Rate These Things

zoostory

zoostory

Well-known member
Ok, Aristotle made a list a long time ago. I'm going to modify it a bit, but just out of curiosity, for an independent project. That is, the stuff we see here, in film festivals, and in smaller theatrical release, put these in order from most to least important (for you):

cinematography
script (the story)
director (director's vision)
performance
sound (assuming a normal sync sound movie)
production design (incl. costumes, etc)
topic
genre

obviously, producing is important to get the movie made, I am talking strictly the result of what we see on the screen.


This should be interesting. To start, here is mine:

1) performance
2) story
3) sound
4) cinematography
5) production design
6) director
7) topic and genre


zoo
 
1) Script
2) Performance
3) Production Design
4) Cinemetography
5) Director
6) Sound
7) Topic and Genre


Reasoning: I nominate the script as the number one slot because, to me, it's the fundamental glue that brings the rest together. A tight script calls for everything else in the production to be just as tight.

Performance comes up next on my list because actors are what you see and hear the most (in most cases). The performance has to sell next for the impact to be achieved, or at least that's what I'd want to be a strong point if I were doing something.

Production design is third for me. I'm a hyper-stylized person and I think that a great production design amps up the production as a whole, allowing the director to take advantage of more, the actors to play off of things and even if it's post-production (special effects, etc. ) it still adds another layer in audience delivery.

Cinema's fourth: If you have the top three things listed, a great Cinematographer should bring along a little more adhesive for the director to work off of. And a lot of times, Directors use their same Cine-guy/gal.

Director goes with up and above, given something to work with and all.

Sound because it just needs to be heard. Sound design is really important but, to me, not as important as those things above it.

And lastly, Topic and Genre. Hey... I watched THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA and I came out satisfied. The movie was great, and I don't even know what Prada is. (exaggerating on that last bit.)
 
01. Script
02. Performance
03. Cinematograhy
03. Sound
05. Production Design
06. Direction
07. Genre/Topic

I think Sound and Cinematography stand together.
 
1. script (the story)
2. performance
3. director (director's vision)
4. cinematography
5. sound (assuming a normal sync sound movie)
6. production design (incl. costumes, etc)
7. topic/genre

I agree cinematography and sound should be together.
 
1 script
2 Performance
3Sound
4Cinematography
5Direction
6Production design
7topic genre
 
I believe that the story is what wins Awards at the end of the day; but I do not find it to be King - Content. There are literally hundreds upon hundreds of films with 'so so' storylines, yet they somehow go onto box office success.

1. The Talent

Better have actors who can act or the audience will immediatley fall out of your world you created. It doesn't have to be Russel Crowe, but it at least better be real. The thing with actors is; they either can, or cannot act. That line is thin.

2. Sound

Better have professional sounding Audio, Score, Foley and FX Sound. Film is sensory. Someone in another thread stated that sound was not as important (referring to silent films) but I asked 'How many people are watching silent films?'. I mean besides the deaf.

3. Mis-En-Scene

Better know how to tell a story through the art of cinematography (and lighting, cutting, compostion, coverage ...). I do not mean to take a pretty picture, but all of those ingredients that the DP and director (and editor) collaborate to do.


Ill stand firm. Yeah, it's better too have a good story, but it isn't the end all. Your film can (and will) find success even without Oscar Material.

I'd gather a film must have atleast 'Two Act's of story'.

-

Name a film; any film, that has crap sound or crap talent. I am not referring to the anomoly films that really do have bad acting but of the hundreds of films released every year that succeed.

Find competent actors, find a professional sound guy, have a director that can competently tell a story, have a DP that can competently use a camera and you're gold.

If you have that Magic Story (Schindler's, Jaws, E.T.), then bravo. That is the icing on the cake that will slam it home.
 
Just watched "thethin red line".

This movie was agood example of, Great script/stroy Great talent. great sound, great cinematography. So So directing and a poor edit. IMO.

The movie has all th parts, it just wasnt put together well.

Editing should be there too.
 
John_Hudson said:
I believe that the story is what wins Awards at the end of the day; but I do not find it to be King - Content. There are literally hundreds upon hundreds of films with 'so so' storylines, yet they somehow go onto box office success.

1. The Talent

Better have actors who can act or the audience will immediatley fall out of your world you created. It doesn't have to be Russel Crowe, but it at least better be real. The thing with actors is; they either can, or cannot act. That line is thin.
Click to expand...

You have a VERY good point here John. A buddy of mine made a short a couple years ago... The script was not very good, but one of the actors who had a bit part (just one scene) made the dialogue sound amazing. He took a very uninteresting character and scene and infused it with an amazing performance and made the scene interesting. Good actors are the key to a film... you can have a so-so script with amazing actors, and people will call the writing brilliant.
 
1-cinematography
1-script (the story)
1-director (director's vision)
1-performance
1-sound (assuming a normal sync sound movie)
1-production design (incl. costumes, etc)
2-topic
2-genre

All of them are important 'cept for the last two. They dont matter.
 
1) Sound
2) Performance
3) Story
4) Director
5) Production Design
6) Cinematography
7) Topic and Genre

Reasoning:

If it's bad sound recording/mixing/design, no one will care about any of the rest of it. (it's going to make that performance tougher if no one can hear the actors clearly, and real hard to follow the story) Poor sound = crap movie every time.

I rated performance next because I think character is more important than story or plot. A flat/boring/terrible perfomance (and therefore character) is gonna make me lose interest in the overall story no matter how good it might be. A great character can carry a mediocre story/script, but not the other way around IMHO.

Story is the blueprint of the film, so it's gotta be interesting and good to keep people's attention. Telling stories is a fundamental human way of communicating, so it's pretty damn important.

The director is the storyteller, and they've gotta hold all the elements together creatively and make it all work and make sense.

Production design - the story's got to look the part, right? Plus, no matter how good the DP is, they can't make white-walled apartments look great. The cinematography is important, but without the others listed above, great cinematography can fall flat. (i.e. all the beautifully shot, horrible Hollywood movies)

Topic and genre is pretty irrelevant in my opinion in regards to a film, unless you are in a marketing dept.

Garrett
 
I agree about sound being of primo importance... BUT...

I think this ranking, while interesting, is not useful. I can think of movies that blew me away solely on the basis of any of these factors. I think a better way to discuss this is to take great movies and say, "which of these factors made this particular movie great"?
 
Script
Acting
Sound
Editing
Cinematograpy

The reason I said script over acting: if a script is great, the dialogue will sound realistic and an OK actor will come off as believable. The script is also what makes people talk about the movie and watch it over and over. Nobody would watch From Justin to Kelly if the acting was great.

I don't know what category this goes under, but I think 'mood' would be a good one to put. I realize mood is a mix of cinematography, sound, and set, but I think it is one of the main things.

I would watch a 2 hour montage of random clips if they gave me strong feelings about something.
 
Cinematography
Performance and Sound
Script
Story
Direction

Reasoning - When talking about what translates to screen strictly, the thing that catches your eye first is cinematography, then you think abuot how good the actors are, and the quality of the sound. With bad sound you can have the best actor reading out the best lines and it'll be useles if you can't hear it. After that you start to notice the dialogue and thus the story is realised. Lastly would come directing which holds everything together
 
ullanta said:
I agree about sound being of primo importance... BUT...

I think this ranking, while interesting, is not useful. I can think of movies that blew me away solely on the basis of any of these factors. I think a better way to discuss this is to take great movies and say, "which of these factors made this particular movie great"?
Click to expand...

Go back and watch those same films with the volume turned off. :)
 
John_Hudson said:
Go back and watch those same films with the volume turned off. :)
Click to expand...

Agreed. I'm not a sound guy. It can't wow me. However, it can ruin a movie for me of it's horrible. For me, if the sound is transparent, you're good.
 
1. Performance
2. Script
3. Direction
3. Sound
3. Story
4. Cinematography
5. Editing

Acting for film is alot different from any other type of acting. Films almost 100 percent of the time try to represent as best they can, real people. If actors are stage-acting, talking with the same voice throughout the film, at the same pace, doing the head movements and the wide eyes and everything, they need to be strangled. It's not an (effin') play.

Script is extremely important because no matter how hard you try, you just cannot sit through From Justin to Kelly.

Direction If you don't have a competent director, your film falls apart - you begin to go behind schedule, the actors begin to lose their trust in you, it's a downward spiral. A film needs a director who can stay away from result directing: i.e. "Be unhappy in this scene." "Dial it up / Dial it down".

Sound can make or break a movie. If you can detect problems with audio, then it takes away from the overall realism of the film.

Story is a key element of a film. It's not a smart idea to make a Sci-Fi remake of Beowulf set in outerspace. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120604/)

Cinematography can't really be set in the parameters of good or bad. It just has to be... well done. The Conversation (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0071360/) makes you really notice the camera is there, but in other films you don't even realize that you're watching a film because you get so absorbed in it.

Editing is a key element to film because many people are not fans of harsh color corrections, extremely quick edits, and the other types of experimental editing out there nowadays. It's key to find a balance between style and viewability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top