Ah-chie distinguishes between "takeaway food" movies and "idea films". My favourite films are both at once - popcorn movies with an idea or two thrown in. My favourite example is probably Die Hard III, a classic Hollywood summer blockbuster. I find it incredibly entertaining (starts with an explosioni and then the tension mounts) and it also says something about interracial relationships (Graham Greene as a New York detective and the whole black/white discussions) and social prejudice (cliché truck driver is the most educated guy around). For that I forgive it the technical impossibilities...

I like the movies I watch to be immediately entertaining (preferably with a few surprises) - if there's a message hidden somewhere, all the better. But let it be hidden - I don't want to be constantly hit over the head with it in a boring movie (like in Bladerunner 2049), especially not if it's something I've already seen. And I'm at a point, after watching probably thousands of movies and living a bit, that I've seen most things.

Which was also the problem with Tokyo Story. Well, apart from the fact that I don't understand Japanese and am far from sure that the French subtitles did justice to the dialogue. It's story is essentially the same I got in a few minutes in the song "Cat's in the cradle", saw in Gran Torino (which has the double advantage of Clint Eastwood and a really surprising end) and last but not least, lived. I'm not trying to say that it's not a good - or even great - film, but that I haven't been personally affected by it.

But it was a fascinating glimpse into another world - so fascinating that I did watch the 135 minutes, even if the only surprise is the music. Unfortunately the world is so different that I'm sure I didn't understand more than half of the movie at best - but I think I'm not interested enough to dig deeper. Too far away, too long ago...
 

Last edited by Kittyhawk (November 18, 2017 11:18 am)

To me, Tokyo Story is the perfect example of what I call Really Good movie. It's what I call "magic of the mundane". There is so much going on, but so subtly that it's just part of everyday life. And therein lies the magic, there is a whole story in a smile. Cultural differences between generations and between traditional life and values and more modern ones. Nostalgia, melancholy, time changing and passing... there is so much going on that I could write a whole paper about it. 

So, yeah, that is why I separate the two. Entertainment movies are popcorn first and foremost. There is nothing wrong with that, that is what I watch the most, but it is what it is. And I don't expect it to be more.

I'm very anti-pigeonholing.  

I saw it for the first time this summer and I agree that's it's a good film. And I agree that while it has a popular appeal because of Robin Williams and such, there are serious themes behind it.
I, too, don't like to put things into too solid a category. As someone who studies film in university, including comedies, I know that sometimes things that seem simple (like a comedy) can still deal with some big questions in some way, or reflect something about society that might be unspoken. This is done to varying degrees, of course, but that doesn't mean it isn't there or isn't worth attention. It also doesn't mean you can't enjoy it on a more surface level if you wish, of course.

Last edited by Yitzock (November 19, 2017 1:56 am)

I agree that the distincion can be blurry, and it's more for my personal benefit than anything else. I created that distinction for myself after I watched Tokyo Story. I remember thinking "So that is how a really good movie is supposed to be?" It put everything else I've ever seen into a category of it's own - entertainment. Yet that category is not a negative thing, and there are a ton of variety in that category.

That was my personal experience, so it's really a subjective categorization that makes sense in my own head after my own experiences.

I want to write about something that I think is relevant to this thread.

When I was younger, I thought that anything that triggered a big emotional response in me, had to be something great.

If it was a painting, it had to be Great Art
If it was a movie, it had to be a Great Movie.
If it was a song, it had to be a Great Song

A few years later, I learned it wasn't so. But then I got depressed, thinking - how shallow am I, who can get such deep emotional responses to songs/movies that are so superficial and simple?

And then, a few years later, I started studying to become a dog instructor and a behaviour specialist, professionally. And so I learned about things like classical conditioning (please look it up if you are interested, it's cool stuff!), and that's when I finally learned - whatever gives you a strong emotional response has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the work itself. So that can never be used as a category or level of anything. It's very personal and subjective, and that's all it is.

And that's when I finally came to term with my music taste being very simple (to you German forum users out there: I LOVE Sandra! Sandra Lauer? Great part of my childhood!) Reacting strongly to something, emotionally, has nothing whatsoever to do with quality.

The relevance to this thread is: You can't use emotions to categorize movies into whether they are Great or not.

Last edited by Vhanja (November 21, 2017 7:16 pm)

You have a point in that you can't truly separate emotions from the intellectual. There will always be emotions involved (if something satisifies you intellectually, that will give you a positive feeling emotionally as well). 

I am just saying that what triggers your emotions is very personal and subjective, and is not in itself a measure of quality. The most simple and superficial 80s pop-song can trigger a huge emotional response it me. It has nothing to do with the song in itself, but the associations it triggers in me on a personal level.

Hollywood has made a whole industry on manipulating emotions in people. They use close-ups, soundtracks, lines and everything they can to manipulate people to feel whatever they want to feel. Production-wise, it's really, really high-quality. They are properly skilled in what they are doing. Often, I see through it and just get annoyed. Sometimes it triggers something in me and I get swept away in it. 

But that is a set formula and has very little to do with a Great Movie in my book.

Last edited by Vhanja (November 21, 2017 9:40 pm)

That is indeed a big can of worm.

My hubbie studied Art at University level. Unfortunately, you might say, it's the art milieu itself who define what is considered art or not. I am trying to avoid to use that word, but no, I would never consider Sandra art. I love her music greatly, it fills me with a whole bunch of positive and nostalgic feelings, because her music brings back so many happy memories from my childhood. But it's commercial pop music of professional quality, made to be popular and to sell. 

To me, art (Great movies, Really Good or whatever you want to call it) has a purpose beyond trying to sell and make money. And it's not presented to the viewer with John Williams music and close-ups of melodramatic crying.

To touch those kind of emotions are actually really easy if you are skilled in how to do it -and Hollywood really are. They use scripts, dialogue, background music, framing, close-ups and acting techniques for everything it's worth, really hitting you over the head with THIS IS WHAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO FEEL NOW - SEE HOW SAD THIS IS! 

That, to me, can be very entertaining. And I can certainly get carried away and cry too. But it's not art. Or Great by my definition.

(As a small side note, as we discussed TIG in this thread. I really enjoyed the movie. I found it interesting and entertaining, and Ben is awesome as always. But I was severly disappointed when, at the end, Keira's character goes: "Sometimes it's the very people who no one imagines...", repeating a line from earlier in the movie. I was immediately thrown completely out of the movie, as I was beat over the head with NOW WE USE THIS TECHNIQUE, NOW EVERYONE WILL BE MOVED. I was SO dissapointed, Great true-to-life story, Norwegian director, Ben and everything - and you stoop to this?! That is one of the reasons why it's a popcorn movie to me).

Quality isn't just one thing, though. If you look at the most superficial and simple action movie from Hollywood, the production quality is incredible. Probably rivaled by none.

But to me, there needs to be something more. Something that isn't spelled out with anvil-sized hints. Something that deals with ideas, not just a particular story or a particular character. Something that leaves me feeling ".... Wow...." when the movie is over, and I want to spend the next hour discussing culture, society, psychology... not "Wow, he was handsome in that movie!" or "Did you see that explosion, so cool!" or "That line was awesome!" Something that satisfies my intellect just as much, and probably more, than my emotions. 

Edit: To give another example of how irrelevant emotions are to art or something great: I can get tears in my eyes and even actually start sobbing by watching the Coca Cola Christmas Commercials ("Holidays are coming..."). Would you call a Coca-Cola commercial great art?

 

Last edited by Vhanja (November 23, 2017 4:14 pm)

Oh, it does. It's very effective. And I am not trying to be negative towards it either - I would say that 90 to 95% of everything I watch/play/read is made for entertainment.

My husband (we are actually not married, but I call him "hubbie" on English-speaking forums because English doesn't have a good word for a solid live-in relationship that has lasted 13 years - boyfriend sounds too teenage-y) says that it's the art people themselves who get to define what is art and what isn't.

So to me, the term "art" doesn't really say much and I see no reason to label anything as such. Because people will have their own defintion of art. To some, it's whatever gives them a great emotional response. To others, it's something they see has been crafted with a great deal of skill. To others again, it's something that challenges them intellectually. 

Since in everyday life, people define art so differently, the word has lost it's meaning to me.

But if I were to give my personal opinion, art to me is something that challenges me, something that has a meaning and a purpose beyond the obvious and beyond selling itself. Something that makes me feel intellectually (and maybe also emotionally) satisfied, having learned something new or been given a new insight.

As an example, I personally think that the music video to Sia's "Elastic Heart" is bordering on being something I would label art.