Why is there a boom of film school dropout videos that point out the obvious?

Why is there a boom of film school dropout videos that point out the obvious?

Every Frame a Painting
Nerdwriter
ect..

anyone else tired of these videos?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=pFUKeD3FJm8
imdb.com/title/tt1163752/
youtu.be/CZhFtd1QZWc?t=4m50s
youtube.com/watch?v=Pkup4zo97E0
youtube.com/watch?v=Pe0SmaBUZT0
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

...

Would you rather watch reviews done by people who didn't go to film school and just sat around all day watching films?

>Trivializing the genre to remove "movie magic" so people are more conscious of cinematography without coming into a movie with the respect it doesnt deserve.

You're a little bitch

You mean like Roger Ebert and Kermode?

Why is it that there's a ton of faggots who shit on these videos every time they're mentioned? They're just simple analysis. Nobody except maybe the Nerdwriter (who is Reddit incarnate, I'll agree with you there) claims that their videos are deep or anything like that. Are you triggered because you aren't able to notice these things on your own and feel angry about it?

it's beyond reddit incarnate now, there's a difference between simple analysis and over analysis
especially when new film school dropout pops up every week
youtube.com/watch?v=pFUKeD3FJm8

Why do you give a fuck?
If you don't like them don't watch them and stop wasting your fucking time talking about how people shouldn't be watching them on the internet.

Jesus Christ get a fucking life.

>Its a "Stupid people I dont like watch this and I know I'm better than them so this is trash by proxy" episode

name one thing wrong with his analysis.

claiming someone is over analysing something is not a criticism. people can read anything they like into a film, that's what gives them infinite depth.

That's how Zizek became such a philosophy meme. No one else would have watched Sound of Music and claimed that it was a fascist film. That's what free thought is for.

No decent film reviewer went to film school.

Wow, why are you so defensive? He has a point

Because plebs need everything to be spoonfed to them, even the obvious. They are either too dumb or ascetically notice and feel it's justifiable to watch videos like these to reinforce their beliefs. It's like how capeshitters watch reviewers who love what they love and shit on what they hate. They like to pretend that if someone with a youtube channel holds the same opinion as theirs then they are somehow correct.

Tldr: plebs are plebs and want to feel smart

Probably because he wants to start one of these channels or already has

The only thing I don't like about them is that they're all copies of each other and all use the same format and style, so it comes off as "Hey, I watched all of Kubrick so I guess I know film theory, I bet I can be big on YT too if I use exactly the same style of editing, with the same calm, monotonous voiceover and abstract titles like 'director - desires and colors' or whatever".

Yeah, sometimes they make videos about mediocre cult films that have been talked about for years just so people will flock to them, and yeah sometimes they come off as pretentious by overanalyzing and overpraising films (like how Channel Criswell jacked off Inarittu for the nothingness that is The Revenant, but some of his other videos are pretty great), but that's what people call 'having opinions'. People like different things, deal with it.

Also youtube is pretty shitty for reviews/analyses anyway. The best you can do is follow strictly discussion based channels like RLM or small "my bluray collection" channels where some creepy fat dude talks in front of a shitty camera for 30 mins every day about his criterion shelf or whatever.

...

No I'm not tired of them, because why would I watch them in the first place?

>Every Frame a Painting
Reminder

>have a problem with that
>don't unfollow him

Absolutely Haram

He seems like a major cunt, but I still like his videos.

On his "Spielberg Oner" video he shows footage of the Tintin movie and someone commented that it is easier to make a one-shot scene when it's animated, and Tony just went off on the dude acting like a raving loon. I'll try to find the comment.

...

These are great at making people feel smart. It helps deplebify people so really it's a good thing.

>I still enjoy the content of people whom I disagree with politically
SCREW MOM

Criswell's new Lynch video is such basic theory it's ridiculous.

He talks about what Lynchian means and doesn't even cite David Foster Wallace who coined the neologism.

His response went along the lines of, "well obviously you don't know anything about animation. Any animator would kill you for saying something as stupid as that. It takes hours of work for a single second of animation."

>We didn't go to film school, we went to films

>names two
lolllll

Every Frame a Painting is definitely "points out the obvious" tier. He reads like an English student bsing an essay the night before

His Drive video was basic framing. His chair video was just "dude, objects in the environment are reflective of their environment, lmao". His Jackie Chan video was just him regurgitating what Jackie was saying. His Kurosawa video was just him explaining shapes.

He's a pseud who thinks he's a genius. He doesn't even have an interesting or unique taste in films, let alone an intelligent discussion of them. And to make things worse he unironically defends femfreq, another channel that just bses things and doesn't actually analyze anything beyond "a woman gets kidnapped or hurt, ergo misogyny."

>No one else would have watched Sound of Music and claimed that it was a fascist film
>No one else
jesus christ. no wonder people are so easily impressed by plinkett et al

...

People try to make things overly complex to give their hobbies and interests more value while disrespecting entry level fans.

If you think these kind of videos are shitty, their mantras obvious and that they lack critical thinking, if you feel the need to judge this bullshit at all;

You're an insecure obscurantist faggot.

Part 2

Part 3

>guy posts criticism from alt account, without his face

Fucking coward.

Yeah, I just watched it too. I thought these were supposed to be essays and analyses, not "these are the things you'd know if you watched his films".
It's not a bad video for someone who doesn't know anything about Lynch, but watch almost any one of his films and you'll understand what "Lynchian" means by yourself, without having to watch a 20 min video.

source

imdb.com/title/tt1163752/

jfc how is this guy so stupid? oners in real life are difficult and impressive because they exponentially increase the opportunities for human error (forcing a repeat), something that's never going to happen in animation.

Maybe they're harder than short animated shots just because you have to think a lot more about blocking, but the other things he points out (color, physics, particle effects) aren't specific to long takes.

Yeah this is pretty textbook pseudointelligent shit here. TDK is a dumb wannabe Michael Mann movie that feigns the tone of a Mann film with comic book characters thrown in to appeal to plebs and manbabies. Any more "analysis" about it, or any of Nolan's flicks, is stupid.

holy shit, what a whiny little bitch.

If you are new to analyzing movies then these vids blow your mind. After like a week of actually watching movies using critical thought you realize how pretentious these guys are though.

how can this guy not get that Sorkijan is saying that the impressive part about a "oner" is the coordination of all of the live action elements without having the ability to endlessly tweak until its perfect. A computer animated shot can be equally or more complex but it's not the same type of achievement as a live action one.

STFU U CANT MAKE A AMIMATION I POKE YOUR EYE WITH A PENCIL

I think the main problem I have with them is that they take themselves way too seriously, as if they're some kind of authority figure on the subject even though virtually all of them have minimal to no connection to film, have not made anything themselves, and are not teachers. So when they start pointing out things that are obvious, like Tony with his chair video, the juxtaposition makes it laughable.

hes right though, doing a oner with animation is extremely hard even though you have complete control over the camera.

who else did then? Zizek's Hegelian-influenced dialectic lead him to such readings. Few people would bother to apply those same skills to that film.

That's why diverse and, yes, overwrought critical analysis is a good thing.

If you only read films how they're "supposed" to be read, you've completely castrated critical thought.

>Film analysist video
>Nujabes starts playing

even worse is he reused a scene that Nerdwriter did a whole video on a few weeks ago, but instead of illustrating a unique point of view, Criswell's entire working theory is "it's meant to be ambiguous and scary"

So what does Sup Forums watch for theory and shit?

People who went to film school will have a higher chance of enjoying wanky technical films, if you dont care about wanky technical films (most people dont) then you have no need to follow a critic who went to film school over one who didnt.

>I took a few film classes as an undergrad at UCLA, but my major was English literature, and I never majored in film there. Later in life, I took a year at Vancouver Film School. One of the teachers there, John Pozer, was actually the source of the quote "Every Frame a Painting."
Having said that, I'd wager most of my knowledge was self-taught. DVD commentaries, reading scripts, and then constantly editing stuff were probably my biggest teachers.

I think they're just trying too hard to make "intelligent" content for "intelligent" people and differentiate themselves from big dumb fun channels that only review blockbusters. It's a noble thought, but it gets a bit ridiculous when they start using art/lit school vocabulary in a serious tone. That's why I like discussion channels the most. It's just friends talking about films, and sometimes they just happen to be classics or arthouse.

madman

Every Frame a Painting's OK but nerdwriter is fucking insufferable. I turn on adblock any time I see his videos.

Aww, I just lost some respect for Tony. Sorkijan was so respectful and nice. I feel bad for the guy :( Also Sorkijan is completely right, how can Tony be so retarded?

Yeah, I can't understand why people do these short basic videos about a director's style, techniques and entire filmography. They're all glib and basically the equivalent of coffee table picture books. They're nice to look at, but there's nothing beyond that, or at least nothing you can't find by simply using google.

I understand an analysis on an entire movie (hell I could make a 2 hour long video talking about Inland Empire alone), but the other stuff is pretty much just an exercise in editing and practice at talking academically.

>the shopped in cameltoe
Never noticed that until now, holy shit

he's 100% right though, moving a CGI models and a virtual camera is incredibly easy compared to orchestrating an entire scene of real people and moving objects

pleb here, i like every frame a painting

i don't care enough to notice techinical stuff, so it's fun to be spoonfed this info

they're basically those Sup Forums threads that put red rule-of-thirds lines everywhere

So do directors and movie makers actually put that much thought into their movies, or do the annalizers just over annalize.

sounds like you should've annalized your spelling a bit more m8

Friendly reminder none of my bastard spawn will ever surpass me.

sick, but seriously do movie makers actually think about the exact location of characters on a frame to show their emotions because the fire piercing their chest actually describes their inner wishes for freedom?

i think most filmmakers (and artists) work more intuitively than that

>watch a film analysis

>voice over is a squeaky estrogen voiced numale

the worst one I've seen like this is a video bitching about capeshit simply because it was "diverse" enough, even though that entire genre is SJW propaganda now. He even talked about how X-Men has always been about how wrong racism, or homophobia ect is, but then tears it to shreds because it has too many white people.

SJW are such fucking plebs

EFP and Nerdwriter are usually good. Nerdwriter has really toned down his "making a profound statement in the end" shtick lately, which is good. The only one who really comes of as pseudo-intellectual reddit-tier is Now You See it

youtu.be/CZhFtd1QZWc?t=4m50s
>mfw

take a sample of your own voice and post it, faggot

I like his stuff when it's not preach.
His shit about jumpscares is dumb though, you shouldn't have your audience constantly on their toes

Im thinking about making a parody video of these "film essays"

what do you guys think the topic should be?
Uwe Boll, The Pest?

What this guy is doing is blatantly ripping off Tony.

He's not even trying to hide it, but what is insane is people calling him deep.

That's just... so awful.

Having a villain have the same goals is a pretty good idea. That and having the villain be an anti to the heroes strengths is pretty cool too.

Would kaptainkristian fit into this category, he does alittle more than movies but its still loose a interest-pooling of ideas

youtube.com/watch?v=Pkup4zo97E0

oh look, Im already right

>a protagonist and his [or her!] story...

you have to make it look really good but only make shit up. Like constantly go into detail about small stuff and how the editing actually speaks a language of its own about the inner thoughts of the character.

You need to make people think it's not a parody.

Those guys that make the Thug Notes videos have really gay film analysis to.

Lol you just described Sup Forums

You are such an enormous faggot, download YouTube blocker and be done with it if they trigger you so much.

These aren't really offensive. It's just a guy who likes comics and is great at editing, he doesn't pretend to be patrician or deep

There's a difference between something like "this tree suggests life, beauty, raw power etc which correlates with the main character because they're happy with life" and shit like "that cardboard box represents the character's fear of his mother and also Mary mother of jesus". You take your guess which one is bullshit.

Sometimes that is actually the case with the likes of Lars Von Trier for example, where his films are generally just an amalgamation of basic symbols. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. It depends a lot on how preachy or in your face it is.

In my opinion, the best way to do it is by suggestion. Basically if it feels like it works and it kind of makes sense when you think about it then it's good, but if it's overly abstract and precise, or something blatant like superman in jesus pose, then it's most likely bullshit.

But then again you have directors like Lynch and Malick who suggest abstract concepts without explaining them and let you make whatever you want of them, so it's kind of a broad thing. Nothing's set in stone.

>Source Filmmaker is free. Try doing a Tintin oner. After one month, you'll be beggin 30 friends to join you one night and shoot it live.

There is so much wrong with this way of thinking it's unbelievable. Tintin was not made by one man. One man did not animated Tintin, mix audio, and do all the after effects by himself.

Has Tony ever even edited a real movie?

Leave it to a guy doge posting to think nerdwriter is good

youtube.com/watch?v=Pe0SmaBUZT0

to be honest a oner in animation is a nightmare, the only time it's easier than a movie is if it's a fightscene with really complicatd camera angles and movements.

Otherwise having two people walking down a halllway while stuff is happening behind them at the same time is way easier than animating it.

explain how he (or anything) can be "reddit"

I dare you.

Yes, absolutely.

I disect things relating to a made up plot. And randomly start adding in clips from random movies to back up your argument

Clickhole and The Onion already (sorta) did it.

Clickhole does it from a listicle angle and Onion has Peter Bradshaw.

But not in the same ways. It's easier with no skills whatsoever to have some cars driving around in a real shot, but I'm assuming that this is about everything after that point. However you get the cars is beside the point once you get to the point of the oner, the point is how easily they can be choreographed and synced up.

I wasn't implying that, but now that you mention it he is quite reddit.

Freddie Got Fingered being a misunderstood work of avant-garde neo-surrealism

And why do they always have that utterly irritating millennial American accent? You can just tell they have a cuck shed with a Hillary 2016 poster plastered on the front

The Big Lebowski, make sure to add in a bit about the Coens saying it was just random shit but don't quote them on it. Then mark them off as a nobody that doesn't know what they're talking about.

>explain how he (or anything) can be "reddit"
take something extremely trite, mawkish and/or pretentious then add 1000 upvotes

he sounds like a faggot

be sure you speak in a really gay numale voice.

user this sounds great, please post a thread when you have a video finished.

You should make a video talking about how overrated something beloved is too, maybe blade runner or pulp fiction.

Imagine being told the sky is blue. You already know the sky is blue so it doesn't really mean much to you.

Now imagine being told that the sky is blue, but over the span of a few minute long video with good editing and tasteful music. The viewer in this situation feels like they are more intelligent by having something that agrees with them that they can share with their friends.

These videos are nothing more than the "share this with 5 friends if you laughed" types of facebook posts, just a higher production value.

The
>If you think it is so easy, why don't you do it yourself
argument.

How can I respect him after this?

Woah Jared! Calm down dude!

>calls himself an editor
>has never edited anything but his youtube channel
>asst. camerman on 3 movies, nothing else

You shouldn't try respecting him