>when people that can't define pacing, call pacing of a movie bad
I swear everyone's a fucking movie reviewer nowadays
>me: ok well what do you mean by pacing?
>him: w-well i didn't like the action
>me: right ok so what about the editing
>him: oh man the editing was horrible, the shots were choppy it didn't look good
>me: what's your favorite movie?
>him: star wars
>me: ok you do realize the guy that edited the star wars movie is the same guy that edited this movie, right?
>him: man all these logical fallacies, i'm done arguing with you
Try to guess the movie we were talking about without looking it up on IMDB.
10 cloverfield lane
and are you this retarded that you pretend to have conversations with yourself where you're the winner?
>>71079165
i literally just had this conversation on twitter with a person that's literally a film major.
>>71079165
also wrong not 10 cloverfield lane
>>71079272
Ghost Protocol
>>71079303
you got the editor right but not the movie
Why do you care?
Most people are plebs.
>>71079368
Warcraft
>>71079385
i got extremely rustled because he's a film major but he had no idea what he was talking about.
you're criticizing some for having an opinion, their own personal taste, and trying to articulate it?
you hold professional 'critics' of art in high regard?
>>71079065
>ok you do realize the guy that edited the star wars movie is the same guy that edited this movie, right?
lmao is that really your argument
>>71079437
that's it mayne.
there are so many legitimate things to complain about that movie. like most of the actors weren't great, the dialogue was terrible for the most part... but the pacing and editing were the 2 things that movie did right.
>>71079229
>film major
That's meaningless. Undergraduate level film courses are a joke. Half of them prefer anime to film nowadays and 90% haven't seen anything made prior to 1994, let alone the classics of the medium.
Those are conservative estimates.
>>71079506
>but the pacing and editing were the 2 things that movie did right.
>>71079497
the fact that he's a film major and he has no idea what he's talking about is what pissed me off.
>>71079499
yes. that editor has an amazing track record. i can't tell him why the editing was great in 140 characters.
>>71079065
>>me: ok you do realize the guy that edited the star wars movie is the same guy that edited this movie, right?
>>him: man all these logical fallacies, i'm done arguing with you
He's was right to stop arguing with you, frogposter. You don't make an argument by appealing to authority.
>>71079736
We were arguing on twitter. I couldn't explain to him why the editing was great in 130 characters. But given the editor had a good track record it was a great place to start.
>>71079618
if he watched the film then he knows what he's talking about. you probably have communication problems and restrict yourself to your own personal dictionary of what words like pacing or editing should absolutely mean.
you're the one who made the logical fallacy in your only point of how the guy editing a movie this person did like and one they didn't meaning their opinion is terrible or, how i presume you would put it, 'wrong'.
>>71079736
>We were arguing on twitter
Well, there's your first problem
Is anyone surprised that the frogposter is a little cunt who comes crying to 4chan for validation when he has a negative interaction?
>>71079065
>can't define pacing
How could anyone not understand what pacing is? If you're bored during a movie then the pacing was bad. If you think it's something more than that then you're just jerking yourself off.
>>71079925
There's literally nothing wrong with frogposting.
I can tell when pacing is bad, but I have no idea how to define it. It's a bit like shot balance in that regard.
And, like shot balance, I can tell bad pacing from good pacing, but I can't tell good pacing from great pacing. I hear a lot that the extended cut of Aliens is paced worse than the theatrical cut, but I literally can't discern this for myself, it feels just as brisk and suspenseful, only with additional character development and scenes of suspense and action.
Dude is a Fucking retard for liking star wars, why would you argue with a retard?
>>71079065
pacing can be an issue and even a plen can notice it
But the worst is when someone says "What was the point of this movie? It was pointless!"
>>71080050
My favorite is when someone says that the movie was confusing
Like, you just didn't get it
>>71079967
Oh really?
>>71079875
It's quickly dismissed every opinion he had about the movie because a 90 minute movie with 50 some minutes of full on expensive cgi blowing shit up/fighting action is unreasonable to be called 'bad pacing'
there balance between story development and action was just right.
>>71080096
Yes really, you can't fault frogposting for the derivative frogposting that came after it. Using that logic the Beatles were terrible because more terrible bands were inspired by them than anyone else in music history.
>>71079506
I didn't like the pacing of that movie, though I was impressed overall. It seemed like they were jamming content that could fit into a television season into the space of a movie.
>>71079065
words have meanings, anon. only your own fault if you dont know what "pacing" means
>>71080146
>you can't fault rage comics for being 9gags favorite meme, they're still 4chan....r-right guys?
Give it up. "pepe" is reddit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OPhtQp1C9c
>>71080050
>But the worst is when someone says "What was the point of this movie? It was pointless!"
Are you seriously suggesting it's never a problem for a movie to have no point? Like if I put together 90 minutes of random glass breaking noises with japanese geisha swimming in a mcdonalds ball pit you're going to say it's bad when someone asks "what was the point?" Fuck you David Lynch.
>>71080255
You give up, frogposting didn't go away last year, didn't go away the year before that, didn't go away the year before that, etc. You're the one who needs to get used to it.
>>71080278
>dude this completely ridiculous thing means you're wrong!
naw fuck off
>>71080278
It's a stupid criticism that people can't really respond to. It's also a thousand times more likely that you missed the point rather than that there wasn't one, since a lot of money and time and effort was invested into the thing you're claiming is pointless.
>>71080214
The actual lore has 20 some books, 3 games that expand on the story a lot and 7 more games that let you play in said stories while also developing a lot of side stories to everything and expanding on some character's storylines.
What we got from the first movie was like half a book and even taht was hard to fit in. But i see what you're saying too much action and it was not enough story for people who are not familiar with the series to understand. And that's a very fair argument.
Now the person I was arguing with has read some of the books and knew what was going on in the movie and that's what got me a little confused.
>>71080309
LiteralIy reddit
>>71080255
t. angry baby
>>71079506
Warcraft had bad pacing because it tried to rush through the first war at a breakneck pace, but half the scenes were "people talking about something we already know."
>>71080370
You're the only one from reddit seeing as how every one of your posts includes posts from there.
>>71080255
Was shitposting part of your plan?
>>71080447
>>71079065
>ok well what do you mean by pacing?
If someone would ask me this, I would probably assume I was talking to a pleb who doesnt know the basic terminology of filmmaking. So dumping it down to "bad action, bad editing" makes sense
>>71079229
Sure you did anon
>>71080492
simply saying
>there was not enough action
or
>there was too much action
would've been enough.
>>71080528
it can have bad pacing with the right amount of action
>>71080616
to my understanding pacing means a fine balance between story development and action.
what does it mean to you?
>>71079065
>>me: ok well what do you mean by pacing?
I mean the rate at which things relevant to the plot happened. There were periods that were extremely boring due to the plot not advancing and other periods where things happened way too quickly and I had no time to digest the events. It was inconsistent and at times jarring.
>>71080528
Not exactly though.
A movie that rushes through scenes that are just people talking would have bad pacing.
Whereas a movie that spends too much time on protracted "action" sequences would also be an example of bad pacing.
>I didn't like it! The main character was an asshole! He should have been a good guy
>>71080643
>between story development and action
what? I know there can be action scenes that are irrelevant to the plot, but those 2 things shouldnt contrast each other
You articulate your points as if you are someone who doesn't come here. I'm not saying >>>reddit but why try to swing people to your side on something that you hold as a viewpoint rather than straight facts?
>>71080820
well, if the movie clearly wants you to think of the mc as a likeable character and you find yourself just cringing all the time, then the filmmakers failed
>>71080902
MOMMY BABBY HUNGRY MOMMY PLS BABY NEED MILK!!!
>>71080847
I believe they should. There can be a lot of senseless action that don't contribute to the plot and there can be too much story that makes the movie boring.
A few examples would be GoT. I don't need to know how The Mad King became King, I kinda just need to know why he was named that and why he was killed. I don't need to know his entire history.
Now You See Me 2, that is basically just setting up the plot for the third movie where the father that died isn't really dead but he's the greatest magician of all time. And it leaves the movie with 30+ minutes of plot that's not gonna mean anything to you while watching this movie. It leaves you thinking
>ok but why did I just spend 30 minutes watching this if it literally means nothing and there's no conclusion.
There can be a a lot of bad story development. too much story with a weak conclusion.
Like for example if Arya in GoT just died in Braavos after they dedicated 2-3 hours of screentime to her in the last 2 seasons. It would've been a shit storyline with a shit ending. People would've just called it filler.
>>71080902
I'm looking for people to challenge my viewpoints. I have conceded a few arguments I've made in this thread alone and I realized what I did wrong. This thread has been pretty good for me.
>>71079065
Warcraft tried to do too much too quickly. It didn't give you time to give a shit about the characters. I wasn't rooting for anyone and I didn't give a shit about what was happening. That's why the pacing was bad. If you compare it to Lord of the Rings, where every character is likable and given proper introductions and takes it's time setting up events and deaths are actually meaningful you'll see why Warcraft was terrible. When you compare Lord of the Rings to Warcraft you'll see why pacing is so important. It's not our fault that your friend is stupid and doesn't understand his own opinion.
>>71081206
You sound insufferable as fuck.
>>71079927
>If you're bored during a movie then the pacing was bad.
Not a good barometer of pacing imo. There are lots of reasons a person might be bored during a film that aren't attributed to pacing. I can't recall how many people I've spoken to that have referred to genuinely compelling moments of character development as "slow bits".
>>71079065
You say pacing is bad when you got bored but you don't want to out yourself as a pleb
>>71081226
That is a very good point.
I guess the director never knew if they were gonna have a sequel so he wanted to do as much as he could in one movie. But yeah I didn't give a shit about Llane dying and Anduin's son.
But I feel like Durotan got a fairly decent introduction and development. I knew what that character wanted and what he strived for, and it made you give a shit about him dying.
