Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
movielover71

Defining the genres

Recommended Posts

I can't imagine you'd actually pick a film just because its in a genre. You're bound to face some real woofers that way. Anybody worth their salt is getting movies recommended before they walk into the store, and not letting the cateogrizing of Blockbuster determine their viewing decisions.

Oh, come on. You are taking your objection way too far. There are times that I have a movie craving that only Noir can fill. It also determines whether or not I settle into a film for which I have absolutely no frame of reference while channel surfing. And woofer is a relative judgement (while necessary in a speaker). And while we are at it, before walking into Blockbuster. You haven't been to the Royal Oak store here. Wall to wall Tarentino Juniors eagerly waiting for you to ask.


"During the contest trial, the Coleman team presented evidence of a further 6500 absentees that it felt deserved to be included under the process that had produced the prior 933 [submitted by Franken, rk]. The three judges finally defined what constituted a 'legal' absentee ballot. Countable ballots, for instance, had to contain the signature of the voter, complete registration information, and proper witness credentials.

But the panel only applied the standards going forward, severely reducing the universe of additional basentees the Coleman team could hope to have included. In the end, the three judges allowed about 350 additional absentees to be counted. The panel also did nothing about the hundreds, possibly thousands, of absentees that have already been legally included, yet are now 'illegal' according to the panel's own ex-post definition."

The Wall Street Journal editorial, April 18, 2009 concerning the Franken Coleman decision in the Minnesota U.S. Senate race of 2008.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

staf wrote:

OK i've got it. By country, then by director underneath that country. I think Facets was attempting to do something like this when i was in their rental store last night. Only Mike H kept putting them all back in the wrong place so people would think that
Amorres Perros
was actually a Russian film.

But in cases of sequels, those have to be together with the original, regardless of what country they were made in and who the director might be. So you'd always have to refer to the original in order to know anything about the sequels (none of which truly matter, anyway, unless Peter Jackson is directing).

So, okay, under this system, where would one look for Star Trek: First Contact?

Doo DOO doo doo, doo DOO doo...

Under "W" for Robert Wise, director of Star Trek: The Motion Picture? Under the director of the first Next Gen movie? (And which would that be, Star Trek Generations (d: David Carson), which was really a transitional picture, or First Contact itself (d: Jonathan Frakes)?

What about James Bond flicks? Where would I find Die Another Day? Under Terrence Young, director of Dr. No? William H. Brown Jr. and / or John Frankenheimer, directors of the very first James Bond adventure, the 1954 "Casino Royale" starring Barry Nelson? Or do we maybe start all over again each time Bond is recast? In that case, Die Another Day (Lee Tamahori) would be under Martin Campbell (Goldeneye). And of course Connery's tenure was interrupted by one-shot Bond George Lazenby, so maybe Diamonds are Forever should be filed under its own director -- and then there's Connery's unofficial entry, Never Say Never Again. Do we go back to Terrence Young, or is this too a one-shot filed under its own director?

P.S. Sorry about putting Dan's words in your mouth, Stef. (Or should I be apologizing to Dan?)


“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.” — Flannery O'Connor

Writing at the new Decent Films | Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DanBuck wrote:

: Aren't fiction books in libraries stacked by author?

Unless they're mass-market paperbacks, in which case they're just stacked wherever.

Russell Lucas wrote:

: By country, or by language? Where do the Three Colors films go?

Exactly -- those were French-Swiss-Polish co-productions, were they not? And since SDG brings up the James Bond films, where do THOSE go? I believe an American company (MGM/UA) owns them all, but they're also pretty British; similarly, Lawrence of Arabia is an American film by virtue of being produced by Sam Speigel and Columbia Pictures, yet its director and most of the cast are British.

: Yeah, I acknowledge some infirmities. Imagine the day when Star Wars

: films are split up (with The Empire Strikes Back and Never Say Never

: Again shivering together out in the cold).

Along with Robocop 2, I suppose? smile.gif


"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, I'VE got it! We should put all the ODD-NUMBERED Star Trek films under Robert Wise, and all the EVEN-NUMBERED ones under Nicholas Meyer!

Except, wait, The Search For Spock is part of the "Spock trilogy" and thus belongs with II and III. And a lot of people think Star Trek Nemesis, despite being even-numbered, belongs with the outcast odd-numbered episodes. So it's not so neat after all.


“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.” — Flannery O'Connor

Writing at the new Decent Films | Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah all this light hearted ribbing, shouldn't we all have cigars or something?

See, we agree on SO much. I was just about to banish myself to the front porch for precisely such refreshment. And the Babe wonders why I need wireless internet capability.


"During the contest trial, the Coleman team presented evidence of a further 6500 absentees that it felt deserved to be included under the process that had produced the prior 933 [submitted by Franken, rk]. The three judges finally defined what constituted a 'legal' absentee ballot. Countable ballots, for instance, had to contain the signature of the voter, complete registration information, and proper witness credentials.

But the panel only applied the standards going forward, severely reducing the universe of additional basentees the Coleman team could hope to have included. In the end, the three judges allowed about 350 additional absentees to be counted. The panel also did nothing about the hundreds, possibly thousands, of absentees that have already been legally included, yet are now 'illegal' according to the panel's own ex-post definition."

The Wall Street Journal editorial, April 18, 2009 concerning the Franken Coleman decision in the Minnesota U.S. Senate race of 2008.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what would we do with Freddy vs. Jason. Because it is Friday the 13th episode eleven BUT ALSO Nightmare on Elm Street episode 8. That would be quite a conundrum.


"...the vivid crossing of borders between film and theology may save the film from the banality of cinema and festival business, and it may also save the church from the deep sleep of the habitual and the always known."

(Hans Werner Dannowski)

Filmwell | Twitter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

: Geek confession: I've actually got my DVD collection organized by

: director, with the films left to right in order of production.

My VHS collection is sorted by directors, to a degree: The directors I have more than one or two films of get either part of a video box (Mamet), their own video box (Allen), or get their own video box and part of another (Leigh). The rest are sorted by genre, more or less.

My VCD collection is also sorted by directors: My singular Yaguchi sits atop my singular Yang.

Dale


Metalfoot on Emmanuel Shall Come to Thee's Noel: "...this album is...monotony...bland, tripy fare..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And what would we do with Freddy vs. Jason. Because it is Friday the 13th episode eleven BUT ALSO Nightmare on Elm Street episode 8. That would be quite a conundrum.
Um... it wouldn't be in OUR video store... duh. Swisher Sweet for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No kidding. I don't remember the last time my Yaguchi has been singulared, let alone my Yang.


"During the contest trial, the Coleman team presented evidence of a further 6500 absentees that it felt deserved to be included under the process that had produced the prior 933 [submitted by Franken, rk]. The three judges finally defined what constituted a 'legal' absentee ballot. Countable ballots, for instance, had to contain the signature of the voter, complete registration information, and proper witness credentials.

But the panel only applied the standards going forward, severely reducing the universe of additional basentees the Coleman team could hope to have included. In the end, the three judges allowed about 350 additional absentees to be counted. The panel also did nothing about the hundreds, possibly thousands, of absentees that have already been legally included, yet are now 'illegal' according to the panel's own ex-post definition."

The Wall Street Journal editorial, April 18, 2009 concerning the Franken Coleman decision in the Minnesota U.S. Senate race of 2008.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the pro genre' crowd, both from a study PoV but also from a video Shop PoV. That said our blockbusters is particularly confusing.

First there's the top 20 new releases. Then there's newish releases (about the last year - in alphabetical order) then there's foreign, action drama and comedy.

So all in all pretty useless. Fortunately they have a such a small selection that you can just scan them all without too much difficulty.

As for home video collections I'm toying with two arrangements for when I move house. 1 - by year, 2 - by length. This I suppose only works for one's own collection, and a not too large one at that, but could be good. I might have to split out the bible films tho'. The by length one would be good from a we've only got so long to watch a film what shall we watch PoV.

Matt

PS my books are ordered by type, but then size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, in my own DVD collection, I prefer absolute alphabetical listing, but only because I'm already familiar with my entire collection and will never be in the position of scanning vaguely for a film of a particular sort without knowing what's available.


“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.” — Flannery O'Connor

Writing at the new Decent Films | Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

staf wrote:

Ok, so now i'm to be referred to as the "Stef infection?" There is something terribly wrong about this thread.

So, okay, under this system, where would one look for Star Trek: First Contact?

Sequels behind the original Star Trek The Motion Picture. Cuz it's all the same thing really, just for a new generaion, kinda like Pepsi. :borg:

What about James Bond flicks?

In this genre we would only list the films made by Sean Connery. The rest we'd sell at half price to some hick who thought he got a bargain deal. And we could sell the George Lazenby one on ebay for like $100. Consider it a novelty item. Bond gets married and goes insane. How cool is that.

P.S. Sorry about putting Dan's words in your mouth, Stef. (Or should I be apologizing to Dan?)

No, you definitely got it right the first time.

The Three Colors Trilogy would all be on the same shelf titled Collage.

And what would we do with Freddy vs. Jason. Because it is Friday the 13th episode eleven BUT ALSO Nightmare on Elm Street episode 8. That would be quite a conundrum.

These we would send back with a note from our lawyer and a class action law suit for the softening of the americna mind. Russell could make us all rich. But he can't make us Kennedy.

-s.


In an interstellar burst, I am back to save the Universe.

Filmsweep by Persona. 2013 Film Journal. IlPersona.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the DVD file I keep on my hard drive, I list everything alphabetically, but in the page devoted to my DVD collection on my web site, I group things according to director, genre, etc., and some categories come before others -- e.g., 'the stanley kubrick collection' comes first, before 'the ancient and/or biblical epic collection', and both of those groups come before 'the non-disney, non-pixar animated collection', so Spartacus goes in the first group and not the second, and The Miracle Maker and The Prince of Egypt go in the second group and not the third, etc.


"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, nothing like a good border war to rage on endlessly.

Myself, I organize my tapes (which way outnumber the DVDs) thusly: John Ford, My Wife's Movies, Movies I Don't Really Like But Can't Get Rid Of, Tapes that Are Shoved in the Back Mainly to Even Out the Crooked Shelf, Home-Recorded Tapes With Identical Labels, Movies The Neighbors Always Borrow, Cool Movies I Keep Away from the Masses in My Office.

Meanwhile, I still think having an infinite number of copies in an infinite number of categories is the only plausible solution to the category problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mike H wrote:

Meanwhile, I still think having an infinite number of copies in an infinite number of categories is the only plausible solution to the category problem.

Which is actually the correct solution for virtual indices: Have as many categories as possible and cross-link everything everywhere relevant. Someday, when God sends me a database guru willing to work for pizza and Jolt cola and I convert my website to dynamic content, that's the way it'll be at Decent Films. For now, users can browse alpha by title, by year of release, by genre (sort of), by age-appropriateness, and by my own idiosyncratic ratings system. But no director or actor index for now.


“I write because I don’t know what I think until I read what I say.” — Flannery O'Connor

Writing at the new Decent Films | Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I organize my tapes by putting them just out of reach of my son. But generally, Bear in the Big Blue House and Veggie tales end up in front for emergency temper situations. The Veggie Tales episodes are stacked in order of the title of the Silly Song therein.

By the way, I spotted a Harvey reference in a veggie tales episode. Love finding that kind of thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I make this situation easy by not owning DVD's. I only have two and they are easy to categorize, but I am glad that video stores don't take this approach.


"...the vivid crossing of borders between film and theology may save the film from the banality of cinema and festival business, and it may also save the church from the deep sleep of the habitual and the always known."

(Hans Werner Dannowski)

Filmwell | Twitter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Musicals have conventions all their own that would make a plain comedy or drama even more corny than it might already be.

I'm resurrecting this thread to discuss the musical.

I


"What matters are movies, not awards; experiences, not celebrations; the subjective power of individual critical points of view, not the declamatory compromises of consensus." - Richard Brody, "Godard's Surprise Win Is a Victory for Independent Cinema," The New Yorker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Christian,

I have to admit that I am not a fan of musicals - so I agree with the review you quoted. Especially for Dream Girls. The first half did not have people in the story line bursting into song and then, suddenly, in the alley, the three guys burst into a song and dance. It was jarring to me and made the film more a stage production.

I like the way RAY celebrated the music without being a musical. That was what I hoped Dream Girls would do. But I take off my hat to you and Nardis for loving musicals and recognize I'm just not there.

Denny


Since 1995 we have authored a commentary on film, cinema in focus. Though we enjoy cinema as an art form, our interests lie not so much in reviewing a film as in beginning a conversation about the social and spiritual values presented. We, therefore, often rate a film higher or lower due to its message rather than its quality of acting or film-making.

Cinema In Focus Website

Free Methodist Church of Santa Barbara Website

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fiddler on the Roof is one of my favorite movies of all time, so obviously, I'm down with musicals.

I believe it was Mark Steyn who wrote, in his excellent book Broadway Babies Say Goodnight, that what we think of nowadays as the standard approach to musicals goes back to the era of Rodgers & Hammerstein, possibly earlier, where people talked until dialogue had reached its limit, and then they sang to express everything that words couldn't say, and then they danced to express everything that songs couldn't say. (I've only read Steyn's book once, and it was a couple years ago, so I might be slightly misremembering that.)

I don't see anything wrong with that formula, and I think it is profoundly silly to say that people should have a "reason" to break into song, as though films and plays were obliged to be strictly literalistic or realistic. You might just as well say that characters in a Shakespeare play need a "reason" to speak in verse. Different stories follow different sets of rules, and as long as they follow those rules according to some sort of internal logic, that's all that matters.

Dreamgirls fails as a "musical" because it seems to set up or follow one set of rules in the beginning, only to change rules or follow a different set of rules later on.


"Sympathy must precede belligerence. First I must understand the other, as it were, from the inside; then I can critique it from the outside. So many people skip right to the latter." -- Steven D. Greydanus
Now blogging at Patheos.com. I can also still be found at Facebook, Twitter and Flickr. See also my film journal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe it was Mark Steyn who wrote, in his excellent book Broadway Babies Say Goodnight, that what we think of nowadays as the standard approach to musicals goes back to the era of Rodgers & Hammerstein, possibly earlier, where people talked until dialogue had reached its limit, and then they sang to express everything that words couldn't say, and then they danced to express everything that songs couldn't say.

I love Steyn's description. I agree with you that Fiddler works - perhaps as a prime example of Steyn's description. I also think it works, in part, because Tevya's songs are often prayers and that works at several levels.

Denny


Since 1995 we have authored a commentary on film, cinema in focus. Though we enjoy cinema as an art form, our interests lie not so much in reviewing a film as in beginning a conversation about the social and spiritual values presented. We, therefore, often rate a film higher or lower due to its message rather than its quality of acting or film-making.

Cinema In Focus Website

Free Methodist Church of Santa Barbara Website

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll join those who are not fond of musical films -- although Fiddler and Umbellas are exceptions, maybe because Fiddler transcends form and Umbrellas isn't an adaptation from the stage. There is just something that doesn't move well from stage to screen in general, but especially in musicals. I never went to see Chicago because I had seen in on stage and couldn't imagine it making the switch. I did see the film of Dreamgirls, but only because I didn't see it on stage. Maybe there is enough artiface to the stage that makes it easier to believe people will break into song. But that artiface is lost when you film it. (I think Umbrellas seems artificial enough to pull off the singing.)

E.g., when I saw the film Man of LaMancha, I'd read it before but never seen it on stage. I thought it was a good version -- until I saw it staged, then the film version went down a few pegs. You can't take the story out of the dungeon as the film does and maintain the same feel.

Edited by Darrel Manson

A foreign movie can't be stupid.

-from the film
Armin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...