
Stephan wrote:The reviews I've read on The Travelling Players have made me decide that it's not for me, but if it makes it to the next round I'll try and make it through.
Henrik wrote:Stephan wrote:The reviews I've read on The Travelling Players have made me decide that it's not for me, but if it makes it to the next round I'll try and make it through.
But you know that long and slow is always good, don't you?
Great movies can be long, and great movies can be slow, but when it's long AND slow, you better have a damn good reason for it. And Angelopolous does not have a good reason.
Jirin wrote:Sunrise is one of my favorite movies of all time and also one of the most critically praised, and it's short and simple. I think RYM voters gravitate more toward the plot-heavy epics.
All combinations of speed and length have their gems and their turds, but I think Angelopolous is one of those filmmakers like Tarr or Rocha who is overlooked because his films are about the history and politics of smaller, poorer countries. (In this case Greece).
If you're not from the US, a rich European country, or Japan, it's very hard to get anybody to take your film seriously unless you're famous enough to premiere it at Cannes. (In the last 20 years maybe China enters that group).
What's wrong with being long and slow? Must filmmakers cater to digital-era attention spans? Are contemplative films outmoded just because less of the audience has the patience to contemplate?
Jirin wrote:All combinations of speed and length have their gems and their turds, but I think Angelopolous is one of those filmmakers like Tarr or Rocha who is overlooked because his films are about the history and politics of smaller, poorer countries. (In this case Greece).
Jirin wrote:If you're not from the US, a rich European country, or Japan, it's very hard to get anybody to take your film seriously unless you're famous enough to premiere it at Cannes. (In the last 20 years maybe China enters that group).
Jirin wrote:What's wrong with being long and slow? Must filmmakers cater to digital-era attention spans?
Henrik wrote:But my question remains why acclaimed movies are much longer than the average movie (it's not only on the RYM charts), while acclaimed songs are not longer than the average song.
Stephan wrote:Is that true? The average popular song is between 3 and 4 minutes and I would bet the average of the top 25 on AM is higher than that.
Henrik wrote:I'm probably the one in this forum who likes action least




Return to Films, movies, motion pictures
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest