Just got back from seeing Talking Heads' Stop Making Sense in a theater. It was fantastic; this was the first time I've ever seen a UK band break into applause after a film, and I've seen both The Raid and The Avengers since I've been here.
I hate it when people applaud at a film no matter how good it is. Who are you applauding for? Nobody is there to hear you. Exceptions are at film festivals and screenings when the filmmakers are in attendance.
Have you ever seen Stop Making Sense? The ending is set up to make you applaud. Like, literally. David Byrne says it in the commentary.
Don't be such a judgmental philistine when you don't know what you're talking about, Scott.
I'm kind of with Scott on this one. Applause has always seemed to me a shallow kind of way to show support for something because there is a social expectation to do it. It's insincere. Even when it is sincere, it still feels forced.
One of the best things about being press is that the press doesn't applaud. If I'm at an event, I dispassionately watch and listen and get a free pass against participation.
Don't be such a judgmental philistine when you don't know what you're talking about, Scott.
Is he wrong that no one involved in the movie was there to hear the applause?
No, but the entire point of the closing shot of Stop Making Sense is to invoke the sort of audience response one would have at the end of a concert; nominally, applause. In this particular case, the absence of those involved in the movie is a moot point. There can be no question about that, no argument as to the intent of that scene. The creator has stated it.
Just because someone is trying to make you applaud doesn't mean that you should, must, or it is right to do so. The purpose of applause is to congratulate and show appreciation to a creator/performer for their excellent work. If the person who is to be the receiver of the applause can not see or hear it, then it is pointless.
In addition it is annoying to me personally. People applaud without thinking. The movie, their motor reflex, the social expectation, "the wave" causes them to applaud. In that sense, not only is the applause pointless, but disingenuous. That results in me being reminded that there are these other people who think and act on autopilot. I may very well have greatly enjoyed the movie, but rather than being able to mull over the end of it, I am taken out of the mindset and reminded I am in a room full of sheep.
When I applaud I applaud with intent. If I am clapping or cheering for you, it means something extra, even if I'm the only one who knows that.
There is also an exception to the rule. It is absolutely permissible to clap, boo, or yell at a sporting event on television or radio.
There is also an exception to the rule. It is absolutely permissible to clap, boo, or yell at a sporting event on television or radio.
Why applaud, boo, or yell at a televised sporting event? No one involved can hear you; it's just as pointless. Also, the psychosocial elements of applause, booing, and yelling, are in effect even more in a situation with a sporting event. Furthermore, "if I am clapping or cheering for you, it means something extra, even if I'm the only one who knows that," can work equally well a a justification of post-film appreciatory applause.
The only thing your rebuttal has thus far accomplished is a demonstration of your ignorance regarding the source material I mentioned and your blatant hypocrisy with regards to the topic at hand. I award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.
If I am sitting at home alone playing a video game, and I pull off an amazing winning move, then I may cheer for myself. That is completely appropriate.
When you are watching a sport, as opposed to a work of art, you are definitely not playing it yourself. However, one of the participating people or teams in the sport is likely to be your representative. Your gladiator in the arena. If they win, then by association you also win. If they lose, you also lose. You have freely chosen to emotionally bind yourself to the events taking place. To react outwardly to the trials and tribulations of your gladiator is only natural.
If you want to root for some director to win an Oscar, feel free to cheer during the awards ceremony.
Everything is telling me to continue this argument in spite of the fact that it is now irrevocably a Scott Argument. Instead, I'm going to pull a Luke and say that, while I'd like to keep pointing out how bullshit your argument is with regards to this particular film, I actually have much more important things to do than argue with Scott Rubin over the psychological and ethical dynamics of clapping.
Everything is telling me to continue this argument in spite of the fact that it is now irrevocably a Scott Argument. Instead, I'm going to pull a Luke and say that, while I'd like to keep pointing out how bullshit your argument is with regards to this particular film, I actually have much more important things to do than argue with Scott Rubin over the psychological and ethical dynamics of clapping.
And so, I will go do those things.
Only you are discussing this particular film. What I am saying applies to all films where none of the filmmakers are present regardless of whatever the film could possibly contain.
For example, when you watching Peter Pan and he breaks the fourth wall telling the audience to clap and bring Tinker Bell back to life, you should NOT clap unless it is a live stage performance.
If you want to clap after watching a movie, clap, but make sure that it is something worth clapping for. If you think it's stupid, don't clap. I usually clap after seeing a new Pixar movie, but that's because I feel like its worth it. I want to show my appreciation for what I just saw and loved, so I am going to express it the only way I know how: clapping, writing about it on the Internet, and possibly buying merchandise.
On reading this thread, I was about to pick up on you arguing with Scott on the topic of "correct" emotional reactions and the validity or enjoyment of such, and advise you not to bother continuing.
Turns out I didn't need to.
I remember the first time I experienced an entire theater bursting into a round of applause during a movie, and it wasn't even at the end. I didn't even know you were allowed to do this! It effected me in a quite profound way, which I'm not going to go into here.
Needless to say, just for the sake of pleasing Scott, I'd hate to deprive that emotional experience. An applause is only rarely for the sake of the person caused you to begin clapping, so any argument based on "the movie director can't hear you" is dead in the water to me.
Needless to say, just for the sake of pleasing Scott, I'd hate to deprive that emotional experience. An applause is only rarely for the sake of the person caused you to begin clapping, so any argument based on "the movie director can't hear you" is dead in the water to me.
I wonder, maybe it's not so much for the movie director, but to show and share your appreciation to the people who just shared the experience with you, ie, your fellow moviegoers.
I honestly don't know, I don't do it, so I can't say why others do it. Just throwing an idea out there.
Everyone go watch All This And World War II. It's the Second World War told through newsreels, movies set there, and Beatles covers. An odd choice, but the people they got to do the covers included Jeff Lynne, Keith Moon, and Tina Turner -- just to name a few. It is one of the great war movies. It can be a bit hard to find (there wasn't a home market at the time, so Fox probably doesn't have the rights to the music for a home release and getting them would definitely be more expensive than the movie would make) but you can torrent it here. No one seeds it, so it might take a while to get all of it (it took me something like 2 days to download) but it is more than worth it. You can also buy a bootleg DVD here. Seriously, guys, this is one of those movies everyone needs to see.
It was... OK. It was an average summer blockbuster. Not great, not memorable: just OK. I enjoyed it well enough, but I have zero desire to ever see it again, nor would I consider it particularly good, let alone better than any of the other superhero movies I've seen in recent memory.
The last fight went on way too long and much of it had no real narrative purpose. Two of the avengers were completely extraneous, and could have been dropped entirely from the movie with no loss. It should have been 45 minutes shorter with fewer characters and more focus: then it could have been "good" rather than "OK."
The musical score was uninspired at best, cliche at worst. Not a single song, motif, or anything was memorable. I was actually deeply disappointed in the score. The Rock was lightyears beyond this movie in terms of soundtrack.
So, it was an OK, average, typical movie with, in my opinion, no particular strong points. It had some great moments ("puny god" for example: I laughed out loud at that), but it was otherwise entirely forgettable.
I am somewhat baffled by the strong response to it here. From what you all said, it was an amazing movie. But upon seeing it, it was literally nothing special.
It was... OK. It was an average summer blockbuster. Not great, not memorable: just OK. I enjoyed it well enough, but I have zero desire to ever see it again, nor would I consider it particularly good, let alone better than any of the other superhero movies I've seen in recent memory.
The last fight went on way too long and much of it had no real narrative purpose. Two of the avengers were completely extraneous, and could have been dropped entirely from the movie with no loss. It should have been 45 minutes shorter with fewer characters and more focus: then it could have been "good" rather than "OK."
The musical score was uninspired at best, cliche at worst. Not a single song, motif, or anything was memorable. I was actually deeply disappointed in the score. The Rock was lightyears beyond this movie in terms of soundtrack.
So, it was an OK, average, typical movie with, in my opinion, no particular strong points. It had some great moments ("puny god" for example: I laughed out loud at that), but it was otherwise entirely forgettable.
I am somewhat baffled by the strong response to it here. From what you all said, it was an amazing movie. But upon seeing it, it was literally nothing special.
I think people who already had love for these characters enjoyed the movie more, people like me who had none, thought it was a good popcorn action movie, not much more.
What the fuck? Rym liked Avatar but found the Avengers passable?
Jesus, say what you will about superhero movies, but at least The Avengers wasn't the sort of Halo-Ferngully-Pocahontas mashup tripe we got with that piece of shit, and didn't come with a nice helping of awful "noble savage" tropes on the side.
Question for you superhero movie lovers. What if the movie you like so much was generally the same movie, but the characters had been replaced with brand new heros that you didn't have such strong nostalgia for and attachment to? Would you still enjoy the movie as much?
Question for you superhero movie lovers. What if the movie you like so much was generally the same movie, but the characters had been replaced with brand new heros that you didn't have such strong nostalgia for and attachment to? Would you still enjoy the movie as much?
As long as Rich Flying Space Marine Ladykiller Genius is still Robert Downey Jr., I'm happy.
Depends on how well designed the characters were. I'm not going to like Avengers if the heroes are Lifeldian messes, but if they are well designed I'll like them. X-Men First Class is a good example of this. I had no prior knowledge of any characters but Charles and Eric (I refuse to use their slave superhero names) and still really liked all the characters.
What the fuck? Rym liked Avatar but found the Avengers passable?
Jesus, say what you will about superhero movies, but at least The Avengers wasn't the sort of Halo-Ferngully-Pocahontas mashup tripe we got with that piece of shit, and didn't come with a nice helping of awful "noble savage" tropes on the side.
Come on, Avatar was a better made movie, had a more satisfying emotional arc (than Avengers) and destroyed on visuals. Joss Whedon did better with the material than I think anyone else could have, but making a great movie based on super heroes is extremely difficult considering the lack of depth in these type of characters.
Question for you superhero movie lovers. What if the movie you like so much was generally the same movie, but the characters had been replaced with brand new heros that you didn't have such strong nostalgia for and attachment to? Would you still enjoy the movie as much?
Honestly I thought Avengers was a well designed action movie, the action scenes were intense but easy to follow, you had an idea what other characters were doing without getting too convoluted. They could have been Generic B characters from anything and it would have still be just as good. I'm not a big avengers fan, I've seen bad super hero movies (Cough, Spiderman 3, X-men 3, Green Lantern, Catwoman, Wolverine) The Avengers movie was extremely good at being a super hero action film that it was supposed to be.
I actually just saw The Avengers yesterday, too. I almost agree with Rym, except replace "OK" with "fine." I have no attachment to any of the characters, but I can understand really liking this movie if I did.
Comments
Don't be such a judgmental philistine when you don't know what you're talking about, Scott.
One of the best things about being press is that the press doesn't applaud. If I'm at an event, I dispassionately watch and listen and get a free pass against participation.
In addition it is annoying to me personally. People applaud without thinking. The movie, their motor reflex, the social expectation, "the wave" causes them to applaud. In that sense, not only is the applause pointless, but disingenuous. That results in me being reminded that there are these other people who think and act on autopilot. I may very well have greatly enjoyed the movie, but rather than being able to mull over the end of it, I am taken out of the mindset and reminded I am in a room full of sheep.
When I applaud I applaud with intent. If I am clapping or cheering for you, it means something extra, even if I'm the only one who knows that.
There is also an exception to the rule. It is absolutely permissible to clap, boo, or yell at a sporting event on television or radio.
The only thing your rebuttal has thus far accomplished is a demonstration of your ignorance regarding the source material I mentioned and your blatant hypocrisy with regards to the topic at hand. I award you no points, and may god have mercy on your soul.
When you are watching a sport, as opposed to a work of art, you are definitely not playing it yourself. However, one of the participating people or teams in the sport is likely to be your representative. Your gladiator in the arena. If they win, then by association you also win. If they lose, you also lose. You have freely chosen to emotionally bind yourself to the events taking place. To react outwardly to the trials and tribulations of your gladiator is only natural.
If you want to root for some director to win an Oscar, feel free to cheer during the awards ceremony.
And so, I will go do those things.
For example, when you watching Peter Pan and he breaks the fourth wall telling the audience to clap and bring Tinker Bell back to life, you should NOT clap unless it is a live stage performance.
Turns out I didn't need to.
I remember the first time I experienced an entire theater bursting into a round of applause during a movie, and it wasn't even at the end. I didn't even know you were allowed to do this! It effected me in a quite profound way, which I'm not going to go into here.
Needless to say, just for the sake of pleasing Scott, I'd hate to deprive that emotional experience. An applause is only rarely for the sake of the person caused you to begin clapping, so any argument based on "the movie director can't hear you" is dead in the water to me.
I honestly don't know, I don't do it, so I can't say why others do it. Just throwing an idea out there.
It was... OK. It was an average summer blockbuster. Not great, not memorable: just OK. I enjoyed it well enough, but I have zero desire to ever see it again, nor would I consider it particularly good, let alone better than any of the other superhero movies I've seen in recent memory.
The last fight went on way too long and much of it had no real narrative purpose. Two of the avengers were completely extraneous, and could have been dropped entirely from the movie with no loss. It should have been 45 minutes shorter with fewer characters and more focus: then it could have been "good" rather than "OK."
The musical score was uninspired at best, cliche at worst. Not a single song, motif, or anything was memorable. I was actually deeply disappointed in the score. The Rock was lightyears beyond this movie in terms of soundtrack.
So, it was an OK, average, typical movie with, in my opinion, no particular strong points. It had some great moments ("puny god" for example: I laughed out loud at that), but it was otherwise entirely forgettable.
I am somewhat baffled by the strong response to it here. From what you all said, it was an amazing movie. But upon seeing it, it was literally nothing special.
Jesus, say what you will about superhero movies, but at least The Avengers wasn't the sort of Halo-Ferngully-Pocahontas mashup tripe we got with that piece of shit, and didn't come with a nice helping of awful "noble savage" tropes on the side.
slavesuperhero names) and still really liked all the characters.Shakespeare? No of course not.