Comments on: Atonement is this year's Crash http://nofilmschool.com/2008/02/atonement-is-this-years-crash/ NoFilmSchool is a site for DIY filmmakers and independent creatives. Wed, 23 May 2012 05:04:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: keegan http://nofilmschool.com/2008/02/atonement-is-this-years-crash/comment-page-1/#comment-62029 keegan Wed, 20 Feb 2008 13:40:14 +0000 http://nofilmschool.com/2008/02/atonement-is-this-years-crash/#comment-62029 Well written comments, interesting perspective. I loved the film, but I don't disagree with you. I just seemed more willing to suspend disbelief I suppose, and because i was so enjoying the *craft* of the film, the typewriter soundtrack, the editing, the shots, the directing decisions, I forgave all story faults. This leads me to believe that its not just the story, but also the craft: acting, lighting, editing, etc. that creates an emotional reaction to a film. My emotional ride in this case seemed more fueled by marveling at these things than being presented with a leak-proof story. But, i admit that when highly recommending this film to others I always did so with the disclaimer, "Well, the story is not all that great, but the way they crafted the film and the ride it takes you on is phenomenal." Also interestingly, Crash was easily my favorite film of 2004, and I'd say is currently in my top 5 favorites. But, I also agree with you about the story there. I just didn't believe that, for instance, a shop owner would straight out ignore a recommendation by a locksmith regarding the safety of his store. Much of the story felt very contrived. This again leads me to the effect the craft of the film must have had on me to get me to ignore a presumptuous and forced storyline. The dialogue, the performances, the soundtrack, the editing, the weaving of the different characters together. In my opinion, this was all top notch. Maybe this is my film study eye adding meaning where there is none, but I think more likely all these things create conscious and subconscious effects on the viewer. In a movie where the level of craft is high, we enjoy the ride more and so maybe can forgive or suspend disbelief of minor story blemishes. I'll watch and enjoy anything Johnny Depp is in, even if the movie is trash. Speaking of contrived, what about that TV show "Lost"? People are NUTS over it. Clearly the only point of every episode of that show is to get to you watch the next episode or weather the commercial break. This seems pointless and stupid. This is all very similar to why I recommend people check out "The West Side." Not because I think the story is this watertight masterpiece--with only two episodes out, its impossible to really comment on the story. But that's not what is attractive about it. It's the look, the feel, the soundtrack, the premise--all awesome. i think people can enjoy even just one episode on its own, without really knowing what is going on. Because the world created is so interesting and the style is so strong. There's my $0.02. I don't think I've ever responded to a Blog post before. You must have struck a chord. Well written comments, interesting perspective. I loved the film, but I don’t disagree with you. I just seemed more willing to suspend disbelief I suppose, and because i was so enjoying the *craft* of the film, the typewriter soundtrack, the editing, the shots, the directing decisions, I forgave all story faults. This leads me to believe that its not just the story, but also the craft: acting, lighting, editing, etc. that creates an emotional reaction to a film. My emotional ride in this case seemed more fueled by marveling at these things than being presented with a leak-proof story. But, i admit that when highly recommending this film to others I always did so with the disclaimer, “Well, the story is not all that great, but the way they crafted the film and the ride it takes you on is phenomenal.”

Also interestingly, Crash was easily my favorite film of 2004, and I’d say is currently in my top 5 favorites. But, I also agree with you about the story there. I just didn’t believe that, for instance, a shop owner would straight out ignore a recommendation by a locksmith regarding the safety of his store. Much of the story felt very contrived. This again leads me to the effect the craft of the film must have had on me to get me to ignore a presumptuous and forced storyline. The dialogue, the performances, the soundtrack, the editing, the weaving of the different characters together. In my opinion, this was all top notch. Maybe this is my film study eye adding meaning where there is none, but I think more likely all these things create conscious and subconscious effects on the viewer. In a movie where the level of craft is high, we enjoy the ride more and so maybe can forgive or suspend disbelief of minor story blemishes. I’ll watch and enjoy anything Johnny Depp is in, even if the movie is trash.

Speaking of contrived, what about that TV show “Lost”? People are NUTS over it. Clearly the only point of every episode of that show is to get to you watch the next episode or weather the commercial break. This seems pointless and stupid.

This is all very similar to why I recommend people check out “The West Side.” Not because I think the story is this watertight masterpiece–with only two episodes out, its impossible to really comment on the story. But that’s not what is attractive about it. It’s the look, the feel, the soundtrack, the premise–all awesome. i think people can enjoy even just one episode on its own, without really knowing what is going on. Because the world created is so interesting and the style is so strong.

There’s my $0.02. I don’t think I’ve ever responded to a Blog post before. You must have struck a chord.

]]>