http://www.grolschfilmworks.com/media/uploads/images/Taxi%20Driver.jpg

 

 

A bit of a general question. When watching a film what is it that grabs your attention primarily/what allows you to enjoy it the most that you simple can't do without?

 

Is it the soundtrack, script, cinematography, subject matter etc? Or more obscure things like a favourite actor being present, insane amount of violence?

 

I would do a poll but i assume there are too many possible responses to count.

Is it the soundtrack, script, cinematography, subject matter etc? Or more obscure things like a favourite actor being present, insane amount of violence?

 

you've just described why spring breakers is my fav

Well there are the rare ones that tick them all, not so much that though.

 

I'd go for cinematography as one my key draws; if i can pause a film and still be overwhelmed by single shots i know it's doing something right. Can't really get into something that's poorly acted though, no matter how hard i try. The script can be piss-poor as long as it's acted out convincingly.

Generally the thing I look for most in a film is entertainment value. Most often that takes the form of comedic value, be it intentional or not. Actually the latter is often preferable, especially in terms of rewatchability. Having an actor/actress I really like is often a big bonus (for example I've watched a few films just because they star Kate Mulgrew/Christine Baranski etc. and ended up actually loving them and likely would never have discovered them otherwise). But yeah I generally prefer light hearted films, comedies or stuff which actually has very little in the way of hidden meanings/life lessons/etc. I mean I LOVE being made to think when I'm watching a film, but more so in the sense that a JJ Abrams TV show makes you think WTF am I watching and WTF is going on, trying to keep up kind of thing, not 'oh what does this MEAN TO ME'.

 

Soundtrack can often further my enjoyment of a film when it's absolutely amazing (Star Trek II being the main example, amazing film made epic by the greatest soundtrack ever) or totally fits the film (Gravity, Gladiator). Stuff like cinematography/director(direction) and all the technical stuff are pretty unimportant to me really.

The script can be piss-poor as long as it's acted out convincingly.

Whilst I'd normally agree with this something about the pure fun and energy of the original Star War trilogy overcomes this despite both being poor

Similar to John, if a movie has someone I admire as an actor/actress, I will be more inclined to watch the movie. I have bought DVD's just for the sole reason to see

Jeremy Renner/Sandra Bullock/Amy Adams etc. in it. This has led me to watching and enjoying movies I would never normally watch, like Dahmer.

 

I'm a bit of a softie at heart so I like to see relationships between characters form and grow etc. (Not always romantically mind you)

Story is important too, I am not one for overly complicated stories, I like to be able to easily follow it and enjoy it.

Another thing I like is the surroundings of the movie, it can be a bit boring sometimes to always see cities, but I still kinda like it.

I love movies set somewhere different.

 

Very few movies have it all for me, but one that does is Leap Year. There is a fave actress (Amy Adams) a nice story (travelling to propose to BF, getting stranded,

stuck with handsome stranger), a relationship forming between Amy's character and the character played by Matthew Goode and then there is the stunning Irish countryside to watch too. All this combines to make probably my all time favourite movie.

 

Acting ability doesn't normally affect my enjoyment much, I mean, Jessica Simpson is no Meryl Streep but I adore movies with her in them and will often go back to them.

Story is very important for me, I'm a creative writing major currently so that's probably no surprise, but a little bit of originality in stories is quite essential and a sense of a journey that we can follow and is engaging is essential. It's not quite paramount (2001... story's all over the place in general, but I can definitely appreciate it for everything else) but it is important. A weak script can work though if it's sold convincingly, I don't wanna say with good visuals though as that's the problem with most blockbusters these days.

Edited February 5, 201411 yr by Chez Wombat

On the subject of visuals, that's one thing I find myself being increasingly more jaded with with each new ''invention''. Like when I see a movie which costs like $200 million or whatever with CGI that would make ABC look good then I just think the whole thing is a bit pointless. There is a lot to be said for using real props, like in X Men: Days Of Future Past - they actually built a sentinel (and then presumably CGI'd in others). It probably didn't even cost that much more, but I bet it looks a hell of a lot better than a pure CGI model. Obv that isn't always doable, but a lot of big blockbuster type movies do have some shocking CGI when stacked up against their budgets.

Completely agree about CGI. It can be used brilliantly and beautifully but far too often it's cold and calculated and completely strips away the potential enjoyment of a film. Give me a story told alongside simple (even hand drawn) backdrops any day.

 

I can probably count the number of big-scale action blockbuster movies i've enjoyed in the past decade on one hand.

Oh well I still enjoy about 80% of the blockbusters I watch really, it's just in stuff like Star Trek that the CGI makes me like it even less (though that's also for a myriad of other reasons and involves more than a smidge of BIAS).

Whilst I'd normally agree with this something about the pure fun and energy of the original Star War trilogy overcomes this despite both being poor

I always thought that most of the actors did a decent job of the dialogue. It's testament to decent acting that you don't notice the poor script until you see it written down, which was at least the case with the originals and the last hour of Revenge of the Sith (The Phantom Menace has some great bits but, tellingly, mainly with very little dialogue).

 

I don't really know what I look for in a film given I enjoy some of my favourites for very different reasons, and it depends what kind of film it is. For instance if it's an action film, particularly a more modern one, I've come to expect great visuals so I'm unlikely to be impressed unless the plot and acting are up to scratch as well (Man of Steel just about gets away with this despite the action sequences being completely over-the-top).

Completely agree about CGI. It can be used brilliantly and beautifully but far too often it's cold and calculated and completely strips away the potential enjoyment of a film. Give me a story told alongside simple (even hand drawn) backdrops any day.

 

I can probably count the number of big-scale action blockbuster movies i've enjoyed in the past decade on one hand.

 

Did you like Inception? I think that story is flawless and I love how little CGI Nolan uses in order to ground it in some sort of reality even more.

 

Also I agree with you about cinematography. Tree of Life is probably one of my favourite films of the past few years which without the cinematography I might not have given as much time as I would with a load of cheap n crappy shots to back it up. I stayed for the cinematography and ended up getting more out of the story because of it.

spaceships and aliens are always a plus.

 

I marked The Wolf Of Wall Street down a couple of points due to the limited number of spaceships in it... :lol:

Did you like Inception? I think that story is flawless and I love how little CGI Nolan uses in order to ground it in some sort of reality even more.

 

Also I agree with you about cinematography. Tree of Life is probably one of my favourite films of the past few years which without the cinematography I might not have given as much time as I would with a load of cheap n crappy shots to back it up. I stayed for the cinematography and ended up getting more out of the story because of it.

I liked 'Inception' but don't particularly enjoy watching it now. I walked out of the cinema initially awed by it all but on repeated listens it just doesn't sit with me. Far too complicated and i'm never interested enough in the characters to follow it through. I commend its use of CGI though for sure; grand yet oddly subtle at the same time like you say.

 

'Memento' on the other hand i can watch over and over again, perhaps because it ventures away from some of the tricks of 'Inception' and is completely "real"?

And i suppose comparing the recent Hobbit films to the LOTR trilogy could lend itself nicely here too. I want my Orcs to look like (humans dressed as) Orcs and not computer generated ones, no matter how "realistic" CGI-ing them up appears to make them in The Hobbit :(

for me, it's usually about actors or actresses that i like.

 

for example, bradley cooper was in limitless, and also in silver lineing's playbook (which is the main reason i watched the latter)

 

the same goes for people like tom hanks or johny dep

 

i also look for story. something will hold my attention (i've a very short attention span)

 

if it's got a lot of shooting or car chases, chances are i won't watch it- but if i feel that the movie can provide some commedy, or it features someone i like, i'll watch it

 

but i always read the storyline. always. when someone says... have you seen such and such?

 

i'll google it first and read about it to see if i'm interested. always the case