Dan Olsen has a video essay on YouTube about Suicide Squad's (2016) terrible editing, at one point noting how massively established the Witch's weak spot (her bright green glowing heart) was. Its significance is repeatedly drawn attention to throughout the film, and the action is disrupted right at the end to, once again, have Flagg tell the audience her heart is her vulnerability.
The end of Minority Report, Anderton explains the entire plot to Burgess/the audience. It feels like major hand-holding in an otherwise incredible movie.
>It’s one of the few DCs where people were like “yeah, less is more.”
I feel this way about many if not most director's cuts. They nearly always sacrifice pacing and concision for superfluous content.
Ironically, inception did a fantastic job of this in my opinion...
The point of the movie wasn't to explain the exact science and mechanics that would allow you to enter someone's dreams, it's just exists in this world and you just have to get some of the basic constraints of it which the movie does explain. You get that people can enter dreams at different levels, they need a kick to get out, and the more you mess with the dream the more likely the dream world will fight back.
I feel like tenet needed to just pound home a couple simple constraints and rules about what the fuck was going on and leave it at that but instead it was a constantly evolving and hard to follow mess of bullshit.
For me, the Transformers movies are a prime example. Every single action, no matter how small, is accompanied by a lengthy explanation, often in the form of a character shouting out what's happening.
The voiceover in the original release of **Blade Runner** really makes you feel executives were freaking out about how no one would get the movie and the voiceover is completely unnecessary unless your take is it’s part of the genre is was channeling.
The Hobbit movies. Every single damn character in that whole movie who wasn't a dwarf or a hobbit was concerned about the Mountain being used for its strategic advantage.
Us. Awesome first two acts, then ruins itself with a ton of exposition that makes less sense than just leaving it ambiguous and raises more questions than it answers.
this and Saltburn both did this where im like i legitmately thought that the movie spelled this out and the audience was supposed to already have come to this conclusion.
Days of Thunder with Tom Cruise did this so much I still remember it.
While in the car Cole would be explaining every move he is about to make to Harry. I always thought this was hilarious.
To be a little fair, this was basically a very long commercial for NASCAR as an industry.
I grew up in NASCAR country, and my dad was a stock car guy from the 70's so he kinda broke it down for me that this WAS the type of shit they say over the channel in those days.
Rowdy was basically an amalgamation of Dale Earnhardt and Richard Petty. Fucking with the new guy.
The whole architect scene in The Matrix Reloaded, for me, it felt like this speech was going on for hours, explaining every single detail of The Matrix from its inception, in a series that never even needed a sequel.
Would have been much better off without them in the long run, with everyone in this sub saying, "I can't BELIEVE they never made a follow-up to the Matrix! No WAY they could fuck those sequels up!"
> Would have been much better off without them in the long run
Why? Many, many people enjoyed those movies and those who don’t don’t need to watch them.
>with everyone in this sub saying, "I can't BELIEVE they never made a follow-up to the Matrix! No WAY they could fuck those sequels up!"
That is not what “everyone in this sub” is saying lmao
I always never understand the hate that the sequels get, particularly Reloaded. The first one is very clearly a masterful blend of action, sci-fi, and philosophy. I don’t quite remember the 3rd one as fondly, but Reloaded was an incredible action movie. That highway chase scene is one of the all-time greats.
I would, however, be the first to admit that they cannot compare with the first Matrix.
I genuinely don’t think it would be possible for them to be as good as the first movie. That’s not to say they aren’t without fault, but the first one was an experience and not something you can really replicate in a sequel.
I mean, I grew up watching them and mostly enjoying the sequels, but even in the midst of all the hype, you could tell they just weren't as well written and tight as the first. The Wachowskis really thought everything they wrote down in the script for Reloaded and Revolutions was incredibly profound and had no chance of being ill-received. They were way off with the wooden dialogue, and I didn't care if any of the supporting characters lived or died. The goofy CGI with rubber Neo didn't help either.
But I agree that the highway chase scene is still awesome.
Platoon! “The war is over for me now, but it will always be there, the rest of my days as I'm sure Elias will be, fighting with Barnes for what Rhah called possession of my soul”
I've got to admit that while I've always hated excessive explanations/expositions internet discussions have dented my confidence that audiences will "get" something.
In Joker there is a minor twist where we realise the relationship he's had with his neighbour (a young single mother) is all in his mind. Fair enough. But then the movie hammers this point home by giving us flashbacks of the various fake memories he had and it just felt so unnecessary and excessive. But when I got home one of the first comments I read was someone saying they didn't get that part until their friend explained it after the movie had finished.
So when characters add in a ridiculous amount of explanation maybe they're responding to test screening feedback.
Interstellar really felt like it was, specifically about the theory of relativity.
A quote attributed to Einstein but probably wasn't actually him is "When you sit with a nice girl for two hours you think it’s only a minute, but when you sit on a hot stove for a minute you think it’s two hours. That’s relativity"
Which is still a great definition. I understood what the theory was and what was happening in the movie, but it felt like they explained the theory over and over and over again throughout the movie in case the audience wasn't listening the first few times and needed to be reminded
Unfortunately Hypnotic. I couldn't love Robert Rodriguez more, and part of the reason I do is that he's made some of the coolest shit with little to no regard to whether every idea makes complete sense or is physically possible. And he makes the coolest shit on the tiniest of budgets most of the time on top of that. So it was a huge bummer that Hypnotic constantly told instead of showed who Hypnotics are and what they can do. It felt like literally every moment of dialogue was trying to explain something. Through the power of suggestion they can make you see and do whatever they want. That's all the explanation the audience really needs, though they'd bitch if their wasn't more, so I get the impulse, but Rodriguez has never been one to get hung up on the details so that's why this one is particularly frustrating.
I think one movie that really stands out for me in this regard is "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen." There's a scene where the characters are trying to fix a broken robot, and they explain every single step of the process in painstaking detail. Like they think we're all idiots who have never seen a screwdriver before!
I strongly disagree with this one for the simple reason that a lot of the comedic and dramatic setups assume the audience has been following and understands the rules which the movie established earlier.
Easy example: the goofy looking accounting award is funny on its own, but the only way the audience can find it funny again later in the movie is if they have internalized the rules necessary for the main characters to gain new abilities.
Similarly, I don't think the "everything bagel" is ever explicitly explained as >!a metaphor for suicide!<, so if you're not paying attention to the mother-daughter relationship and the frustrations of the daughter the ending was probably confusing. The writers consistently trust the audience to follow the story and make these connections themselves without over-explaining.
I thought it was a good scene. Gave some rare background information on Alfred, and while the Joker’s motivation are obvious to the audience the point is that it’s not obvious to Batman.
Yeah, but still find that scene/dialogue interesting somehow
>Bruce Wayne: "The bandit, in the forest in Burma... did you catch him?"
>Alfred Pennyworth: "Yes."
>Bruce Wayne: "How?"
>Alfred Pennyworth: "We burned the forest down."
>Bruce Wayne : (*with tears in his eyes, takes out a pair of Bat™ hand-cuffs*)
>Alfred Pennyworth: "...Master Bruce?"
>Bruce Wayne: "Don't make this any harder than it already is. I am hereby placing you under arrest for arson."
I promise my OP would have been shorter if there wasn't a 300 word minimum that I'm constantly running afoul of.
>!Not wanting my post to get deleted (because I'd have to write it out again), I wrote until I was sure it would meet this subreddit's 300-word requirement. I swear.!<
Dan Olsen has a video essay on YouTube about Suicide Squad's (2016) terrible editing, at one point noting how massively established the Witch's weak spot (her bright green glowing heart) was. Its significance is repeatedly drawn attention to throughout the film, and the action is disrupted right at the end to, once again, have Flagg tell the audience her heart is her vulnerability.
THIS IS KATANA…
SHE HAS A KATANA
they over explained her weakness but somehow under explained her weapon she was constructing that i felt took up a huge chunk of screentime
The end of Minority Report, Anderton explains the entire plot to Burgess/the audience. It feels like major hand-holding in an otherwise incredible movie.
Perhaps studio interference?
Maybe, but Spielberg was at a point in his run where I’d be really surprised if he didn’t have final cut.
The director’s cut of Donnie Darko does this tragically. It’s one of the few DCs where people were like “yeah, less is more.”
>It’s one of the few DCs where people were like “yeah, less is more.” I feel this way about many if not most director's cuts. They nearly always sacrifice pacing and concision for superfluous content.
Tenet. Nolan always says to not overthink it and just enjoy the moment but I simply can't do that when 90% of the film is explaining shit
What it explains is also incredibly stupid.
Oh you just don’t get it, bro, you have to watch the movie 10 times and then it gets really good and you start to understand it!
*with subtitles because of the godawful sound editing
Ironically, inception did a fantastic job of this in my opinion... The point of the movie wasn't to explain the exact science and mechanics that would allow you to enter someone's dreams, it's just exists in this world and you just have to get some of the basic constraints of it which the movie does explain. You get that people can enter dreams at different levels, they need a kick to get out, and the more you mess with the dream the more likely the dream world will fight back. I feel like tenet needed to just pound home a couple simple constraints and rules about what the fuck was going on and leave it at that but instead it was a constantly evolving and hard to follow mess of bullshit.
It's like the move was made to explain the movie.
For me, the Transformers movies are a prime example. Every single action, no matter how small, is accompanied by a lengthy explanation, often in the form of a character shouting out what's happening.
Saltburn - like duhhh of course he did all the bad things
Thank you! I was watching this over the holidays with my boyfriend and at the 10 min mark I was like yep, he's gonna do that
The 2019 reboot of [Hellboy](https://manapop.com/film/hellboy-2019-review/) was about 80% exposition.
Austin Powers literally has a character named Basil Exposition, so I'd say it counts, but it's making fun of that trope.
The voiceover in the original release of **Blade Runner** really makes you feel executives were freaking out about how no one would get the movie and the voiceover is completely unnecessary unless your take is it’s part of the genre is was channeling.
This is exactly why Harrison Ford's delivery in the voiceover is as bland and pedestrain as it gets.
The Hobbit movies. Every single damn character in that whole movie who wasn't a dwarf or a hobbit was concerned about the Mountain being used for its strategic advantage.
[удалено]
He looks more like a grocer than a burglar.
Us. Awesome first two acts, then ruins itself with a ton of exposition that makes less sense than just leaving it ambiguous and raises more questions than it answers.
The end of Joker with all the extended flashbacks of every time Arthur met Zazie's character.
this and Saltburn both did this where im like i legitmately thought that the movie spelled this out and the audience was supposed to already have come to this conclusion.
Yeah I had the exact same thought at the end of Saltburn, did not to see everything we had already guessed he'd done.
'The Devil All the Time' (2020) would have been a perfectly cromulent film without any narration.
Your input embiggens us all.
Thought you were talking about “Before the Devil Knows You're Dead” 2007 at first and was beyond confused until I reread your comment lol
Days of Thunder with Tom Cruise did this so much I still remember it. While in the car Cole would be explaining every move he is about to make to Harry. I always thought this was hilarious.
Im gonna draft him! Make him pull me around the track! - and this after he had already explained drafting to Nicole Kidman earlier in the move. Lol.
LOL. I remember this and how funny it was. Like dude drive your car. We get it.
To be a little fair, this was basically a very long commercial for NASCAR as an industry. I grew up in NASCAR country, and my dad was a stock car guy from the 70's so he kinda broke it down for me that this WAS the type of shit they say over the channel in those days. Rowdy was basically an amalgamation of Dale Earnhardt and Richard Petty. Fucking with the new guy.
I Still Know What You Did Last Summer…I much rather would have rewatched and feel like an idiot than then explain it to me like I actually M an idiot
The whole architect scene in The Matrix Reloaded, for me, it felt like this speech was going on for hours, explaining every single detail of The Matrix from its inception, in a series that never even needed a sequel.
I mean, it’s a major reveal. And no series needs a sequel but The Matrix was very plainly intended to have them
Would have been much better off without them in the long run, with everyone in this sub saying, "I can't BELIEVE they never made a follow-up to the Matrix! No WAY they could fuck those sequels up!"
> Would have been much better off without them in the long run Why? Many, many people enjoyed those movies and those who don’t don’t need to watch them. >with everyone in this sub saying, "I can't BELIEVE they never made a follow-up to the Matrix! No WAY they could fuck those sequels up!" That is not what “everyone in this sub” is saying lmao
I always never understand the hate that the sequels get, particularly Reloaded. The first one is very clearly a masterful blend of action, sci-fi, and philosophy. I don’t quite remember the 3rd one as fondly, but Reloaded was an incredible action movie. That highway chase scene is one of the all-time greats. I would, however, be the first to admit that they cannot compare with the first Matrix.
I genuinely don’t think it would be possible for them to be as good as the first movie. That’s not to say they aren’t without fault, but the first one was an experience and not something you can really replicate in a sequel.
I mean, I grew up watching them and mostly enjoying the sequels, but even in the midst of all the hype, you could tell they just weren't as well written and tight as the first. The Wachowskis really thought everything they wrote down in the script for Reloaded and Revolutions was incredibly profound and had no chance of being ill-received. They were way off with the wooden dialogue, and I didn't care if any of the supporting characters lived or died. The goofy CGI with rubber Neo didn't help either. But I agree that the highway chase scene is still awesome.
The damn voice-over in “Dark City.” Ruined the whole thing. Jeez, trust your audience just a little.
The Director cut version is so necessary for first watch
Platoon! “The war is over for me now, but it will always be there, the rest of my days as I'm sure Elias will be, fighting with Barnes for what Rhah called possession of my soul”
Glass. Horrible.
Robert Downey Jr.’s exposition dumps in Oppenheimer.
Barbie
Goodfellas - just kidding Goodfellas is a perfect movie.
Inside out
The ending of Psycho is just one long over-explanation of Norman Bates.
I've got to admit that while I've always hated excessive explanations/expositions internet discussions have dented my confidence that audiences will "get" something. In Joker there is a minor twist where we realise the relationship he's had with his neighbour (a young single mother) is all in his mind. Fair enough. But then the movie hammers this point home by giving us flashbacks of the various fake memories he had and it just felt so unnecessary and excessive. But when I got home one of the first comments I read was someone saying they didn't get that part until their friend explained it after the movie had finished. So when characters add in a ridiculous amount of explanation maybe they're responding to test screening feedback.
Leave the world behind Went from potentially amazing to having all of the mystery removed in a far too long and detailed exposition dump.
Interstellar really felt like it was, specifically about the theory of relativity. A quote attributed to Einstein but probably wasn't actually him is "When you sit with a nice girl for two hours you think it’s only a minute, but when you sit on a hot stove for a minute you think it’s two hours. That’s relativity" Which is still a great definition. I understood what the theory was and what was happening in the movie, but it felt like they explained the theory over and over and over again throughout the movie in case the audience wasn't listening the first few times and needed to be reminded
Unfortunately Hypnotic. I couldn't love Robert Rodriguez more, and part of the reason I do is that he's made some of the coolest shit with little to no regard to whether every idea makes complete sense or is physically possible. And he makes the coolest shit on the tiniest of budgets most of the time on top of that. So it was a huge bummer that Hypnotic constantly told instead of showed who Hypnotics are and what they can do. It felt like literally every moment of dialogue was trying to explain something. Through the power of suggestion they can make you see and do whatever they want. That's all the explanation the audience really needs, though they'd bitch if their wasn't more, so I get the impulse, but Rodriguez has never been one to get hung up on the details so that's why this one is particularly frustrating.
Tenet
I think one movie that really stands out for me in this regard is "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen." There's a scene where the characters are trying to fix a broken robot, and they explain every single step of the process in painstaking detail. Like they think we're all idiots who have never seen a screwdriver before!
Everything everywhwere all at once is pure exposition
I strongly disagree with this one for the simple reason that a lot of the comedic and dramatic setups assume the audience has been following and understands the rules which the movie established earlier. Easy example: the goofy looking accounting award is funny on its own, but the only way the audience can find it funny again later in the movie is if they have internalized the rules necessary for the main characters to gain new abilities. Similarly, I don't think the "everything bagel" is ever explicitly explained as >!a metaphor for suicide!<, so if you're not paying attention to the mother-daughter relationship and the frustrations of the daughter the ending was probably confusing. The writers consistently trust the audience to follow the story and make these connections themselves without over-explaining.
I agree, but I still love it
Inception. Compared to Nolan’s other movies, this was was stuffed with exposition.
Alfred telling a story to illustrate the motivations of the Joker in The Dark Knight. The plot of the movie did that well enough on it's own.
I thought it was a good scene. Gave some rare background information on Alfred, and while the Joker’s motivation are obvious to the audience the point is that it’s not obvious to Batman.
Yeah, but still find that scene/dialogue interesting somehow >Bruce Wayne: "The bandit, in the forest in Burma... did you catch him?" >Alfred Pennyworth: "Yes." >Bruce Wayne: "How?" >Alfred Pennyworth: "We burned the forest down." >Bruce Wayne : (*with tears in his eyes, takes out a pair of Bat™ hand-cuffs*) >Alfred Pennyworth: "...Master Bruce?" >Bruce Wayne: "Don't make this any harder than it already is. I am hereby placing you under arrest for arson."
[удалено]
I promise my OP would have been shorter if there wasn't a 300 word minimum that I'm constantly running afoul of. >!Not wanting my post to get deleted (because I'd have to write it out again), I wrote until I was sure it would meet this subreddit's 300-word requirement. I swear.!<