Takoma1 wrote: ↑
Wed Mar 18, 2020 5:32 pm
I can't speak to others who have criticized A Quiet Place
, and I'll take your word for it that there are people who are saying it's a bad movie or that it's entirely "ruined" by the plot elements we've discussed.
But I would say that my point of view on the film is far from "glass all empty". I have/had many nice things to say about the film. I wrote positively about it when I first viewed it. I think I gave it a B or B+ type rating.
It is true for me that having a certain number of issues with a film (not restricted to plot holes) does eventually push me out of the reality of the film. And once that happens, yes, any emotions or intellectual engagement I would have from the film falls flat for the most part. And I am hard pressed to think of (or recommend) a movie as being "good" if I was disengaged for a significant portion of it. To that extent, plot holes (or other issues) can be make-or-break.
I'm sure that there are people who went in to watching A Quiet Place
ready to hate it just because it had gotten praise. No doubt. And I'm equally sure that there are people who take more delight in criticizing and tearing down art than appreciating it and seeing it for the good that it has. But I'm in neither of those groups, and painting everyone who took issue with the film with the same brush is a bit reductive.
I told you in the other thread that my friend just cannot take seriously films/TV that incorrectly portray CPR (and further the purpose and effect of delivering a shock to someone's heart). I am familiar with both CPR and AED usage and I constantly see that it's being done wrong and I just don't care that much. So is she right and I'm wrong? Am I right and she's wrong? Every individual viewer has an independent experience of being immersed in a film and we can't police whether or not someone fails to connect with a film for the "wrong" reasons.
I'll give you some examples of "experience ruining" plot holes/issues (though that phrase is really dramatic--more like "pulled me out of the film, probably won't recommend it or rewatch it"):
1) Won't name the title. Mystery/thriller film. A masked killer is offing people. There are several sequences where we see the masked killer. He has very distinct eyes. They are so distinct that I realize which actor (because of course the killer is someone the detective knows, right?) it is. Only later in the film we find out the killer is a different character. A character who doesn't even have the same color eyes. I'm waiting for them to realize their mistake. Nope. We are supposed to get that this is the killer. This bothers me TREMENDOUSLY. Years later I read on the IMDb trivia page that in order to confuse the audience, Distinct-Eyes-Actor sometimes played the killer even though his character wasn't the killer at all. I totally call shenanigans on this and it does make me think negatively about the film.
I'm sorry if I seemed to lump you into the glass-all-empty crowd with that post, because that wasn't my intention at all, and I don't view you as just another Negative Nancy just looking to do nothing but complain about movies, because I know for a fact that that isn't true at all (and while I know we just discussed A Quiet Place
at length, me bringing it up again here wasn't meant as some shade-throwing sub-Tweet type thing; I genuinely just brought it up because it's become the foremost target in recent years of online nit-pick culture). I'm just tired of all the obnoxiously relentless negativity I see in general online, so I was aiming that post at the Jeremy Scotts of the world, and I'm sorry if I made you feel lumped in with those losers.
Anyway, as for the issue of whether or not it's legit to say that plot holes on their own fundamentally ruin movies, I still can't help but find it odd that, in general, I see people all the time saying that a hole ruined a film for them, but I've literally never
seen anyone say the opposite, that a movie was good because everything made sense; even in something as intricate, logical, and plot-driven as Chinatown
, I've never seen anyone say that about that particular film. Don't get me wrong, plot holes aren't a good thing, and the fewer of them a film has, the better, but they just seem like a minor issue that shouldn't be dwelled on, in order to get down to the true make-or-break elements of a film, because even Chinatown
has at least a couple of significant plot holes in it, showing how universal they really are in cinema. And anyway, as for your point about your friend who can't take movies seriously if they portray CPR incorrectly, no offense to her, but, assuming you meant that she can't like movies if they portray that technique improperly, then I would actually say that she is "wrong" to have that reaction, because that's a pretty insignificant reason to not like a movie for.
For instance, if the CPR scene in Hard Boiled
has medical inaccuracies in it, does that do significant damage to the overall excitement level of that Action movie? Does it diminish John Woo's incredible directorial style, the beautifully violent usage of slow-motion, or the fact that it has some of the most amazing action scenes of all time? Does that one moment do anything to lessen the inherent excitement of another scene where Chow Yun-fat shoots a goon off of a motorcycle with a shotgun, then leaps over the sliding vehicle and shoots the gas tank of another
motorcycle in mid-air as it pops a wheelie, causing it to blow the hell up? Of course not! It reminds me of the way that, whenever Neil deGrasse Tyson talks about movies, it exclusively only seems to be in order to criticize technical inaccuracies in Sci-Fi,
to the point that he's actually invented
non-existent mistakes in movies, like when he said that, in The Force Awakens
, a ball-shaped droid supposedly wouldn't have the traction to roll around on sand, ignoring the fact that "BB-88" was an actual prop that was actually rolling around on the sand on location there. It's like, I respect that you know so much more about science than I ever will, but if your main thought while the torrent of emotion was being unloaded during the montage at the end of Arrival
was that "Maybe the aliens didn't realize that they were writing their language backwards to the humans", then I can't say that I'm too interested in reading your film thoughts.
Anyway, as for the complaint about the eye-switcharoo with the masked killer, I've had similar issues with movies doing little "cheats" like that, like in Dressed To Kill
although I still can't say that that detail ruined that film for me, especially not when the fatal flaws run so much deeper than that one detail, like how obnoxiously sleazy, transphobic, and yes, even racist the film's sensibilities are in general, and no amount of detail-corrections could fix all of that
, of course.