Can watching bad movies make you a worse filmmaker?

Started by SoNowThen, February 13, 2004, 11:17:17 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages1 2 3 4
User actions

SoNowThen

February 13, 2004, 11:17:17 AM
What I mean by this is, once Mac said he tries to see as many movies as possible, and would never leave even a bad one, because there is something to be learned from each and every film.

Running parallel to this, is an old bit of advice I still have sitting in my head from a film school note sheet. Most of the advice we got was terrible, but some made sense. This particular sheet was tips for writers. That being the one thing I had experience in, I found it to be actually quite sensible and helpful. Y'know, the old "write at least ___ hours every day" stuff, and all that. At the bottom of the sheet, it said "writers/directors should stay away from watching porno". Now, I had to think about it, and it makes sense because the dialogue and acting is so bad in porn, and the shots are so terrible, the more the you watch, the more you get a diluted sense of what is acceptable to put on tape/film. Of course, I didn't follow that good advice, and kept watching porn. And I realized (during my heavy porn watching days), a lot of my dialogue was getting worse and worse. So now, I just skip all the talking parts and just watch the sex, all in the name of my art, you know.  :wink:

But in all seriousness, d'ya think it could be detrimental to watch tons of crap movies all the time? Imagine you watched as many made-for-tv and studio assembly line romantic comedies as you did the "critically respected" works -- would your search for quality be diluted, hurting your creative work?

It's kinda for this same reason I won't take a job as a local tv editing assistant or make wedding videos with my camera equipment. I'm scared to death of learning the habits of bad public tv and/or industrial video craft, and having it affect the way I wanna write/direct/edit features. Am I being paranoid, or do others share this feeling?

p.s. - as a disclaimer, by bad movies I don't mean the really popular commercial stuff we all disagree on, I mean the BAD movies we all recognize as bad.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

SHAFTR

#1
February 13, 2004, 11:20:02 AM
Quote from: SoNowThen
p.s. - as a disclaimer, by bad movies I don't mean the really popular commercial stuff we all disagree on, I mean the BAD movies we all recognize as bad.

"Talking shit about a pretty sunset
Blanketing opinions that i'll probably regret soon"

pete

#2
February 13, 2004, 11:25:26 AM
well, that depends if you consider QT to be a bad filmmaker.
"Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot."
- Buster Keaton

SoNowThen

#3
February 13, 2004, 11:29:36 AM
Good god, no.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

MacGuffin

#4
February 13, 2004, 11:32:46 AM
Quote from: SoNowThenBut in all seriousness, d'ya think it could be detrimental to watch tons of crap movies all the time?

How do you know they are crap movies unless you watch them? You have to see for yourself. Then think, 'Why didn't I like it?' That's how you learn from their mistakes. It could be the script/story, the characters, the acting, the direction, etc. What would you have done different?

Or it could totally surprise you into thinking, 'I wasn't expecting it to be that good' then ask what was fresh or captured you about it.

Quote from: SHAFTR

*Cough*
I'm in that film.
"Don't think about making art, just get it done. Let everyone else decide if it's good or bad, whether they love it or hate it. While they are deciding, make even more art." - Andy Warhol


Skeleton FilmWorks

SoNowThen

#5
February 13, 2004, 11:44:38 AM
'kay, but that wasn't really my point. Go on the porn and wedding video examples: cinema that will form bad habits, I like to call it.

Is that clear? Am I making any sense? I mean, I don't want this to turn into a movie taste war, and I'm not trying to get down on certain types of films. But sometimes you can watch movies where you go "I didn't like this and this", yet the more of them you watch, the less you notice that you don't like it, it becomes acceptable, and that's the dangerous part...

Influence/inspiration habits, I guess...
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

pete

#6
February 13, 2004, 12:18:24 PM
yeah but just as you accept all the flaws of a terrible movie, you also take all the good stuff in a good movie for granted.  for example, in the "this your lot" thread there was a quote by Mamet about how after the Godfather came out, people took that murdering to classical music device for granted.  Then, good becomes bad.  I think having good taste, or even a keen sense of cinema, is still very different from being a good filmmaker.  It can help sure, good taste in music, film, acting, and art in general helps a filmmaker make better decisions when it comes to issues of sensibility--how much is too much...etc.  But being a good artististic filmmaker (if we consider filmmakers artists and whatnot) ultimately relies on being original, and the ability to transform thoughts/ feelings into something tangible.  Like Christopher Doyle, with no previous training in film, who just picks up the camera at age 30 and starts filmming.
"Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot."
- Buster Keaton

SoNowThen

#7
February 13, 2004, 12:28:24 PM
Ah, now I see your point -- like all the Tarantino wanna-be's, right?

Yeah, that's brutal, too. But I think copying really talented people is still better than copying shit.

Plus, I don't so much mean copying, as I do Unconscious Habit.

But yeah, and Godfather also started that "period piece must have sepia tinge" thing too, didn't it? That's getting annoying.

EDIT - also, I was just thinking, the really great filmmakers can take stuff that was done as a fix-it before, and make it great. Point in case, the shit stack called Dueces Wild had tons of post slo-mo, which of course looked terrible. I used to hate this effect until I saw Wong Kar Wai use it. Under his control, it becomes a beautiful thing. Same with dissolves, I tried to always get around dissolving when I planned things out, but I was blown away by Scorsese's use of them in Age Of Innocence and Kundun.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

molly

#8
February 13, 2004, 12:36:18 PM
Quote from: SNTWhat I mean by this is, once Mac said he tries to see as many movies as possible, and would never leave even a bad one, because there is something to be learned from each and every film.

learn from other people's mistakes

pete

#9
February 13, 2004, 12:38:10 PM
or woody allen with the romantic comedy genre and the french new wave dudes with various other genres.  I still think it's the people, not the movies they watch.  meaning wong karwai without the overtly exaggerated pixelization post effect will still be badass.
"Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot."
- Buster Keaton

Fernando

#10
February 13, 2004, 12:43:09 PM
I don't know if this has to do exactly with your post but, I remember Kubrick once said that the thing made him want to be a filmmaker was watching bad films, he thought he couldn't make any worse than those; so he at some point you could say was influenced by bad movies in a good way.

Another SK story, when he was planning on making 2001, (IIRC) it has been claimed that he saw every film ever made that has to do with space or sci-fi in order to see what he could or couldn't use, rights and wrongs, then he came up with his own idea of the film, and rest is history.

SoNowThen

#11
February 13, 2004, 12:44:25 PM
:(  No, my point ain't coming across here. I guess I'm the only one to feel this way.

It's like golf, if someone teaches you a bad stance and a shit swing, and you practice all the time, you can still become decent. But it would be to your benefit in the long run to start off with a proper stance and swing. Of course the natural geniuses and natural athletes are just born with something, but the rest of us gotta work at it...
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

MacGuffin

#12
February 13, 2004, 12:51:34 PM
Quote from: SoNowThenIt's like golf, if someone teaches you a bad stance and a shit swing, and you practice all the time, you can still become decent. But it would be to your benefit in the long run to start off with a proper stance and swing. Of course the natural geniuses and natural athletes are just born with something, but the rest of us gotta work at it...

But how would you know it's a bad swing and stance if you're just learning? It wouldn't be until someone else comes along and tells you what you're doing is wrong and/or after many attempts and not succeeding, you would have to question that your technique is wrong. Once again, learn from the mistakes of others (and from your naivete) and you'll know what not to do. You don't have to get it right the first time.
"Don't think about making art, just get it done. Let everyone else decide if it's good or bad, whether they love it or hate it. While they are deciding, make even more art." - Andy Warhol


Skeleton FilmWorks

SoNowThen

#13
February 13, 2004, 01:04:55 PM
One last time, put differently:

Imagine the worst movie you've ever seen. Not a movie that disappointed you, but one that you were actually pissed off that it got made. Incompetent everything, I mean not just subjectively bad in terms of content, but technically bad as well.

Now imagine having to watch it every day for a month.

Would it affect you in any way? Would you now not hate it as much? Would it be (in a Pavlovian kinda way) ingrained in your mind to the point that you may be unconsciously copying it in work you are doing?
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

pete

#14
February 13, 2004, 01:10:07 PM
I git what you're saying man.  but then what is the question?
"Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot."
- Buster Keaton
Print
Go Up Pages1 2 3 4
User actions