The Cinematic Thread (i.e. What in the fuck is it?)

All non-Nolan related film, tv, and streaming discussions.
I had actually been thinking about making this thread for a few days now, but it seems we got a head start in the Star Wars IVVVIVIX thread.

anyways, a "Cinematic" film. Is it something abstract (as vader said), or quantifiable (as rifa said)?

Some movies are more cinematic than others, what qualities do they posses to achieve that?

Are we all snobs?

discus

User avatar
Posts: 26295
Joined: February 2010
Location: Texas
I would agree some films do things better than other films, but there are other terms for that, which fall into categories of things like cinematography, editing, writing, performance, etc. I suppose my entire gripe in that discussion was the idea of how "cinematic" something is being a scale or a spectrum seems silly to me.

It just doesn't make sense, semantically, conceptually, metaphysically, anatomically, sexually, however people want to frame it.

It's like comparing "Tomorrow Never Knows" to "Ginseng Strip" and saying one is more "musical" than the other.

User avatar
Posts: 9847
Joined: October 2011
Location: Foot of Mt. Belzoni
To me it's pretty simple.

If you turn the sound off, you should still understand the story. If you can do that, it's cinematic.

It's why The Passion of Joan of Arc is pretty much at the top of the tree.

User avatar
Posts: 5279
Joined: May 2014
I'm not cultured enough to take part in this discussion.

Cilogy wrote:I would agree some films do things better than other films, but there are other terms for that, which fall into categories of things like cinematography, editing, writing, performance, etc. I suppose my entire gripe in that discussion was the idea of how "cinematic" something is being a scale or a spectrum seems silly to me.

It just doesn't make sense, semantically, conceptually, metaphysically, anatomically, sexually, however people want to frame it.

It's like comparing "Tomorrow Never Knows" to "Ginseng Strip" and saying one is more "musical" than the other.
i wouldn't say cinematic necessarily means "better" or "movie-er" (like rifa said there's plenty of good non-cinematic directors), i feel it's more a certain effect that it places on you, similar to immersion.

i think that at least half makes sense but i dono

User avatar
Forum Pro
Posts: 55550
Joined: May 2010
Location: Arrakis
ArmandFancypants wrote:To me it's pretty simple.

If you turn the sound off, you should still understand the story. If you can do that, it's cinematic.

It's why The Passion of Joan of Arc is pretty much at the top of the tree.
I turned the sound off during Transformers, everything made perfect sense.

But I like the way you approach it, really.

User avatar
Posts: 4377
Joined: June 2011
Location: Romania
CoolwhipSpecial wrote:I'm not cultured enough to take part in this discussion.

User avatar
Posts: 21411
Joined: June 2010
Location: All-Hail Master Virgo, Censor of NolanFans
mchekhov 2: Chek Harder wrote:anyways, a "Cinematic" film. Is it something abstract (as vader said), or quantifiable (as rifa said)?

Some movies are more cinematic than others, what qualities do they posses to achieve that?

Are we all snobs?

discus
Me and Vader said pretty much the same thing only using different terminology and approaching the subject from a slightly different pov. But it's the same thing.

And yes solo... there are plenty of good directors out there that don't really make strong cinematic movies. However, most of the big guys in the movie industry get to be big exactly because they have the ability to make really strong cinematic movies. Because that's why people go to theater for. Juno is cool and all but if it can fit on a small screen and work just fine then it's not really cinematic. If you turn the sound of to Juno... again... you will miss a lot of things so it's not really cinematic. Seeing it on the big screen doesn't bring anything extra than seeing it on the small screen... so again.. it's not cinematic. It's a good film nonetheless. But if you want to make your movie big and epic like Star Wars requires for example... then you need a director that has the vision and skill to make a strong cinematic movie. There are masterpieces out there that are not cinematic simply because they tell great stories in amazing ways without necessarily being cinematic.

So we never wanted this discussion to be about whether or not a movie being cinematic is better than the others. There are tons of cinematic movies that are crap. The point is a a strong cinematic movie will always have a huge effect in the movie theater because that's where it belongs... and at the same time it's the kind of film that would work mute as well. The Transformers comparison is silly here because we're not just talking about whether or not you're able to understand the story if the film is mute... it's about much more than that... it's about if the movie has the ability to capture you and send you in that same magical place, it's about emotions, it's about immersion, it's about getting pulled in, gripped, and enthralled by what you're seeing.

Lawrence of Arabia is a perfect example of what cinematic movie means. You don't need to hear anything while watching those beautiful large wide shots of those dunes because your mind is already travelling there... you're already feeling it, your mind can easily make the perfect music for it. When you watch a great battle your mind can already hear the sound of clinching swords. You don't have the same feeling when you're watching Transformers or Die Hard 5... or Looper for that matter. Because you're not transported in their worlds so easily. Because they're not cinematic enough.

I feel that you all know actually what is a cinematic movie and a cinematic experience. It's just that not all of you are used to describe it like this. Don't take every word literally.
Last edited by RIFA on June 21st, 2014, 3:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Posts: 19966
Joined: June 2010
Location: The White City
ArmandFancypants wrote:To me it's pretty simple.

If you turn the sound off, you should still understand the story. If you can do that, it's cinematic.

It's why The Passion of Joan of Arc is pretty much at the top of the tree.
if solo didn't love you yet, he does now

Dreyer is his bae


-Vader

User avatar
Posts: 1682
Joined: November 2012
mchekhov 2: Chek Harder wrote: Are we all snobs?
Yes

Post Reply