• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

[NT] The movie-watching experience...

Qre:us

New member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
4,890
I don't know who this would be relevant towards, most likely, not just NTs, but, here goes.

I am well aware of the fantasy element in movies, the fiction, the minor need for suspension of disbelief, etc. But....there must be logical consistency even in the fiction you present, given your preliminary premise, with any changes noted, thereafter.

Sometimes, inconsistencies in movies bug me to the point where I can't even focus on the movie as a whole.

For example, the movie, Angels & Demons, the whole angle of capturing antimatter within a tube, right from the start, just threw me off because of its implausibility, and it irked me for the rest of it. The urgency of the whole plot was, thus, lost completely on me.

My ENTJ and ESFJ girlfriends and I went to see a chick flick - the Time Traveller's Wife, and I couldn't 'catch on' to the movie because every time he time-travelled, the setting looked 'modern'/not relevant to the time, and I couldn't get a timeline clearly outlined of how the movie was flowing. And, that was that.

Or, if a character says in a movie, "I gotta take my jacket" and puts it on a chair, and then exits without taking the jacket, without any follow-up dialogue like, "Damn, forgot the jacket"...it irks me.

A person driving a car, moving their hand so much on the steering wheel, with a pan shot of the car driving straight (not zig zag)...gah!

MAKE SENSE!!!
Anyone relate?
 
Last edited:

Orangey

Blah
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
6,354
MBTI Type
ESTP
Enneagram
6w5
Oh inconsistencies can ruin an entire movie for me, so I definitely relate. For example, my parents love the third LOTR movie, but I can barely watch it because of ridiculousness like the character Elrond (the ugly elf guy) traveling all the way from Rivendell to Rohan with enough time to catch Aragorn (the ugly human guy) before he left. That would be impossible given how long it took the principle characters to travel there during the first and second movies.
 

epp

New member
Joined
Jun 10, 2009
Messages
150
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
7w8
I definitely notice those inconsistencies and I usually chuckle at them but I have learned to 'switch it off' - just for the sake of enjoying the movie, storyline etc. So that I notice but pay no more attention. Not until after the movie - then I'll have a good laugh :)
 

Laurie

Was E.laur
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
Messages
6,072
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7w6
I hate aliens meshing with our computer systems. I mean.. cmon now.
 

Katsuni

Priestess Of Syrinx
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
1,238
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
3w4?
I try not to focus on it too much, but some movies... yeah it's just too much.

The worst example I can think of is the worst movie I've seen, "The Last Sentinel".

DO NOT WATCH THAT MOVIE NO MATTER WHOT!

Seriously, I don't mean that it's just BAD. I don't mean "so bad it's funny", no it goes right past that into being "so bad it's just BAD" and then it decides that's not good enough so it breaks into a sprint to be absolutely certain that it's so far in the red that after yeu're don't slapping it with a tennis racket trying to knock it somewheres way the hell away from yeu, it could resemble a brick wall with the lines in it.

Whot's even better is the cover jacket... lies. Period. It goes on about how the world is destined to be saved by "one woman" and goes on about her like she's a major plot element... she shows up, forcefully, so that it doesn't fit with the plot at all, sucks as a character, has no skill and nearly gets the main character killed repeatedly, and then gets killed off more or less halfway through the movie and doesn't show up again until the end after the last baddie is defeated. It's like... how did any of that make sense? Why was she even in the movie to begin with? It had nothing to do with her at all period, the only thing she supplied at all was a tiny bit of mostly inaccurate information, and then she disappears.

Whot's better is the other inconsistancies... like the world being pretty much overrun by these automated android like police force that have gone insane... except... uhm... they're all controlled from a single desktop computer. That's right, the entire 'operations hq' for the entire world, is controlled from a desktop computer.

And I don't mean a state of the art desktop computer, no no, I mean it has display monitors from the 80's, and two random 'scientist' looking people, who are barely more than a pair of cultists, of which only one of them even talks... and then gets shot. After going on about how they didn't rule the computers, they worshipped them and they couldn't stop them if they tried. Of course when the 'hero' just knocks the computer off, BAM all the androids suddenly die off. Well really. Yeu couldn't stop them at all huh? Sad...

The whole movie was just fifteen thousand levels of SUCK all rolled into one... it probably wouldn't be THAT bad of an action movie if I wasn't so hung up on the fact that not a single thing in the whole movie made the slightest bit of sense, or even pretended to try to >.<
 

Matthew_Z

That chalkboard guy
Joined
Jun 15, 2009
Messages
1,256
MBTI Type
xxxx
On a bit more of an S note, movies take some getting used to. Unlike the world outside of movies, you can't truly move around; the camera has a relatively high amount of control over what you see. For someone who, like myself, seldom views movies, getting used to minimal head movement in addition to accepting generally impossible angles can be a fair deal of a challenge.

Other than that, my main problem with movies wouldn't necessarily be dialogue/action inconsistencies or other visual effects not matching. What would bother me is when a movie seems to suddenly divert from what appeared to be the natural progression of the plot or the theme, the "hidden side" of the movie. In other words, large thematic differences between the main plot and one of the many possible subplots is slightly irritating.
 

Kra

Black Magic Buzzard
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
912
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
4w5
I've run into this a lot as of late. I have no problem suspending disbelief if they at least try to convince me. If not, the movie very quickly becomes a comedy.

I have to physically restrain myself from pulling a Mystery Science Theater 3000 occasionally.
 

thisGuy

New member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
1,187
MBTI Type
entp
nope.

point of the movies...most movies is entertainment...so i use movies to get entertained...if it learns me something, all the better

documentaries are another issue
 

Ozz

New member
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
197
MBTI Type
ISTJ
I hate aliens meshing with our computer systems. I mean.. cmon now.

It's only common sense that our existing computing systems are actually based on alien technology. You think Alan Turing and Larry Page are human?
 

Folderol

New member
Joined
May 16, 2008
Messages
83
MBTI Type
INTP
I am nowhere near that annoyed at movies.

My problem is stupidity of characters. There are so many ridiculous plot lines too. I know they are movies, but some movies are so far out there or just plain stupid. I find the "quality" of recent movies is sorely lacking... thrown together plot lines, (partially) covered up with special effects.
 

BlackCat

Shaman
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
7,038
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I am nowhere near that annoyed at movies.

My problem is stupidity of characters. There are so many ridiculous plot lines too. I know they are movies, but some movies are so far out there or just plain stupid. I find the "quality" of recent movies is sorely lacking... thrown together plot lines, (partially) covered up with special effects.

Me too.

Bolded: I saw District 9, and the stupidity of Wikus van de Merwe made me want to leave at some parts.
 

Qre:us

New member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
4,890
Leave your Ti at the door. :D

Sagely advice. :smile:
Oh inconsistencies can ruin an entire movie for me, so I definitely relate. For example, my parents love the third LOTR movie, but I can barely watch it because of ridiculousness like the character Elrond (the ugly elf guy) traveling all the way from Rivendell to Rohan with enough time to catch Aragorn (the ugly human guy) before he left. That would be impossible given how long it took the principle characters to travel there during the first and second movies.

Exactly, it means that we're so involved in the movie - I want to believe - that when the movie drops the ball, it loses my respect.

As a consumer of the product, I'm asking for a certain level of quality control. I've willingly engaged in the exchange of the product, and damnit, I want delivery! And, it makes it seem as if the director et al. is either (1) shoddy with their work, or, (2) assumes a level of stupidity in the audience.

I definitely notice those inconsistencies and I usually chuckle at them but I have learned to 'switch it off' - just for the sake of enjoying the movie, storyline etc. So that I notice but pay no more attention. Not until after the movie - then I'll have a good laugh :)

My friends get exasperated with me because after the movie, when we review it, I have a list of issues, so all they can do is roll their eyes. Or, like my ESFJ best friend says, leave your logic at the door! (Quinlan, style)

I've run into this a lot as of late. I have no problem suspending disbelief if they at least try to convince me. If not, the movie very quickly becomes a comedy.

I have to physically restrain myself from pulling a Mystery Science Theater 3000 occasionally.

:laugh: So true, in such tragedies the only thing to do is, see it as comedies.
 

Shimmy

New member
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
1,867
MBTI Type
SEXY
Yes, I am always tremendously bothered by inconsistencies in movies. Especially in movies that claim to be "sophisticated". I don't care if Steven Seagal or Jack Black makes a logical fallacy, but take a movie like The Matrix or Apocalypto and suddenly every little mistake bothers me tremendously, and the movie is ruined to me.

I think there should be a: "List of movies that are satisfying instead of annoying."
 

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
I would say I enjoy a movie more when there's a fabulous effort made to craft the entire piece, beginning to end, including getting the "science" right. To get the period right, the details consistent, make the characters believable. I too find it irksome if there are too many "mistakes" or ridiculous silly things we are just expected to believe because that's essential to "get" the movie.

But I loved The Matrix, the first one being the best. I could accept the implausibility of the scenario because the rest of the movie was just so well put together, every shot planned and crafted like art.

Interestingly, I am equally disturbed by characters that don't behave like people would IRL. You can't set a plot and then play with the people, making them do things that wouldn't be logically consistent with their already expressed tendencies.
 

Fife

New member
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
81
MBTI Type
INFJ
Totally know this feeling :D

My friends and I get out DVDs to watch every so often, and they always come with a running commentary. :cheese: It's very entertaining. But only works with someone else who views movies like this.

One of my friends has gotten into TV tropes recently too - which makes it more interesting because we can analyse the plot as we go.

Of course, if there was someone in the room who didn't want the commentary, it could be extremely annoying :steam:
 

Colors

The Destroyer
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,276
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I dunno, I often *enjoy* nitpicking the movie for logic holes- even if my friends don't always find it as enjoyable to listen to a 15 minute speech about the values dissonance of Shrek, or like in the aforementioned Angels & Demons, the carmelengo basically had to have planned that Robert Langdon's timing to the dot of finding the "antimatter-bomb" (and who exactly would've taken the fall for trying to kill him, anyway, if he hadn't been so conveniently discovered by the Swiss Guard?). But they usually do.

I mean, nothing's perfect, right? I don't think seeing the pieces, seeing the construction, necessarily ruins the whole- I mean, certainly I hope film majors still enjoy films.
 

Little Linguist

Striving for balance
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
6,880
MBTI Type
xNFP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Okay, fiction movies are fake. We know this and shouldn't be shocked if they are not believable.

However, one thing that really gets my goat is when people take a fiction movie and believe it - like conspiracy theories or 'science' fiction films. Take the Day after Tomorrow. You could swear everyone was talking about OMG TOMORROW THERE WILL BE AN ICE AGE!!!!!!! Another classic: People believing in the Jedi order or turning that into a cult or WHATEVER. Or people who believe that cows are purple. A further example: THE GOVERNMENT is working with ALIEN COMPUTERS to keep us SLAVES. Give me a break. It was a movie, not a scientific documentary film.

Now, if you create a science fiction or conspiracy theory (or other) fiction film and that gets people THINKING about things within a REALISTIC context because they like the film, then it did its job. For example, The Matrix might bring up questions about authority figures and government; some people even interpret it in various ways. Or The Day after Tomorrow might prompt people to be more conscious of the environment, even if the premises of the film were scientifically not feasible. Or Star Wars might prompt people to look at the nature of good and evil, try to define what that means, and look at the instances of good and evil around them.

OR They just might have a good time watching the films.

It's all good. But then taking it at face value never is. Then you jump to the wrong conclusions.
Then again, that has to do with PEOPLE being stupid, not movies.
 

Katsuni

Priestess Of Syrinx
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
1,238
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
3w4?
Interestingly, I am equally disturbed by characters that don't behave like people would IRL. You can't set a plot and then play with the people, making them do things that wouldn't be logically consistent with their already expressed tendencies.

This's sadly much more difficult to fix than one may think.

Generally there's two primary methods of writing characters, from a puppetmaster point of view, where yeu dictate whot the characters do and manually try to make them do whot yeu want by pulling their strings, regardless of whether they're supposed to bend that way or not. The second major way is the channeler form, in which the character is designed as a living, breathing entity, almost a split section of the designer's mind, with independant will; this type is presented more as yeu drop a character in a situation, and see whot they do, because half the time yeu yeurself have no clue how they'll act. The downside, is that many people literally can never do this, it generally only works for 1-2 characters at a time at most, and it can cause major plot inconsistancies when the characters just wander off and do whotever they feel like doing regardless of whether they're supposed to for the plotline or not.

The puppetmaster works exceptionally well for supporting characters, and when trying to manhandle a character to play the role yeu want them to, the downside is that we often get inconsistancies because they aren't a developed character, they have no mind, they just follow whot's needed to be done for the script. If yeu give them a background, the background history has NO EFFECT AT ALL on the character, because they won't react according to their background unless expressly told to each and every time. Yeu can have all the explainations yeu want for their actions, but in the end, yeu're the one pulling their strings, and they do whot they're told, no matter how silly or implausible it may seem. They literally DO NOT HAVE A CHARACTER, therefore they can't really act "out of character" because they never had one to start, they're just a puppet on strings, and the only reason they may seem otherwise, is if the puppeteer is careful to only pull the strings accordingly. This is painfully obvious with a bad writer, but even the masters can make major mistakes on this method, especially on secondary characters where this'll almost invariably be used, as it's hard to keep track of how they reacted in the past, and their entire history.


On the other hand, we have the channeling as mentioned earlier... these are 'real' characters. They have thoughts, hopes, dreams, aspirations, a mind of their own. This makes them lively, and complex, they will do the unexpected and have a good reason for doing so, they'll be natural and fitting. Yeu don't pull the strings on these characters though, yeu can nudge them where yeu want them to go, but if they don't want to go there, there's not really a whole lot yeu can do to force them to short of removing every single other option out from under their feet. This often leads to a bizzare alternate problem... the character will go according to their own character but often the layout of the terrain around them will change in bizzare ways to force them to take a certain action, whether they want to or not. Yeu'll see this most blatantly obvious when trying to force a character to do something they don't want to do... make a character afraid of spiders and try to make them turn left down the road towards the haunted woods with spiderwebs everywhere... well, the puppeteer one will go down it, and maybe complain; the channeled characters says "screw that" and turns around and leaves, leaving the princess to die... except then a magical wall of trees suddenly appears blocking their escape path! Yeu get limited control over the character, and can only use their environment against them to make them follow the plot, and this is often done at gunpoint. Most of the truly great writers will have at least one, usually a small handful, of these types of characters in their storylines. Making every single individual character in a book or movie like this is impractical and impossible, and would be a nightmare to do anyway, since yeu'd be constantly forcing the environment to act in all sorts of wonky ways to force them to ever do anything yeu want them to (see the tv show Voyager for an example of where this runs rampant to the point of just being ridiculous).



In the end, a great writer can compensate for this by elegantly either leading a character to do whot they want via subtle environmental changes, or they can puppetteer it very carefully, adding in enough backstory and explainations that people don't notice so much that the 'character' is little more than a mindless zombie on a very short leash.

Done improperly, we see the crap that just irritates us to the core in movies and books, games, etc. , and sometimes things that just seem out of place but we can't quite place why.

The hero that lets the heroine die for no real particular reason other than "oh yeah the plot needed it to happen", to the "zomg the warp drive's offline! AGAIN! Not that this happens EVERY SINGLE FUCKING EPISODE or anything".
 

Fife

New member
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
81
MBTI Type
INFJ
:D Yay! Explanation :)

That's really cool Katsuni. How are plots/sub-plots produced? It seems like there would be a similar necessity for internal consistency.

:coffee:
 
Top