Movies are forever ruined.

Doc Bernard

Doc Bernard

Indie Arms Member
There is a part of me that detests my experience in film-making. I can no longer go to the movies and just get wrapped up in the actual movie and story.

Today I went to see 2012. I was impressed at the storyline and the 24-esque feel, but I found myself distracted by my attempting to dissect the SFX and judging the camera angles.

This sucks. I have not been in the theater in a long time, and decided to go see this. Apparently, I am forever ruined when it comes to just going to see a movie.

But it was a decent movie and worth the 13.00 I spent. Except for the f*$#ing crying baby. Who, in their right mind, takes a baby to a disaster flick at 9pm??????
 
Last edited:
For me that is precisely how I can judge if a film was good to me or not. If at the end of the movie I say to myself "Damn it, I have to watch this again so I can pay attention to how it was lit and shot." then I consider it was a good movie because I forgot about all the other stuff and became submerged into the movie. On the other hand if I am looking at all the stuff the entire movie then something is wrong.
 
Interesting. I do want to see it again, and will probably buy it on dvd to do so. But there were a few shots my brain went "Ooooo! How did they get that shot?" or "Nice, those waves must of cost xxxxxxxxxx to do, based off of 'Pirates'"

I do think it was worth seeing, unlike the last one I went to see. Just hate that I couldn't just enjoy it like most of the other people there.

LOL, my friends don't ask me to recommend movies anymore, either. Another side effect.
 
I only do that when I'm bored in the movie or say the scene doesn't interest me. I try to do that sometimes but I get pulled into the movie since it was good. I payed attention to the 2012 vfx (which were awesome btw!) but was still able to watch the movie just fine.
 
LOL, I hear ya, Ramsaur. But I do that with every dvd I see, even if it is amazing. Take "Saving Private Ryan", my absolute favorite movie. The lighting, the angles, the acting, the storyline, the SFX.....stellar. But, I analyzed it to death, despite enjoying the actual story. I bought it to actually take notes, either to learn from,. or see if I could imagine another way to do it. I can't seem to shut the analytical side down. If I have seen it, I can tell you what I picked apart about the film. No matter how good it is.

And that is what depresses me. Prior to my doing filming, I could easily get "lost" in the storyline. Not lost in a bad sense, but lost as in totally unaware of what was going on around me. Becoming part of the story kind of lost. Now? That is gone.

Now mind you, I had to sell my camera, which hurt like you don't believe. But I still am allowed to give my input on the films I have worked, though only when a situation arises that there is confusion on how to shoot a particular scene I am involved in. Otherwise I stand aside and make mental notes on how I would do it. Presumptuous? Yeah. But I will eventually get another decent camera. And then I can explore those angles I envision.
 
Last edited:
oh yea, I've done that with movies on DVD I've seen all the time or also my favorite films. And I'll skip the story line since I already know it, and watch the camera operating, lighting, all that fun stuff to watch and observe.
 
Nitsuj said:
For me that is precisely how I can judge if a film was good to me or not. If at the end of the movie I say to myself "Damn it, I have to watch this again so I can pay attention to how it was lit and shot." then I consider it was a good movie because I forgot about all the other stuff and became submerged into the movie. On the other hand if I am looking at all the stuff the entire movie then something is wrong.
Click to expand...

my thoughts exactly. i hope i never get too sucekd into it. been in audio for years, and there came that 'plateau' where my brain just couldn't listen to a full mix. it would look for the multitrack inside.

It's funny how something is good, if its so good one just doesn't notice. It's a different part of the brain that watches i think. There's the critical part, and the moviegoer part. Don't wanna ruin the moviegoer part.
 
I guess I've been able to detach myself, for the most part, from technical over-analysis. I very much notice continuity errors and condors, and other awkward imperfections, but I have been able to step back and keep myself from analyzing every frame. This does not mean, of course, that I don't occasionally see some incredibly well-executed shot and think for a moment about how that could have been done.

I'm also an immersive viewer. Nothing pisses me off more in the theater than the d-bag three seats down who answers his phone, or the two people behind me who have to analyze the movie (verbally) as they watch it. I get so wrapped up in listening to every single bit of the mix just as much as I watch the screen. It's frustrating being pulled out of that by some jerk who can't keep quiet.

I guess what I'm saying, since audio is my first life and shooting came second, I'm very attentive to both... and though I do get distracted because I notice a lot, I also am able to bury myself in the experience.

It's the same principle for me for going to see a film despite what the critics might say. Folks go to a movie that has high expectations and they come out disappointed, and after watching that film I realize it's not because it's a bad film... it's because there was a certain expectation on it. Go to the film and expect to see a movie, expect to be entertained for 90 minutes, and forget everything else.
 
I gave up this battle years ago. I rarely get pulled into a movie in a complete visceral way like I did when I was a kid. Back then, the screen just seemed to disappear and I would become one with the movie. I think some of this is just getting older. As we mature we lose much of that "play" aspect of our brains that let's us have imaginary friends and allows inanimate objects to come to life. I think that's biological and somewhat inevitable. Add to that the aspect of becoming a filmmaker and analyzing all the technical aspects of a movie and you can lose that "out of body" experience a great movie provides. I can still be moved emotionally by a film, usually by something that reminds me of something in my own life, but find I rarely get excited or scared any more by what is actually happening on screen. The trade off for me is that I can have a deeper understanding of a film, more philosophical.
 
Can you imagine this experience for a 'writer' as we have to listen forced exposition, unfunny lines, contrived phrases, etc.? We see the whole pattern, inciting incidents, low point, point of no return, near death experience - there are few movies were I don't think about these things at all, but few.
 
I agree that a standard by which to measure how good a given film was, is to note how often I wandered off into thoughts about lighting choices, finishes, density matching, continuity problems etc: if I did, the show probably wasn't very good. But if I didn't, that means that what was on screen actually held my attention on its own merits and kept me from wandering.
 
I made a promise to myself I wouldn't let this happen. That if I wanted to know how it's done I'd get the DVD later. I may question or take note of something but when I'm viewing the film for the first time it's all about the movie.

-Nate
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top