So today marks the
one month anniversary of this here blog. To celebrate, I thought I'd unveil what I originally intended to use the "snark upon my sleeve" for. I've put it off for so long because of technical difficulties, which I am still having. But oh well, when I finally figure it out I can fix everything retroactively. I've had this formula, or system, for reviewing movies for a few years, but when I shared it with a friend, he told me it should wait to go online until I could express it visually and in color. Fair enough, on this post you will get pictures with color. But I still need someone's help to show me how to do it on a small scale next to text. What am I talking about? The "ROYGB Specialized Five Star Rating Movie Review System," that's what. As you know, most movie reviewers rate a movie with a certain number of stars (out of five, traditionally). What's important there is how many stars. With my system, each star signifies something different, so whereas a higher number of stars is still better, there is a concise display of information which can be interpreted to mean any number of different things to different people. Simply put, I can convey with five simple symbols (minus the plot synopsis) what other reviewers take 500 words to write. I'll still include a paragraph justifying my star selections, but never a plot synopsis.
The red star is for pre-production, or the screenplay/script/story. It goes from the spark of an idea through "development hell" to the final rewrite. It includes everything from the basic pitch to plot structure, continuity to point of view, and dialogue to vibe (which confoms or contrasts to a given genre). If the film's an adaptation of a novel, play, or TV show, is it faithful or intentionally irreverent? A MOVIE SCRIPT SHOULD READ DIFFERENTLY BOTH IN CONTENT AND PACING FROM A BOOK, PLAY, OR TV SCRIPT. Are there sympathetic characters? Worthy opponents? Does the setup hook you efficiently or leave you hanging for too long? Is there enough conflict to make you care and/or is nothing resolved by the end? Is it accessible? Believable? Consistent? Do people really talk like that? Can you fly a 747 through the plot holes? On a positive note, is it unique? Unpredictable? Does it make you think, "it's so simple - why didn't I think of that?!?"
The orange star is for production (design + direction + the dressing room). Including but not limited to: animation, camera angles and pans, costumes, "location, location, location" (to borrow the old real estate slogan), lighting, makeup, mechanical and photographic effects, models and puppets, sets and scenery, sound, and visual style. Most of this they have on Broadway, but A MOVIE SHOULD LOOK DIFFERENTLY FROM A VIDEO RECORDING OF A STAGE PRODUCTION. To me, film should look differently from TV too. I don't know if it's the camera lens or focus that's different, but from the storyboard planning stage until shooting has wrapped, it should look CINEMATIC. A big budget isn't necessarily required to look like a dream. Even indie movies can suspend your disbelief. A movie can literally make a mountain out of a mole hill. It should seem SO real and not be real.
The yellow star is for the performers, from animals to stuntmen to voice-overs. Everyone involved with casting makes choices to play to or go against type when it comes to the screen personas of the pretty or ugly people who fill the pretty or ugly scenery. Do you agree with their choices? To borrow a quote Gene Siskel, A MOVIE SHOULD BE "BETTER THAN A DOCUMENTARY OF THE SAME ACTORS HAVING LUNCH." There was another quote I forgot to use as part of my description for the red star, but I'll include it here: "A film director can take a great script and make a great film. Or he can take a great script and make a terrible film. But he can't take a terrible script and make a great film. No way." (the renowned Syd Field, from
Screenplay: The Foundations of Screenwriting) I've pardoned, excused, and made allowances for bad movies with great actors, but I've also watched great movies made mincemeat by bad acting. These are just some points to ponder.
The green star is for post-production, which is not just special effects like blue screen, CGI, morphing, rotoscope, and split-screen. It mostly refers to overall editing and its tricks: accelerated montage, crosscutting, intercutting, jump cuts, match cuts, and stop-motion animation. My first two commandments for moviemaking are: THOU SHALT USE SLOW MOTION SPARINGLY AND THOU SHALT NOT RECORD ANYTHING LOUDER THAN DIALOGUE, NEITHER BACKGROUND NOISE NOR MUSIC. While music is saved for the blue star, sound mixing falls under the green star, along with sound effects. I feel obligated to mention that there seem to be too many movies these days with great special effects, but lousy scripts, acting, and music. Just as the primary colors in art's color wheel are red, yellow, and blue, I would say the primary stars for well-rated film (under this system) are for pre-production, performance, and music. No quality or quantity of post-production can make something from nothing.
The blue star is for music. As you can tell if you read my "Top Ten Film Composers" post, I love music in the movies. My friends used to make fun of the percentage of my CD collection that was soundtracks. But the absence of music in movies is important to me too. I would RATHER A MOVIE HAVE NO MUSIC THAN OVERDO IT. Yes, soundtracks should complement the mood of a particular scene or even create atmosphere quicker than visuals can, but they should never be redundant to the action or dialogue. How many musical montages can one date movie bear? How many horror movies have sacrificed suspense to obnoxious theme music? Oh the horror of good music which has been wasted quietly in the background of scenes that stood on their own! Beware the passing of time in an epic chick flick set to an otherwise catchy pop song!
The purple star is for "rewatchability" (if there exists a proper synonym, I don't know it yet). It is not part of the five star rating but may be added to the rating of a movie of great, personal significance. If I was tied to a chair and forced to watch the same movie over and over forever, I could handle any of my favorites. That's why they are my favorites. A MOVIE SHOULD REQUIRE MULTIPLE VIEWINGS TO UNLOCK ALL ITS TREASURES. Sadly, too many rely on one big plot twist and/or there are no subtle lines or background images you miss the first time around. DVDs have helped out a lot by offering special features like alternate endings and multiple director's commentaries. But even before there was DVD, there was something to be said for a movie that you watched every holiday season or knew every line and could lip sync.
The red star is for pre-production, or the screenplay/script/story. It goes from the spark of an idea through "development hell" to the final rewrite. It includes everything from the basic pitch to plot structure, continuity to point of view, and dialogue to vibe (which confoms or contrasts to a given genre). If the film's an adaptation of a novel, play, or TV show, is it faithful or intentionally irreverent? A MOVIE SCRIPT SHOULD READ DIFFERENTLY BOTH IN CONTENT AND PACING FROM A BOOK, PLAY, OR TV SCRIPT. Are there sympathetic characters? Worthy opponents? Does the setup hook you efficiently or leave you hanging for too long? Is there enough conflict to make you care and/or is nothing resolved by the end? Is it accessible? Believable? Consistent? Do people really talk like that? Can you fly a 747 through the plot holes? On a positive note, is it unique? Unpredictable? Does it make you think, "it's so simple - why didn't I think of that?!?"
The orange star is for production (design + direction + the dressing room). Including but not limited to: animation, camera angles and pans, costumes, "location, location, location" (to borrow the old real estate slogan), lighting, makeup, mechanical and photographic effects, models and puppets, sets and scenery, sound, and visual style. Most of this they have on Broadway, but A MOVIE SHOULD LOOK DIFFERENTLY FROM A VIDEO RECORDING OF A STAGE PRODUCTION. To me, film should look differently from TV too. I don't know if it's the camera lens or focus that's different, but from the storyboard planning stage until shooting has wrapped, it should look CINEMATIC. A big budget isn't necessarily required to look like a dream. Even indie movies can suspend your disbelief. A movie can literally make a mountain out of a mole hill. It should seem SO real and not be real.
The yellow star is for the performers, from animals to stuntmen to voice-overs. Everyone involved with casting makes choices to play to or go against type when it comes to the screen personas of the pretty or ugly people who fill the pretty or ugly scenery. Do you agree with their choices? To borrow a quote Gene Siskel, A MOVIE SHOULD BE "BETTER THAN A DOCUMENTARY OF THE SAME ACTORS HAVING LUNCH." There was another quote I forgot to use as part of my description for the red star, but I'll include it here: "A film director can take a great script and make a great film. Or he can take a great script and make a terrible film. But he can't take a terrible script and make a great film. No way." (the renowned Syd Field, from Screenplay: The Foundations of Screenwriting) I've pardoned, excused, and made allowances for bad movies with great actors, but I've also watched great movies made mincemeat by bad acting. These are just some points to ponder.
The green star is for post-production, which is not just special effects like blue screen, CGI, morphing, rotoscope, and split-screen. It mostly refers to overall editing and its tricks: accelerated montage, crosscutting, intercutting, jump cuts, match cuts, and stop-motion animation. My first two commandments for moviemaking are: THOU SHALT USE SLOW MOTION SPARINGLY AND THOU SHALT NOT RECORD ANYTHING LOUDER THAN DIALOGUE, NEITHER BACKGROUND NOISE NOR MUSIC. While music is saved for the blue star, sound mixing falls under the green star, along with sound effects. I feel obligated to mention that there seem to be too many movies these days with great special effects, but lousy scripts, acting, and music. Just as the primary colors in art's color wheel are red, yellow, and blue, I would say the primary stars for well-rated film (under this system) are for pre-production, performance, and music. No quality or quantity of post-production can make something from nothing.
The blue star is for music. As you can tell if you read my "Top Ten Film Composers" post, I love music in the movies. My friends used to make fun of the percentage of my CD collection that was soundtracks. But the absence of music in movies is important to me too. I would RATHER A MOVIE HAVE NO MUSIC THAN OVERDO IT. Yes, soundtracks should complement the mood of a particular scene or even create atmosphere quicker than visuals can, but they should never be redundant to the action or dialogue. How many musical montages can one date movie bear? How many horror movies have sacrificed suspense to obnoxious theme music? Oh the horror of good music which has been wasted quietly in the background of scenes that stood on their own! Beware the passing of time in an epic chick flick set to an otherwise catchy pop song!
The purple star is for "rewatchability" (if there exists a proper synonym, I don't know it yet). It is not part of the five star rating but may be added to the rating of a movie of great, personal significance. If I was tied to a chair and forced to watch the same movie over and over forever, I could handle any of my favorites. That's why they are my favorites. A MOVIE SHOULD REQUIRE MULTIPLE VIEWINGS TO UNLOCK ALL ITS TREASURES. Sadly, too many rely on one big plot twist and/or there are no subtle lines or background images you miss the first time around. DVDs have helped out a lot by offering special features like alternate endings and multiple director's commentaries. But even before there was DVD, there was something to be said for a movie that you watched every holiday season or knew every line and could lip sync.
No comments:
Post a Comment