>For some not so extreme examples think about what happens if the actors are shit - The Room is a good example. The story is good but the acting is what made it into a "so bad - let's troll this" movie.
I never thought I'd see someone praise the writing of The Room. The acting is bad, but the dialogue is so completely inhuman that I can't imagine anyone doing it well.
>You can come up with the best story you have but if I as an audio engineer create a mix where you can't legibly hear dialogue you'd walk out of the theater in anger.
But we're talking about basic competency now, not what makes a movie the very best it can be.
> If the cinematographer has constant camera shakes in every shot - even a dialogue scene - then also you can salvage the movie.
I wonder if you had Paul Greengrass movies in mind
> if I as an audio engineer create a mix where you can't legibly hear dialogue you'd walk out of the theater in anger.
Tenet? No one I know in the US could watch that film, but my international friends liked it, presumably because they had subtitles.. the theater had to blast the sound to make the audio vaguely discernible
Honestly, Nolan's audio cacophony generally works for me (though it is distressing, which is the point). Tenet in particular worked great.
The theater I was at reached a point of nearly physically hurting. It doesn’t really work when it’s distressing during passive explanatory scenes. I didn’t even get the chance to be confused by the technobabble
Re:No More Movies
by lotsofpulp on Tuesday July 06, 2021 @06:18AM
(#27746327)
That is a Christopher Nolan signature trait.
If the cinematographer has constant camera shakes in every shot - even a dialogue scene - then also you can salvage the movie.
For some not so extreme examples think about what happens if the actors are shit - The Room is a good example. The story is good but the acting is what made it into a "so bad - let's troll this" movie.