Cygnet74

and you won't, because it doesn't. it's just a popular crutch for depthless thought.

Fincher Fan

Alright NBT, I'll bother answering your question, though I doubt it'll stop your whining everytime the phrase is used.

I found the style of filmmaking used throughout the Amityville remake to be conversant with the staples of the average music clip (by this I refer to the length of shots, editing and heightened narrative pace). Most of this movie consisted of aesthetic scares solely for the audience, creating no sense of fear for the characters (in the way a film such as Rosemary's Baby does, for example). Although Reynolds has a great screen presence, the one-dimensional characters went from one predictable point to the next - it was lazy filmmaking. I was going to list some examples from the film but, honestly, it was so damn forgettable I'm drawing a blank.

So to me "music video or MTV-like" is a valid criticism because it means the film will embody everything we've come to expect in a music clip with a different structure - all flash, no substance.

hdtv00

What really cracks me up is he acts like he just made the whole mtv/video reference up for the first time in history. Christ you have ANY idea how many times I've heard that referenced in movies lately. You're the one that needs to get used to it, not the rest of us change what it refers to...better yet, how bout they stop hiring shit directors with no talent.

It has got out of hand the last few years in movies thats for damn sure.

Anyway back to Mellissa George's body....

Someone asked about something being rated R, are we even allowed to watch ratred R movies these days in the US, or have they been banned yet for the greater good...

I cant for the life of me figure out why I have to watch the rated pg13 version of flying daggers...then theres darkness..which was rated pg13 as well but the whole rest of the world are all grown up and get to watch ratred R movies...lucky for them.

Fincher Fan

Who me? Nah, just spelling it out for someone.

What I don't understand is why they don't have a rating category for you guys between PG and R - seems to be working fine everywhere else...

CaptainMarvel

It sounds like you just have a personal hang-up over the phrase. That's, perhaps, something you should try to get over, rather than attempting to remove a recognized phrase from the lexicon.

The same arguments you make about the diversity of music videos ("quality of direction, style, cinematography...") could be made about the diversity of television commercials. The basic premise of such a comment wouldn't be that all commercials are the same, but that there are predominant characteristics to most commercials. You may or may not agree with that premise, but I would. To me, saying something too closely represents a television commercial would definitely convey a meaning... it would be up to me to decide whether that's a positive or a negative, but it's definitely not a valueless commentary.

I don't see how saying something is "MTV-like" or "music video like" is any different.

QuiGonJosh

pics?

NatrlBornThrllr

I'll just leave it be by quoting that response. No sense in debating it.

-JP

CaptainMarvel

Outright dismissing other people's opinions as "depthless" is infinitely more shallow than anything Fincher Fan said, IMO.

Cheers.

NatrlBornThrllr

Wait, so according to this post, I'm to assume that you believe that every thought ever posted on these forums is deep, meaningful, and well thought out?

Please.

-JP

CaptainMarvel

Yes, because that's exactly what I said.

You entered this thread with the notion that the phrase was meaningless. Several people explained to you exactly what they thought it meant. Phrases and words only have the meaning people attach to them... when "MTV-like" has a definite connotation to multiple people, the phrase has meaning. It's not even a new phrase... movie reviewers (professional writers with very large audiences) use the phrase all the time, as they have for years. They aren't doing it out of laziness, or to confuse their audience; they're doing it because it conveys something very clearly to their audience.

Just because you choose to take an contrary bent, clap your hands over your ears, and deny its otherwise understood meaning doesn't strip that meaning from it. And, IMO, no... obstinance isn't "deep."

Please indeed.

NatrlBornThrllr

I'm afraid I don't understand your confusion. You said it was "shallow" to dismiss somebody's opinion as depthless. By this logic, all opinions are deep...otherwise it wouldn't be "shallow" to dismiss the opinion as depthless, it would simply be, for lack of a better term, appropriate.

If by "several people," you mean you and the person who first made the comment, then yes, I suppose "several people" have explained what they think it means.

Not if that "definite" connotation is baseless. I stick by the fact that music videos (which differ from your commercials reference because they are, at the core, made to entertain...whereas commercials have a fundamentally different agenda) are comparable to film.

Music videos can have a narrative structre that's sharp, or one that's aimless. They can have direction that's on key, or wayward and amateurish. They can have impressive cinematography, or a "point and shoot" approach. Just like feature-length cinema, music videos feature solid examples of filmmaking as well as commercial, by-the-numbers examples.

Just like short films, music videos offer a wide spectrum of execution. Given that, I chuckle at people who make a blanket statement like, "aspects of that film were music video like" and assume it to be wholly negative. Simply put, it's an extremely vague critique of a film...so vague, in fact, that I'd argue that it's anything but (as you put it) "meaningful."

-JP

CaptainMarvel

No, I said "outright dismissing other people's opinions as depthless." You jumped into the thread assuming the phrase didn't mean anything, and you lashed out at him (quite snidely) for using it.

You can disagree with what the phrase means all you want. It's one thing to say a comment has a meaning that is wrong. It's another thing to assume a comment is meaningless. If your bone of contention is that he's simply wrong, then that's fair.

And hdtv00. I can drag up movie reviewers (including Ebert) who thought the phrase had meaning too, if you wish. Although I suspect I could list dozens of people without swaying you.

I simply don't see what their end purpose has to do with anything. What's important is whether they have a set of common, typical traits. If so, those traits make for an understandable simile when used to describe something else.

As can commercials.

As can commercials.

As can commercials.

Would you scoff similarly if somebody claimed that a movie or TV show was reminiscent of a commercial ("commercial-like")?

I never said it would be "wholly negative"... I wouldn't even begin to know how to judge that. And I never denied that music videos can be absolute masterpieces of art, if done correctly. I'd say the same is true for commercials as well. My opinion, however, is that the vast majority of music videos are formulaic, and use the same sort of filming techniques repeatedly. That's an assessment that you may disagree with, but it's a common one, and you merely disagreeing with it doesn't make it meaningless.

And I don't think a simile fails because there are almost always outliers or oddities which would make the simile false. When you use a simile, you aren't saying "object A is 100% like object B." You're just pointing out similarities.

At this point, I think you're quibbling over semantics. If he had said "I think this movie's directing was too similar to that used in most music videos", would you have given him as much grief?

In this case, he made a comment that part of the film were "MTV-like." If I hadn't seen the movie, I would have still understood exactly what he was talking about. It would have been up to me to determine if I consider that a negative or a positive (or even important). The problem isn't that his criticism lacked meaning... it's that one member of his audience apparently disagrees with his assessment.