The other night a friend and I got in a bit of a disagreement based on the way we watch films.
She said she loved 2001 and I said "Ugh. That movie was so boring. The plot was like 15 minutes long."
And she said she loved Napoleon Dynamite and I said "Ugh. That movie's plot didn't start until halfway into the film."
And she said there was this great moment when this one dude did this thing and I said "But that's a scene, not a movie. A movie is a string of related scenes that work together to tell a story, preferably one with some sort of meaning."
And she said "That's a film. A movie doesn't have to have a story."
And I said, "WHaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa?"
This conversation made me suddenly realize why people love David Lynch.
And yes, I realize I have now insulted a lot of stuff some of you guys like. But at least now I get why.
I love movies with stories. To me, story is paramount. Every camera angle, every wide shot, every line of the score, every jump cut needs to push the story. The goal of the film is to tell a story. It had never occurred to me that there is any other purpose. Maybe that's because I spent my early life learning to be a writer, not a filmmaker. To me, story is the source of everything else.
But my friend disagreed. She said she loves to watch a movie with pretty shots or meaningless scenes that made her laugh. Story is nice and all, but it's not the main purpose of a film.
This is completely incomprehensible to me, but at least hearing her say that helps explain why people don't always consider the screenwriter worth mentioning when they list the credits of a film, or why people revere films that have weird camera shots for the sake of having weird camera shots.
I don't get it, but at least I now understand it.
All hail Quentin and the Coen brothers.
ReplyDeleteBatman: The Dark Knight...loved, loved, loved the story in the that one. Hence it's undeniably popularity--everybody went to see it because of the great story
ReplyDeleteI am, of course, Jerry, being ironical. (bonus points if you name the movie I bastardized that line from).
I still don't get it (also didn't like Napoleon Dynamite)
ReplyDeleteI'm all about the story. Maybe that's why I don't like abstract art either...
It doesn't matter how bizarre the story may seem, as long as there is a story. But if it's just random pointless act after random pointless act... doesn't quite cut it.
Probably why I like South Park more than Family Guy too.
I had a hard time with this. I was doing the same, talking to a friend about movies. He pretty much likes any movie that makes him laugh and they don't have to make any sense at all as long as they do that. I need story. I watched a bunch of mumblecore movies and to me that are pretty boring but they have a huge following and get great reviews. Most have very little story, if they have any story at all. I don't don't get it.
ReplyDeleteI had a hard time with this. I was doing the same, talking to a friend about movies. He pretty much likes any movie that makes him laugh and they don't have to make any sense at all as long as they do that. I need story. I watched a bunch of mumblecore movies and to me that are pretty boring but they have a huge following and get great reviews. Most have very little story, if they have any story at all. I don't don't get it.
ReplyDeleteVisuals are great! However, they're not the movie. If you can make both, then you've got a winner.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, you can have a great scene and a poor movie. See: Resident Evil: Extinction. Brilliant scene with the flamethrower and the birds, but the rest of the movie was lame.
What she probably meant was:
Entertainment doesn't have to have a story.
If only a scene is great, then you have either a short, or a skit.
Then again, some movies are great entertainment, but no great story. Rocky Horror Picture Show for example. You can pull any scene in that and it's entertaining.
I think you're defining story in a pretty limited way. I would argue that EVERYTHING has a story. That's human nature, to see the story. You're just arguing that you like a more traditional format.
ReplyDeleteDavid Lynch is all about story. He's just not telling it in the way you're talking about. Story isn't merely presented through classic plot development and dialogue. Mike Leigh films are character studies. Still about story. What about Kabuki theatre? Still about story. A Hopper painting tells more of a story to me than most horror movies.
And TDK is all about story. That one was even in the classic sense.
I live for the moment when I emerge from the darkness of a theater into the light of the day with a new understanding of myself and the world around me.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't get past the first ten minutes of Napoleon Dynamite - I wonder if that was why.
ReplyDeleteI'd agree with you about 2001. I'd go one further (and probably be labeled a heretic), but I have problems with Blade Runner where the (poorly told IMO) story again plays second fiddle to the (absolutely stunning) visuals. I love the look of the movie, I think the overall concept of the story was a decent enough one. It just wasn't told in what I consider to be a compelling manner because the director was more concerned with mood.
Hey Emily, I just wanted to let you know that I'm seriously digging your blog. I came across it via my friend Adam's blog, "Our Man in Los Angeles". I'm new to the blogging world -- I recently started a blog about my current writing/producing project.
ReplyDeleteRegarding story, I think there has to be a happy medium. I'm all for random scenes that make you laugh & beautiful shots, but there has to be a story driven plot for me to get involved in. The most important thing to me, though, is that a film have characters that I care about watching.