What makes Villeneuve movies "soulless"?
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
What makes Villeneuve movies "soulless"?
What makes Villeneuve movies "soulless"?
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
he is basically Nolan's rip off
He's Canadian.
Digital filmmaking
this, same applies to most movies in the last two decades
Frick you, Incendies was kino
Yeah, I also like "Enemy".
>soulless corporate garbage
Villeneuve movies feel commercial but in a different sense from Marvel movies. What is the right word?
Exblain
>What is the right word?
pretentious
>Exblain
If you watch Sicario, you're taken from the POV of a woman who is trying to figure out what the frick is happening. As you start out it's an impersonal ride of fear and adrenaline. You don't know the people, you aren't supposed to know the people.
It makes the impact of mr revenge man getting his revenge doubly impactful.
Main girl's story and plot was pretty weak, but I get what they were going for and I can dig it.
I think powerless-ness and "sovlless-ness" get a mixed up sometimes, I wouldn't call Sicario soulful, but I wouldn't go out of my way to insult it with the term soulless. I think there are more relevant criticisms.
I've only seen Arrival and Enemy on top of Sicario.
Enemy was like an Indie movie with a budget, felt unique to watch and I enjoyed it.
Arrival felt very soulless, but I did enjoy it. It was as though they took a 90s cheesy alien arrival plot and adapted it to the 21st century, making it way slower and tamed down with realism and character drama.
>It makes the impact of mr revenge man getting his revenge doubly impactful.
I thought I was watching a realistic movie. But the revenge scene felt out of nowhere and Bondianish.
>Enemy was like an Indie movie with a budget, felt unique to watch and I enjoyed it.
True.
What was your job on Sicario?
>What was your job on Sicario?
I was the extra in the 1985 300ZX (Z31) in the border traffic scene.
Nice, my man
>What is the right word?
dishonest
br2049 and arrival were keyed
the rest of that is soulless corporate garbage
so when he's allowed to create (the two good films i mentioned) he really brings his A game, otherwise he does the bare minimum
i've done lots of thinking on this tbh
It worked for Sicario. Felt like an unstoppable freight train.
the writing is just never good enough
I cannot sunction his inexpressiveness
Nothing. Dune us a bit dry
Lack of humor/Architectural Digest Aesthetics.
His architectural taste fricking sucks, he's mega-soulless.
One of the worst to ever do it, he makes everything so bland and sterile, it's just bad.
dune was the worst culprit of this imo. Do you think it worked for BR2049?
No nut Roger Deakins carries his ass. It's just a downgrade from the original
yeah it seems like he thought about how to make a movie for pretentious 42 year olds to feel serious and sad and intellectual as they watch, because they are too uptight to just enjoy a regular movie, so it has to be stripped of all the style and energy to seem mature or whatever it's called. nothing wrong with making a movie that isn't funny or fast paced, but it never seems to occur to some directors that you can't just make a bunch of sad characters stand around for 3 hours and have a good movie
did you watch Incendies? I think it's his best.
His only kino, it was shot on 35 mm.
He wasn't that popular at that time, If he did it now, it would look totally different: empty and slow
All his movies are shit, maybe besides Sicario but that's down to the acting and writing. I hate the direction. A grimy Tony Scott-style direction would have made it a modern classic but it's all forgotten now. He tried to make glowies fighting off beaners like it's some epic grand struggle or something when a more realistic direction would be better.
> Lack of humor
Not every film needs to have le undercutting irony like in your capeshit flicks
Digital cameras, makes everything look like rubber
Woah Villeneuve did Prisoners? No wonder it was surprisingly good
The same le serious and le grand cinematic aesthetic for pajeet brains. Soulless post-modern garbage. Frick him for ruining Dune and putting some negress in the role of one of the most important characters and making Chani a mutt.
it seems like he just copy pastes his style, but his movies are all different time periods, and different places, and different characters. He just says, "let's slap LE WASHED OUT COLORS and le WIDE SLOW PAN SHOTS and le OMINOUS BACKGROUND MUSIC" and he does that for almost every scene in every movie. I really liked enemy and blade runner 2049, i feel like the style worked well for those movies, but the others just drag on, scenes are way too long, too many close ups and 5 minute scenes where someone has a bunch of sad facial expressions.
From the ones I watched, the protags are all the same and the movie pretends to be "deep" and "confusing" when they just refuse to give anyone dialogue
unnecessary fluff
look at the sicario spooks going into tunnel scene
you can tell he wanted to include that shit because "it looks epic"
calling attention to itself, dishonest if I had to sum it up
>you can tell he wanted to include that shit because "it looks epic"
it did look epic. it sounds like you can't enjoy things because you think you're smarter than everyone.
>it did look epic.
Films use visuals to tell stories. If you use grandiose visuals but don't manage tell anything with them, that will only raise the height from which you fall once the viewer gets past the immediate spectacle and tries to grasp what's behind it.
Not understanding color and digital films
Villeneuve
He lacks the lightness and humor of a sincere artist. He tries really hard to give all of his movies this somber grandeur, by relying on stuff like minimal set decoration, perpetually muted lighting, muted colors, static symmetrical cinematography and so on, all shortcuts for your movie to appear serious and mature, and it comes across as him being a coward who is scared of being criticized for putting any of his real personal tastes into his movies. He is like the michael hannecki of sci-fi, that sort of modern german art style of extreme severity and lack of color because anything other than minimalism is barbaric and might be called silly.
Anyone who imagines a space princess, extremely rich and delicate.
I imagine her adorned with gold, beautiful fabrics, all kinds of israeliteelry.
Meanwhile, Denis just casts a pig and puts that shit in her head
Don't know if she's a "pig". But yeah she's more masculine than feminine. That's just how some women are. I know them from wrestling. They don't larp as men.
I can see what he was going for
>specify how a thing fits into an unspecific term
Lack of camera movement and wide lens I guess. Not sure if this was already mentioned but the "underacting" or whatever. Everyone is doing the emotionless pokerface performance even though the plot is advancing and kinds of crazy shit is happening.
God, I hate Graig. He ruined Bond. He was just a gay bong Jason Bourne or whatever. Making Bond movies without the joie de vivre and making them le epic Nolan style subversions is a cinematic sin of the highest order. I'd rather watch Die Another Day a hundred times than any of his shit
amen
Too technical and safe
The lines are too fat. Something a borderline mentally moronic person would draw.
that's not what dishonest cinema is
occam's razor says that the filmmakers are midwits, not that they have some diabolical scheme to make a movie that makes midwits feel smart.
Incendies is pure fricking garbage and the plot is Colombian soap opera tier.
Right. Lets debunl this take, one kino at a time.
prisoners
>gruelling story about a father desperately doing everything he can to find his child.
polytechnique
>promising, full of life student traumatized for life because a maniac did a schoolshooting
Dune
>up yours for even suggesting this is soulless.
Br2049
> supra.
Arrival
> musing on communication, connection, the damn film views like a poem, Richters score helps ofcourse.
Sicario
> not soulless, but admittedly a very clinical lool at the ever escalating drug war
Enemy
> symbolic art film, more about the ideas, where cinema is one way of conveying them. Art films are not soulless, but just require a different way of viewing them.
Haven't seen the rest.
i like the movies
He's simply not a competent filmmaker. He's no auteur (whenever he writes his own script, it's derivate as hell), he has no consistent visual style (relies solely on the cinematographer), he doesn't understand or respect his craft or the craft of others in the industry (see pic related), he is not an actor's director (cannot communicate with them and always gets the very worst performance out of them), doesn't understand or respect what he adapts (DUNC, BR), sells out to the Hollywood industry and makes films for morons.
>he is not an actor's director (cannot communicate with them
To illustrate: Pic related.
Wrong. That's just how the actor prepares for the role. His backstory should be the novels, if he doesn't need it to perform, fine. Though, as a self respecting actor he should know he has all the backstory he can get.
>That's just how the actor prepares for the role.
You have literally no idea what you're talking about. (Good) actors will ask questions about their characters, and (good) writers and directors will fricking provide answers. For example, Alan Rickman famously demanded to know everything about Snapes motivation before signing on to do the Harry Potter films, and Rowling told him about things she had not written yet.
>Though, as a self respecting actor he should know he has all the backstory he can get.
There's literally a book that has that whole backstory of that character. It does exist. It was Villeneuve's job to know that backstory and work on it with the actor. He evidently did not do that.
Right, if you can prove he asked those questions and all he got was said response, then it's clearly shortsighted. Still, the director shouldn't have to micro manage his actors all the time. Given the abundance of source material, I'm sure an experienced actor such as him can work with that.
>if you can prove he asked those questions
What? You think an actor, especially an accomplished character actor who has proven in the past that he can do better than that carricature of a Bond villain in DUNC, wouldn't try to communicate with the director about his character? Really?
>the director shouldn't have to micro manage his actors all the time
Again you prove that you have not the slightest idea what you're talking about.
>Given the abundance of source material, I'm sure an experienced actor such as him can work with that.
It's not the actor's job to work through the source material. It's the actor's job to perform the vision of the director (and screenwriter). That's why communication on set matters. It's astonishing that you outright argue that there shouldn't be any communication regarding characters.
I never argued there should be 'no communication regarding characters'.
>Again you prove that you have not the slightest idea what you're talking about
Oh no, then please, instead of these non arguments, elucidate.
>carricature of a Bond villain in DUNC
Baron Harkonnen isn't that well fleshed out. He's a powerhungry maniac, extremely jealous of house Artreidis, playing a real politik game to seize power. You're now implying Villeneuve should've deviated from the source material and create a Baron backstory?
>Baron Harkonnen isn't that well fleshed out.
So you have not read the book then, or watched any other adaptation. Figures.
He makes movies for homies like this. Middle class "intellectuals"
if you think he's soulless then nolan is too, they are the same guy villeneuve is unironically more talented though
most of the time it feels like he's trying to imitate someone
He's trying to imitate contemporary Hollywood. People say Nolan in particular, but that's just because Nolan fits that Hollywood mold neatlessly. It's like with Abrams imitating Spielberg - true on the surface, but looking into it you see that what's being copied are very basic clichés and techniques from all over the place, some of which the more popular directors (like Spielberg and Nolan) also used extensively (and more competently).
>August 32nd on Earth
Can someone post a download link for this? Can't find it anywhere
He's Canadian AND French. Soulless is a fact of his existence.
What's the point of being French when you're already Canadian?
Personally, I've always preferred the German-speaking and Italian-speaking parts of Canada anyway.
Not sure, I like the movies from him that I've seen, but I'm never excited for his next picture or look up what he is doing next.
>I like the movies from him that I've seen
What do you like about them?