What Makes A Film Great?

Started by modage, January 13, 2004, 05:10:02 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages1 2 3 4 5
User actions

modage

January 13, 2004, 05:10:02 PM
okay, this thread is probably doomed to begin with but I just finished reading Easy Riders, Raging Bulls and watching Personal Journey with Martin Scorsese Through American Movies and thinking about some great movies of the past (and then some of the movies of today), and somehow this question came up.  as I posed it to myself I had no idea of the answer, so perhaps its just an opinion, but what is it that would make a film great?  or even worthwhile?  since film is a storytelling medium, what makes one story better than another?

is a film great because of

1. the STORY IT TELLS.  the story is something that is interesting, exciting, different, sheds some light on a subject that had never been illuminated before.  makes us laugh, cry, cheer.  the way in which the story unfolds, whether through plain ordinary photography and uninventive camerawork and editing have no effect on the subject of the film which is the story that is still getting across.

or is a film great because of

2. the WAY IT TELLS the story. is the story inconsequential, and could be about anything?  because more importantly than the subject of the film, the language of film is brought to such life through the sequences of images and techniques utilized/improved/invented that the story could be of a barber or a king and its not the subject but the telling that breaks barriers.

or is a film great because of

3. the SUBTEXT OF THE STORY.  does that make a film more important when the story is only masking a deeper message.  is a film that deals with aliens, but is really speaking about racism, or macarthyism or violence deemed a great film because of what it is 'saying' about a certain subject?

obviously a mix of these choices might result in a great film, but if one of these was to be valued above the others which ONE is more important?

basically how come the seventies is full of great movies, but there are less today?  what are todays movies lacking that was in such abundance then?  a great story?  a new way to tell that story?  or a story with a deeper social/polictical conscience that has something to say?
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

kotte

#1
January 13, 2004, 05:33:33 PM
Just off the top of my head I would say a combination of the three but if you dig down to basic I would say no. 2. How many great films haven't we seen that just re-uses old storylines?

Coens are a great example of this.

Alethia

#2
January 13, 2004, 05:34:58 PM
who's to say a film is great?  who's to say it isn't?  wonderful breakdown tho, modernage.  i think the nineties and even today are full of just as many great films as the seventies, but then again that's just me.  some people think taxi driver is brilliant (most of the people on this board) and hate a film like say, oh...minority report (there seems to be quite an even split with that one), and some (mutinyco i am thinking of) think minority report is a masterpeice and taxi driver needs to be re-edited.

what makes a film geat to me mostly has to do with how it gets me to respond emotionally, and you pin pointed that in number one, tho a mix of all three gets me to that point.  it's tough to say what makes a film great to an individual, or even the masses....i dunno....i think ive stated the obvious but hey someone had to do it... :)

SoNowThen

#3
January 13, 2004, 05:59:07 PM
I think it's lots of swearing and lots of killing that truly makes a great film.
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.

kotte

#4
January 13, 2004, 06:04:53 PM
PG never makes for great art.

MacGuffin

#5
January 13, 2004, 06:08:09 PM
Quote from: kottePG never makes for great art.

"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

kotte

#6
January 13, 2004, 06:09:36 PM
Quote from: kottePG never makes for great art.

Yeah...I was just kidding. Forgot the smiley-man...

modage

#7
January 13, 2004, 06:10:13 PM
so you would go with the story it tells.  obviously, ideally a combination of elements would be best.  but which element bears more importance?  

Citizen Kane is regarded as a great film because of the barriers it broke down and doors it opened as far as how to shoot a film and the WAY TO TELL A STORY.  although the story is interesting, i doubt were it not for the WAY IT WAS TOLD, any one of us would be mentioning this film today.

Bringing Out The Dead has some brilliant camerawork and editing, but fails to be a great film.  not because of the WAY ITS TOLD, so there must be other missing elements.  

Casablanca, #2 on the AFI List of Greatest Films, is also regarded as a great film.  and although the camerawork and editing is competent, as there were so many films made on the assembly line, why has this movie stood out over time?  because of the STORY IT TELLS for whatever silly reason has struck a chord with so many people, that regardless of the way its filmed, people still watch it because they feel its a good story and can connect with it.

why are so many films of the seventies regarded so highly?  what magic ingredient did they contain that made them superior to the films of the 80's or today?  what makes Taxi Driver a more highly regarded film on this message board than Jaws?  is it because it tells a story that connects to so many people here about lonliness and isolation?  is it because of the way its told was so unique and interesting?  or was it because of its social commentary, how it not just speaks about one character, but speaks for a whole group of people?
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

ono

#8
January 13, 2004, 06:23:25 PM
Quote from: kottePG never makes for great art.
Two words: Annie Hall.  Although, that is the exception more than the rule, and I agree with Kael (I think) who said that it's almost a requirement that the film be rated at least R to be a great film.  Again, there are a few exceptions.  I don't think you can generalize what make a great film, either, because there are so many variables.  Which is why it's so laughable that there's now a formula for the blockbuster.

Today, I was watching TV and a commercial came up for "Win a Date With Tad Hamilton!"  Liz Phair's "Why Can't I" started whining in the background.  Now the movie has a shoddy premise to start with, but sometimes I think certain shoddy premises can work if they aren't Hollywood-ized.  Along Came Polly, for example, had a great premise, two good actors, but will probably fail because of how it's handled.  This morning I saw a student film made in film school by the creator of Buffy.  His father is my dramatic fiction writing teacher, oddly enough.  Now, this film was decent for someone still in film school, but it fell into certain cliches and film school don'ts, and it had a soundtrack that grated on my nerves because it tried to tell me how to feel.  I'm more and more convinced that less is more, and that Dogme has a lot more legitimacy than first thought.  That, and a combination of the three things modage said, if anything, makes a great film at its basic.  But nothing is that simple.

godardian

#9
January 13, 2004, 06:31:45 PM
It is not the "what," it's the "how." Andrew Sarris hit it perfectly square on the head when he wrote that. Someday, someone's gonna deck me for repeating that over and over, but... it's so true. So I guess, like everyone, I'd hedge and say a combo of the three, but you'd never get a great film without the second option modernage mentioned, without something special/passionate/proficient in the style. Now, a style needn't announce itself or be to be a style- everyone has a style, whether you choose it or it chooses you. You don't have the option of not having one; you have the option of what degree of control and insight you have with it.

I'll admit there are stories I'm less interested in than others, but I feel that's a subjective failing on my part, and don't usually care to admit it when I can help it. My real belief is that any story can be great if told in a way that's great (this, of course, covers an overemphasis on plot, thus requiring more specific attention to "plot holes" and the like, as well).
""Money doesn't come into it. It never has. I do what I do because it's all that I am." - Morrissey

"Lacan stressed more and more in his work the power and organizing principle of the symbolic, understood as the networks, social, cultural, and linguistic, into which a child is born. These precede the birth of a child, which is why Lacan can say that language is there from before the actual moment of birth. It is there in the social structures which are at play in the family and, of course, in the ideals, goals, and histories of the parents. This world of language can hardly be grasped by the newborn and yet it will act on the whole of the child's existence."

Stay informed on protecting your freedom of speech and civil rights.

Rudie Obias

#10
January 13, 2004, 07:09:47 PM
my genius!
\"a pair of eyes staring at you, projected on a large screen is what cinema is truly about.\" -volker schlöndorff

NEON MERCURY

#11
January 13, 2004, 08:49:58 PM
QuoteWhat makes a film great?





...when the words....."A David Lynch Film" appears onscreen....

modage

#12
January 13, 2004, 08:53:13 PM
Quote from: rudieobmy genius!
Quote from: NEON MERCURY...when the words....."A David Lynch Film" appears onscreen....
hilarious.  atleast read my initial post first, huh?  the last time i attempt to start a 'thoughtful thread'.  back to lists...   :?
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

pete

#13
January 13, 2004, 08:58:35 PM
three great scenes; no bad scene.
"Tragedy is a close-up; comedy, a long shot."
- Buster Keaton

NEON MERCURY

#14
January 13, 2004, 09:35:18 PM
.......honestly.....it has to be combination of #1..and #2...you see....a film can be great jusyt onthe surface  the story it tells....like jaws for example.....that is a gtreat ffilm...and there is nno essence of #3 ......unnless you want to be overly  ANALytical about it and say..."oh..oh the umm shark represents oppreseive government...and the boat represents the country ..which serves as a "life boat" to the poeple riding it"......but ......that just stupid there are plenty of ffilms that are unniverally great..but have no "deeper" meaning.....but like i have said earlier anyone can find meaning in something but.....honesly #3 ....can be nnonn--existence in cinnneam...and it would be peachy.....but i still enjoy watching films......that conveys  #3's part in this equatioonn......basically.....it comes down to what makes a great film is story and style....but there some films that have hardly a story to it....but he style oif the film is remarkable.....take muhollannd dr.    for example......if you unnlock the story its not that "fanntastic/innnovative....etc......but the way lynch approached the film in his always amazing STYLE....made a okay story the masterpece of the new millenniunm which hasnn't been equalled yet.....
Print
Go Up Pages1 2 3 4 5
User actions