDL quote, HoL alludes to the difference between creating versus analyzing a created work. For an artist, there is such a think as talking about a work too much. I’ve heard something I attribute to Hemingway that a writer shouldn’t discuss what she’s writing about. He alluded to the notion that doing so would rob some vital energy to the project. I’m not an artist, but I think I can relate to this on some level. If you talk about a project (or for an actor, a role) too much, you might gain too much understanding or you might express so much that there’s almost no point or motivation of finishing the work.
But I think this is very different from talking about a completed artwork—especially when the people talking about the art aren’t the creators. As I mentioned, talking about art generally expands understanding and enhances the experience of the art—at least in my experience.
Yes, for an actor or a director, thinking too far outside of the moment can be disastrous, though not always so. It all depends on the goal. Pre-thought can kill a scene in that it inhibits the spontaneous. The unexpected should be planned for and encouraged at all costs.
@Axel
I mean, you really want to know how they did that trick, you talk and talk about it you theorize and contemplate and it’s a lot of fun… but, at the same time… you don’t really want to know, because once you do, the party is over. It’s dead.
Matt Parks, Greg X and Robert need to chime in here. They (or maybe it’s only Matt) have been harping on me to learn more theory as well as the nuts and bolts of filmmaking. I’m not resistant because I think once I learn the “tricks” I won’t enjoy the “magic.” My concern is that I’ll only be able to see the filmmaking, while not enjoying the film.
@Hal
A good film is more invisible and is finely woven. A bad film is where you can see the holes in the cloth.
But do you also agree that talking about great films can rob you of your enjoyment of it? Seriously, I don’t think that’s ever happened to me. I want to hear from you or others about such experiences (if you don’t mind).
Speaking as someone who creates and also someone who discusses… there are certain works which I don’t feel like analyzing, because they reach a part of me that refuses definition. That’s not to say that I refuse to listen to others talking about them, because to me what others think about something is always potentially interesting for the very reason that they may articulate something I have trouble articulating, or, it’s just interesting to see a different perspective, whether I agree with it or not.
As for analyzing my own work — sometimes I will discuss some aspects of it with others when it’s done, to sound out what I am thinking about it. But never a work in progress — at least, only method is considered, how do you get from point A to point B, what do you do next, and that’s verbal in my mind, and not verbal, at the same time. The only thing close that I have to sharing those kinds of thoughts with another, and literally it’s always ONE person whose judgement I trust, is when I am having trouble with something or I’m uncertain. Then I appreciate feedback. (btw the one or two people I ever show work in progress too are very brief and to the point with their feedback, which is ideal)
I’d say if you feel like something is too sacred to talk about, and we all might have subjects like that, then don’t.
Odd as it may sound, I feel like I have a relationship with a lot of my favorite films, and being a relationship it is doomed to ultimately run its course… as natural a thing as the budding and wilting of a flower.
The fear is that by “talking it out” I speed the process, I climax the relationship… when my actual goal is to stall it out and keep the “dance” going for as long, or as many viewings, as possible.
It’s kind of like The Man Who Wasn’t There, the idea that the more you look the less you know. The act of observation, of analyzing something, of talking about something… you change it, it’s not the same thing anymore, and you actually are further away from it then when you started. Clearly I don’t full subscribe to this notion as evident by this very post, but I do think there is a lot to be said for “the more you look the less you know.”
A silent struggle has gone on for decades to continue to evolve film past the point where it relies on scripts at all and ceases to have words to describe it. As a visual medium, wouldn’t that be the sublimation of the form?
The problem with that ideology, linguistically speaking, is that human beings invent words for what they find a need for.
—PolarisDiB
@ Jazz I do think there are some aspects of great films that are ineffable, maybe even mystical—aspects that really define any type of explanation…
Yeah, I think that dovetails with what HOL is saying. The closer one gets to the ineffable the more awe inspiring the work, imo. That ineffable part is your imagination.
The other thing is that crit can take the form of appreciation, even in reverse.
By ’ in reverse’, I mean if you say a great film sucks, you most likely will get appreciators helping you understand the relationships in the film.
Bad films are like shooting-fish-in-a-barrel, they just confirm one’s ability to shoot easy targets.
I don’t see that as progressing one’s skill, understanding, or appreciation of the art form. Personally I find it incredibly boring and boorish.
Personally, I think the the cost of defining a film is less than the benefit of hearing other people’s perspectives on it and being able to express your own.
With some films, ten different people can watch it and come to ten different meanings, and you appreciate the film more hearing the other nine.
@Odi
I can understand you not wanting to analyze or hear interpretations of your own work, but what about analyzing and talking about art you really loved? Has that ever diminished your experience of the art?
Also, with your own artwork that you don’t like analyzing, I would think that you also wouldn’t want to hear interpretations from other people. You mean mentioned that you don’t like analyzing some work if it “reaches part of you that refuses definition.” I would think it might be uncomfortable and unnerving if someone really got close to defining these parts of you. If you weren’t uncomfortable, would you want these parts of you clarified, or do you feel like something would be lost or diminished?
As for analyzing my own work — sometimes I will discuss some aspects of it with others when it’s done, to sound out what I am thinking about it. But never a work in progress…
I’m not sure if you read my take on this, but I’m wondering what you thought of it, if you did.
@Axel
Odd as it may sound, I feel like I have a relationship with a lot of my favorite films, and being a relationship it is doomed to ultimately run its course… as natural a thing as the budding and wilting of a flower.
The fear is that by “talking it out” I speed the process, I climax the relationship… when my actual goal is to stall it out and keep the “dance” going for as long, or as many viewings, as possible.
It sounds like you’re afraid of discovering flaws or details which will ruin a favorite film. If so, that makes sense, although I don’t think I’ve ever felt that way. And, fwiw, I think I haven’t felt this way because what I like and what I think is good aren’t necessarily the same thing. So, if I really enjoyed a film, but I concluded—through talking about it—that the film is really horrible, I think I would still enjoy the film. A film doesn’t have to be a great for me to enjoy it.
Now, if my positive experience of the film stemmed from the fact that I thought the film was really good, and I later concluded, via discussion, that it wasn’t so good, then that would diminish my experience. But in this situation, I don’t mind this—indeed, I would prefer it. I don’t want to think highly of a film if, through thoughtful analysis, I would conclude that the film wasn’t any good.
@DiB
A silent struggle has gone on for decades to continue to evolve film past the point where it relies on scripts at all and ceases to have words to describe it.
Are you equating making a film based on a script and talking about a film? I think these are two very different things.
@Robert
The closer one gets to the ineffable the more awe inspiring the work, imo.
Obviously, I share this sentiment. On the other hand, I can understand the idea of wanting to preserve the mystery of an artwork. Do you see this as the same issue?
Bad films are like shooting-fish-in-a-barrel, they just confirm one’s ability to shoot easy targets.
I don’t see that as progressing one’s skill, understanding, or appreciation of the art form. Personally I find it incredibly boring and boorish.
I don’t know. Don’t you think that knowing why something doesn’t work can be very helpful? I guess this isn’t necessarily the same as analyzing a really bad film. On the other hand, I think understanding a really bad film—specifically, what makes it so bad—can be useful. Also, I must admit that reviews of terrible films are often the most entertaining.
I can understand you not wanting to analyze or hear interpretations of your own work, but what about analyzing and talking about art you really loved? Has that ever diminished your experience of the art?
It really depends, Jazz. There are some things I love to discuss. There are other things I’ve made up my mind about that I don’t think merit further discussion — at least with me participating. If I don’t want to hear others’ ideas about it, i.e. I get fed up with the analyzing, I just stop paying attention to that. It’s pretty easy to do.
Also, with your own artwork that you don’t like analyzing, I would think that you also wouldn’t want to hear interpretations from other people. You mean mentioned that you don’t like analyzing some work if it “reaches part of you that refuses definition.” I would think it might be uncomfortable and unnerving if someone really got close to defining these parts of you. If you weren’t uncomfortable, would you want these parts of you clarified, or do you feel like something would be lost or diminished?
It’s amusing to hear people’s interpretations of my work. Whether I’m going to confirm them or not is up to me. Most of the time I’ll just be like, “hmmm. interesting,” and leave it at that. I’m under no obligation to reveal anything to anyone. Also, I defy anyone to understand me in any truly comprehensive way. My lips are sealed. :D
Yeah I read your take about completed work vs. work in progress. A work in progress should not be revealed to the world at large until it is ready. And therefore, it is useless to discuss it until it is fully formed. To pick it apart before it is ready to be born, would be the equivalent of performing an abortion, to me. The only exception to that which I ever made was for The Ergodic Project, where I posted segments of my work in progress before I edited and completed it. I did that because I consider The Ergodic a sort of educational project, as everything we are doing is public, from brainstorming the first ideas through our funding attempts.
Hope that answered your question…
@Odi
It really depends, Jazz. There are some things I love to discuss.
I guess I’m asking if a discussion ever ruined a film or film experience?
To pick it apart before it is ready to be born, would be the equivalent of performing an abortion, to me.
Do you feel like talking about a work before completing it saps vital energy or creativity from it? I
Do you see this as the same issue?
LA:The mystery is unknowable in an effective work – it is the mystery that then perhaps causes the effectiveness.
SA: no
Don’t you think that knowing why something doesn’t work can be very helpful?
In the case of progressing one’s (perceptive) skill, (perceptive) understanding, or appreciation of the perception of the experience of art – no.
I don’t think a discussion of a film has ever ruined the experience for me. Why would it? Whatever I feel about it I keep. :)
And yes, talking about a work before completion, as in analyzing it, ruins it. The thing’s not finished and therefore not ready for analysis of that kind. Does that make sense?
" hmmm….Why waste your time talking about bad films?
Good films need to be appreciated. "
" I’m shocked to read something so Carneyesque coming from you, Robert. "
Actually, you can run that idea (as it relates to film criticism) all the way back at least to Bazin, who was a proponent of what he called “appreciative criticism.”
I’m sympathetic to the whole Nietzschean postmortem thing— “that for which we find words is something already dead in our hearts . . . there is always a kind of contempt in the act of speaking”, but then there’s Socrates, ὁ δὲ ἀνεξέταστος βίος οὐ βιωτὸς ἀνθρώπῳ.
Matt, by “I’m sympathetic” you mean….?
I didn’t catch the Socrates quote. It was like Greek to me. (bah dum dum)
AxelUmog
So one of my absolute favorite parts of watching film is the discussion afterwards. Big surprise, this being a message board solely devoted to the discussion of film.
Never-the-less, I love talking about the experience for the following reasons among others:
1. I’m human, and as such I am generally fond of hearing myself talk.
2. I like to continue to formulate feelings, ideas and sentiments by saying them out loud and relating them to another like minded person.
3. I like to agree with other people, it’s great to be able to share with someone else the exact same sentiment or feeling about a film. And if we don’t agree, I like to try and convince them to alter their obviously erroneous viewpoint. (and, ok, every now and again I suppose I like to “listen”, and maybe concede a point here or there, this is rare.)
“Ok, ok… so talking about films is great we get it, what’s the point?” Well… The point is it’s not actually great or even good at all. cue /gasp.
What I mean is, I only like to discuss films that I thought were bad, marginal, or just decent. If a film is more than decent and actually manages to transcend to the status of an actual good film, I loathe discussing it. This is odd, because discussing films is generally quite enjoyable.
The problem is first of all that there are not words yet invented by man capable of doing justice to a film that is truly wonderful. You can flounder around and attempt to describe it sure, but you are just doing the film a disservice by attempting to force it into the confines of words, and worse yet, words that you personally happen to be familiar with.
In support of this, here is a quote from Daniel Day-Lewis on the subject of rehearsal:
“Even now, when I sometimes think of doing a play, I think of rehearsal rooms and people hugging and everyone talking over cups of coffee because they are nervous. It`s both very touching and it makes me a little nauseous and claustrophobic. Too much talk. I don`t rehearse at all in film if I can help it. In talking a character through, you define it. And if you define it, you kill it dead.”
I think there is a lot of truth in this notion, and a very real danger. There is a most tangible kind of a death that happens when you define, when you force something into words. Now it is important here to clarify that this does not mean that one doesn’t feel a need, a great want to discuss great films. Quite the opposite, there is a very strong desire to do just that. But I feel like this can be a very dangerous impulse to indulge in, and some films are just so great that how can you possibly justify taking the risk?
An interesting hedgehog’s dilemma, it’s like a David Lynch film in a lot of ways: You want to know what “certain things” mean, but then again, you don’t want to know. Because once you know, the thing is dead. The magic is dead. But still you think about it, you ponder things, you wonder about things… you really do want to know, and that wanting is important, it’s definitely part of it… but you can’t know, you really, really can’t. There is a kind of Yin-Yang principle at work here, and the tightrope can be very tricky to walk sometimes especially on a website such as MUBI…
So, I’m curious other people deal with these opposing forces. Do they exist, and to what degree do you honor them assuming you buy into the idea?