- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Name 5 movies that were better the second time you watched them
Posted on 3/5/14 at 11:09 pm to pivey14
Posted on 3/5/14 at 11:09 pm to pivey14
quote:
elaborate
I never said movies "can't get better on successive viewings" or "you can't enjoy successive viewings of a movie" or "you can't find 'anything new' in a successive viewing." None of that is true.
The short answer is that, most films do not and should not REQUIRE successive viewings to "get" or "understand" them. Those phrases are flexible to the genre of the film. For instance, in a horror film, successive viewings often get worse because tension release is known after you see the movie once.
Longform: I start from this:
1. The director and his intent are more important than the viewer
2. You can never have the same experience twice
3. But you are always watching the same thing
In most cases, directors are making films specifically for ONE viewing, unless explicitly stated by the director or by the rules of the film. Obviously, they cannot control the fan who wants to consume content over and over again. But the idea of a film is tell the journey of a protagonist who meets obstacles, overcomes them and changes over time. That's one path. Therefore, a competent and successful director, will create a film that has all necessary parts of the story, the character, and the overall theme in its film front and center. If he or she is not successful at that, the film will fail to connect with the intended audience.
A film that REQUIRES successive viewings to understand the film, unless explicitly defined as such, is a failure.
Films that support successive viewings and films that support one singular experience should be celebrated.
This post was edited on 3/5/14 at 11:15 pm
Posted on 3/5/14 at 11:15 pm to Freauxzen
You are being way to critical about the meaning of this thread
When did I ever say this thread was about "getting" or "understanding" a movie the second time? All I said was better the second time.
quote:
most films do not and should not REQUIRE successive viewings to "get" or "understand" them.
When did I ever say this thread was about "getting" or "understanding" a movie the second time? All I said was better the second time.
This post was edited on 3/5/14 at 11:24 pm
Posted on 3/6/14 at 2:28 am to Freauxzen
quote:
I never said movies "can't get better on successive viewings" or "you can't enjoy successive viewings of a movie" or "you can't find 'anything new' in a successive viewing." None of that is true.
The short answer is that, most films do not and should not REQUIRE successive viewings to "get" or "understand" them. Those phrases are flexible to the genre of the film. For instance, in a horror film, successive viewings often get worse because tension release is known after you see the movie once.
Longform: I start from this:
1. The director and his intent are more important than the viewer
2. You can never have the same experience twice
3. But you are always watching the same thing
In most cases, directors are making films specifically for ONE viewing, unless explicitly stated by the director or by the rules of the film. Obviously, they cannot control the fan who wants to consume content over and over again. But the idea of a film is tell the journey of a protagonist who meets obstacles, overcomes them and changes over time. That's one path. Therefore, a competent and successful director, will create a film that has all necessary parts of the story, the character, and the overall theme in its film front and center. If he or she is not successful at that, the film will fail to connect with the intended audience.
A film that REQUIRES successive viewings to understand the film, unless explicitly defined as such, is a failure.
Films that support successive viewings and films that support one singular experience should be celebrated.
far too complex. some movies you just enjoy upon more a second time around. it's not about "understanding" or "getting" and just like anything you can also acquire a taste. and yes you can have a different experience. everyone is different.
quote:
directors are making films specifically for ONE viewing
really? even comedy?
Posted on 3/6/14 at 3:11 pm to Freauxzen
quote:
A film that REQUIRES successive viewings to understand the film, unless explicitly defined as such, is a failure.
absolutely disagree
that would then extend to all forms of art such as books and music
saying a piece is a failure if all of its complex subtleties aren't immediately grasped upon first viewing/reading/listen is ridiculous.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News