Nirv
Carbonite Member
Cinematic is an extremely wide term. Could we agree that "professional", "tasteful", and "artsy", are descriptions that fit inside that designation?
If anyone uses any of those terms to describe a video they deserve a punch in the face.
The cinematic term is necessarily wide because the aesthetics of cinema are so wide and are constantly undergoing change. The moment you try and define what cinematic means will lead you down a dark hole and become an exercise in political correctness fascism, thought censorship and elitism.
I believe the 'intent' of the piece should be taken into consideration, it was clear to me the intention of the producer was to create a short film that contained the aesthetic of cinema while experimenting with various optical effects. It was very obvious to me that this production did not use the aesthetics of a local news report or an ego massaging corporate video or a Dogme95 production and its ambition was that of a cinematic style.
Who defines what cinema is?
Which fascist decides on what is cinematic and what isn't?
Is Battleship Potemkin cinematic?