Comments on Nick's Flick Picks: The Blog: Come on In, the Mise-en-Scène Is Fine!

Thanks for all these ideas it inspired me to go af...

2010-10-28T02:36:25.355-05:00

Thanks for all these ideas it inspired me to go after many of them and use a lot of you suggestions like a blog…

it's good to see this information in your post...

2010-07-26T06:19:27.065-05:00

it's good to see this information in your post, i was looking the same but there was not any proper resource, thanx now i have the link which i was looking for my research.

Masters Essay Writing

Great article, Nick (as per usual). The given name...

2010-07-19T13:11:39.748-05:00

Great article, Nick (as per usual). The given name for my internet personality tells you exactly what I think of everything you said.

By the by, the further away I get from Inception, the more I think that mildly interesting mise en scène was just about the only thing that film had going for it.

Isn't it strange how Inception is already all but guaranteed that editing Oscar (whether it deserves it or not).

MISE EN SCENE - EVERYTHING WITHIN THE FRAME? I THI...

2010-07-19T04:24:12.354-05:00

MISE EN SCENE - EVERYTHING WITHIN THE FRAME? I THINK SO.

Marvelous & insightful essay, though I haven&#...

2010-07-16T00:17:17.129-05:00

Marvelous & insightful essay, though I haven't read the article (I am so fucking done with those "death of film criticism" jeremiads, and Shone sounds like a screaming cobag). But I have too many good friends in cinematography not to point out one wee quibble: that discipline includes not just lighting, but also choices pertaining to focus and focal depth, and the related use of different lens sizes.

Second: I want to print Nathaniel's comment and tape it to my computer screen.

Nathaniel, if you're not careful, I'll hav...

2010-07-15T10:01:27.926-05:00

Nathaniel, if you're not careful, I'll have to quote you twice in one day.

Sadly, i don't think that many people like to ...

2010-07-15T07:54:10.641-05:00

Sadly, i don't think that many people like to learn new words. I'm generalizing but I notice on the web (as I do on reality tv) that there is a very conscious pride in ignorance and a very real anger at anything that challenges people to step outside their comfort zones.

It's not hard to miss the fact that in heated comments sections of polarizing reviews, SOMEONE will complain that the author is using "big words" to try and sound smart. Not because you know, words are very useful and sometimes larger ones have very specific meaning that might be just the right thing for the thought being conveyed. ;)

i personally don't get it (i love learning new words... i had to look up gaullimaufry the other day and IMMEDIATELY loved the word) but i see it enough to know that the ease in which you can obtain knowledge (hi Google!) does not deter people from not wanting to obtain it.

I've already said so in e-mail form, but I rea...

2010-07-15T06:39:50.153-05:00

I've already said so in e-mail form, but I really love you for writing this. Shone may pick on a few deserving targets in the piece, but his blanket dismissals and condescending chiding of internet critics for "trying to sound exactly like critics" -- as if none of them can reasonably be considered critics themselves, with or without the "internet" qualifier -- really stuck in my craw.

And yes, who doesn't gain from learning a new term now and then? I know I do. A few months ago, one commenter quite specifically instructed me to "scale back the vocabulary" because he wasn't familiar with the word "oleaginous" -- self-regarding verbosity is obviously not to be encouraged, but honestly, why would one want fewer words in one's life?

Hope Shone reads this, one way or another. At least a link to this post has surfaced on the original blog!

Yeah, everyone here's hit on the major points....

2010-07-15T03:19:08.002-05:00

Yeah, everyone here's hit on the major points. He sounds like the critics he's lambasting, and uses poor examples. Charging "mise en scene" as obfuscatory is one. Suggesting that most critics are trying to be Roger Ebert are another. And it's a laugh that he should stand back and sneer at all those "self-afflating" snobs. Hmm...

And Inception's mise en scene IS wonderful, though it's the only thing to recommend it (give or take its few attempts to critique the continuity editing system, and I don't mean the tired "wait for the flashback" opening).

For the record, I keep my Apple Dictionary open ev...

2010-07-15T00:47:06.977-05:00

For the record, I keep my Apple Dictionary open every time I make a visit to Nick's Flick Picks (you know, just in case)--which is, during the lazy summer months wherein I'm constantly tweaking my Netflix queue, at least a few times a day. And that's just fine.

In seriousness, though: I also had quite a hard time swallowing the crux of Shone's argument. To paraphrase, he suggests he might not be so miffed, "if only" "heathens" would "stor[m] the ivory tower" of film criticism? I could buy into his argument (or at least regard it as a genuine concern) if he weren't, in reality, writing from that very ivory tower. That he even has a scope that enables him to pontificate about a so-called "democratisation of film criticism" belies his seemingly democratic objectives. By suggesting that everyone "tries to sound exactly like a critic," he establishes the "critic" as something distinguishable (a label with which he adorns himself repeatedly on his profile) while complaining that others, no doubt less able really to understand or properly use jargony terminology--that is, no doubt less educated--merely try to sound like "critics," hoping, apparently futilely, to fit in that increasingly obscure category. So those wannabe-critic folks should be writing from their guts, then, I suppose, and not their heads, right? Instead of using--what was it?--"strangled self-conscious locution" (i.e., pretentious style) or "obfuscatory jargon" (i.e, confusing words), right? In order to... storm the ivory tower, right? What a snob.

Keep on writing, Nick. Love the site!

I like what you wrote but mostly regardless of Sho...

2010-07-14T23:55:02.722-05:00

I like what you wrote but mostly regardless of Shone's piece. I think you made a big deal something that was a minor point in his argument.

I didn't know the meaning of the term and looked it up in wikipedia (in addition to reading your definition) where I saw that he was kind of right when he wrote that everyone understands it differently.

Of course the point is more about whether a critic should use terms not widely known or not. I agree with you on that and I have to say I liked the fact that I learned something new about cinema. After all, it's not that hard in the age of the internet.

I do like ambition, eloquence and specificity in reviews but if Shone senses some kind of pretentiousness it's his right though he makes unfair generalizations.

Andrew - "Hey, that new movie it's the sh**. Lots of stuff blowing, up and stuff like that."

I don't think he means that way is the right one.

I completely disagree with him on the Ebert bit. Ebert's writing is elegant but quite simple.

In addition, though, (in theory) I understand that...

2010-07-14T17:35:40.663-05:00

In addition, though, (in theory) I understand that no one wants to read pretentious prose, but I don't really want to read conversational reviews either. "Hey, that new movie it's the sh**. Lots of stuff blowing, up and stuff like that."

No thank you. Not to be condescending, but isn't one of the tenets of growing older writing with a more mature tone? I don't know, I'm probably just as culpable; but I hate how people (Shone not being the first one) gripe about reviewers being too "full of themselves". Ugh. This probably makes me sound like a snob.

I'm feeling conflicted over his article too, I...

2010-07-14T17:26:51.916-05:00

I'm feeling conflicted over his article too, I was almost feeling where he was coming from, but like you said the climax of his argument makes the entire piece lose a bit of its credibility. Naturally, internet criticism has its negatives, but I hardly think people writing "pseudo-critically" is the biggest one. I like seeing words I don't know in review, doesn't everyone like learning new words?

I will say though, I was feeling a little he apparently does before I saw Toy Story 3 with the overwhelming buzz, and I think it's just good after seeing it. (Any chance of you reviewing that?) It made me think that perhaps there's too much of a mob-psychology with new reviews that we MUST love it...or else. Still, much to think about...