Muad'Dib 1,802 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Just for fun... Which one do you prefer? I think I like Narnia 3 a little better, but neither are that remarkable as we expected. At least, from my point of view.Let the rant begin!Edit: Scores, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 I'll give the edge to Narnia 3 too (scores NOT the movies) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crocodile 8,017 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Potter is still more interesting. They both lack something that you might call "a genuine heart and soul", but there is more going on in DH. Narnia is nice, I guess, but quite "obvious" at the same time.If there is something I learned from these scores is that I'm not interested in the fantasy genre anymore. It is simply too limited and people involved play it too safe. At least these days. And if have to pick something from the genre, I generally find my enjoyment in smaller and more off-kilter scores. Like Parnassus, for example. Which is better than either one of them.Karol - who enjoys both to some degree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scallenger 483 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Is this for score or film? Or both as a whole? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taikomochi 1,136 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 I'd take any Potter film over any Narnia film any day. The Narnia films almost certainly wouldn't have been made if not for Harry Potter(and Lord of the Rings) anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joelparnis 0 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Go check the tomato meter for any of the HP films vs any of the narnia films. There's your answer.And if we're talking about the scores, i'd still vote DH... but just by a hair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Penna 3,690 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Based on listening so far, definitely Potter.And I'd agree with crocodile that fantasy scores are becoming less interesting because the composers aren't allowed to really let themselves go and have fun. A lot of Narnia is inspired, but then Arnold goes and inserts a predictable passage, possibly where Apted asked for something.DH on the other hand just never bores me, and often surprises with its direction. It's definitely the fresher score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckM 1 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Wait, are we talking about the scores or the movies?Assuming it's the movies, this is a truly difficult choice. I love both franchises (and both books). The storyline in HP7a is maybe a bit more interesting, but then it is currently incomplete. And I am far more in line with the beliefs portrayed in Narnia.Both were excellent movie adaptations but in different ways—HP7a being relatively exact to the book and VotDT being a very well done plot adjustment.As for the scores, there's no question that Arnold wins this one. Desplat's score still just doesn't do anything for me. Edit: And Zimmer's works wonders in the film but is purely grating on its own.Then there's the simple fact that Narnia is C.S. Lewis. It's perhaps a bit of a personal bias, but Lewis is just about my favorite author.So I'm going to go with The Dawn Treader but not by much.Then there's Inception—fantastic movie, probably the best this year, but is it really fair to put it in this poll? Doesn't seem to fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 were talking about the scores for the movies HP7 by a million miles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckM 1 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 were talking about the scores Oh well. In that case, just read the fourth line of my post. My same vote still stands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Inception, since you gave me the option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 VOTDT gave me several eargasms. DH did not. Although Inception cured my insomnia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indy4 155 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 I can't vote, as I haven't heard Narnia. But, I agree that Inception > DH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fommes 153 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Thanks for including the Inception option! Had a good laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Inception = Most overrated movie of the last several years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samuel Walters 0 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 I tend to agree that Inception (both the film and the score) is overrated. The film itself has a *lot* going on ... but the mindless slow-mo action sequences just when the film should be getting interesting kills the overall effect for me. And I agree with Chuck that Zimmer's score works very well in the film, but as a soundtrack album ... not so much.As for Potter vs. Narnia soundtracks, I give the nod to Potter. VotDT certainly is much more grandiose, which I like, but it feels like more style than substance to me. DH1 has more substance than style and, comparatively speaking, is much more engaging to listen to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uni 306 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Inception = Most overrated movie of the last several yearsHardly. It was most original and well-executed film in ages. And that's about all I can comment on in this thread, since I haven't seen (or heard) HP7 or Dawn Treader yet.- Uni Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Part of it's "complexity" is just bad storytelling. Your not supposed to see a movie several times to fully get it's main plot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckM 1 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Part of it's "complexity" is just bad storytelling. Your not supposed to see a movie several times to fully get it's main plotI absolutely disagree. Those are the best type of films. If everything is fully apparent the first time around, there isn't much left to make you want to rewatch it right away. I like movies that force me to pay close attention and really think to understand them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koray Savas 2,251 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 The film really isn't that hard to follow. There's just so much to explain, that if you miss something or don't understand, you're gonna fall behind. Most of the dialogue is pure exposition, it shouldn't be a big problem. Anyway, the third act is one of the most gripping and entertaining sequences I've seen in a long time. The hotel fight still amazes me.I at least hope you guys appreciate Nolan's lack of everything CGI a la Michael Bay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 I find Nolan's movies (this and TDK) do a poor job at exposing the plot/story and the action sequences are non thrillingHe's definitely not in my top directors at the moment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 I still don't understand what was so difficult about TDK's plot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckM 1 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Yeah, that one was pretty easy to get the first time around. Although, there is plenty of deeper stuff (the stuff not essential to the plot) to be gleaned on multiple viewings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 it was the way the scenes were set upLike the multiple bank robberies at the beginning .You don't really know where everyone is or what they're doing. why is the Scarecrow there? why are there fake batmans? the editing isn't clear.your kind of shuffling all this in your head and lose attention to what's going on on screenand don't get me started on the night goggle thingy near the end of the film Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Yeah, that one was pretty easy to get the first time around. Although, there is plenty of deeper stuff (the stuff not essential to the plot) to be gleaned on multiple viewings.But it doesn't detract from the initial viewing.it was the way the scenes were set upLike the multiple bank robberies at the beginning .You don't really know where everyone is or what they're doing. why is the Scarecrow there? why are there fake batmans? the editing isn't clear.The multiple Batman's are vigilantes and the Scarecrow, while unnecessary, is to tie up his character's arc from BB.The bank robberies are for the Joker to establish his power and throw a wrench into things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 yes I know that afterwards. I said it was a mess the way it was presented and distracted me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 and don't get me started on the night goggle thingy near the end of the filmNight goggles?Batman was using them to see who were the hostages and who were the Joker's henchmen.yes I know that afterwards. I said it was a mess the way it was presented and distracted meI thought it was clear from the start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 and in Nolan films they'll like show you a half second shot of an object on a table or something written on a piece of paper a character is holding and if you somehow missed it , you screwed understanding the next 20 minutes of the film Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Nolan tends to excel in speeding you along at a breakneck plot-pace and keeping you entirely gripped whilst ever so slightly confuddled. I find myself backtracking in my mind during key moments, hastily tying plot threads together and managing (mostly) to come to the correct conclusions. It's part of the fun, I guess.And then you have Inception, which was just conceited shite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crocodile 8,017 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Here we go again. Karol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uni 306 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Part of it's "complexity" is just bad storytelling. Your not supposed to see a movie several times to fully get it's main plotNor do you have to, at least in this case. My wife and I followed every turn of the plot from beginning to end. We even knew exactly how it was going to end halfway through the film (as soon as DiCaprio started describing what Limbo was). Not that it detracted from the film at all; it was watching how they pulled it off that made the story so much fun. Of course, we didn't understand everything that was happening at the beginning of the movie . . . but that's also what made it great. Too many filmmakers feel they have to explain everything expositorially so they don't lose the audience. They hand you everything preconstructed and wrapped with a bow. Some of us still enjoy engaging our brains at the cinema. We like learning about something as we're watching it (the same thing goes for good books). And that's what this one did so well. It was like working a good puzzle: Nolan & Co. put the pieces on the table one at a time and allowed you to connect them in whatever order you wanted. Gradually the picture came into focus--and what a picture it was.That's not bad storytelling at all. Quite the opposite, in fact. . . . - Uni Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus 5,399 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Of course, we didn't understand everything that was happening at the beginning of the movie . . . but that's also what made it great. Too many filmmakers feel they have to explain everything expositorially so they don't lose the audience.I found Inception to be terribly bloated with exposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naïve Old Fart 9,533 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Yeah, that one was pretty easy to get the first time around. Although, there is plenty of deeper stuff (the stuff not essential to the plot) to be gleaned on multiple viewings.What on Earth is "deep" about a murderous psychopath going around slaughtering people? As for the stuff not essential to the plot: what's it doing there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crocodile 8,017 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 Of course, we didn't understand everything that was happening at the beginning of the movie . . . but that's also what made it great. Too many filmmakers feel they have to explain everything expositorially so they don't lose the audience.I found Inception to be terribly bloated with exposition.Welcome to the heist/caper genre, mate. Part of it's "complexity" is just bad storytelling. Your not supposed to see a movie several times to fully get it's main plotNor do you have to, at least in this case. My wife and I followed every turn of the plot from beginning to end. We even knew exactly how it was going to end halfway through the film (as soon as DiCaprio started describing what Limbo was). Not that it detracted from the film at all; it was watching how they pulled it off that made the story so much fun. Of course, we didn't understand everything that was happening at the beginning of the movie . . . but that's also what made it great. Too many filmmakers feel they have to explain everything expositorially so they don't lose the audience. They hand you everything preconstructed and wrapped with a bow. Some of us still enjoy engaging our brains at the cinema. We like learning about something as we're watching it (the same thing goes for good books). And that's what this one did so well. It was like working a good puzzle: Nolan & Co. put the pieces on the table one at a time and allowed you to connect them in whatever order you wanted. Gradually the picture came into focus--and what a picture it was.That's not bad storytelling at all. Quite the opposite, in fact. . . . - UniI just finished my seventh viewing and it all makes even more sense. People complain that the dreams are too... mundane and such. And yes, there is some explanation about it being important for the team to complete the task. But there is also different purpose, much more obvious. Nolan said he was obsessed with creating a "dream feeling". That it feels real but at the same time not really. It's just after the fact you just realize how ridiculous it is. The film does the same. The levels seem realistic, but they're not. And if you watch closely there are some things that just don't make sense if you think about it. The most obvious being the hospital in the third level. It just doesn't make sense to create fortress like this, does it? And yet it taps into what's the subject is thinking (Fisher character) at this point. He knows he's dreaming and that he tries to break into somebody else's subconcious. Hence the Bond feel. But, still, it is a hospital. So the architect did a good job to make subject feel as an active participant. It replicates what dreams do pretty well. And yet the film is very coherent, tone-wise. Brilliant!Another thing I notice (unintentional, I guess) is that at the end Cobb did the same thing to Saito that he did to his wife. Cruel and ironic.Yeah, that one was pretty easy to get the first time around. Although, there is plenty of deeper stuff (the stuff not essential to the plot) to be gleaned on multiple viewings.What on Earth is "deep" about a murderous psychopath going around slaughtering people? As for the stuff not essential to the plot: what's it doing there?You see... exactly nothing! That's the point. It is just the catalyst that moves everything else around. Nolan compared it to the shark in Jaws. Joker is a McGuffin and the least important element of the plot.Michael must regret his choice to even mention Inception in the poll. Karol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bondo 33 Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 I would've picked NARNIA if it weren't for Inception... :cool:Otherwise, Narnia is leaps and bounds above Harry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted December 14, 2010 Share Posted December 14, 2010 Well I'm off to see Narnia ,so I can make a real choice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demondm810 399 Posted December 14, 2010 Share Posted December 14, 2010 Inception>Narnia>Potter::ducks:: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted December 14, 2010 Share Posted December 14, 2010 Inception doesn't belong in this poll. Now's it's skewed the results like Ross Perot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488 Posted December 14, 2010 Share Posted December 14, 2010 For some reason, I lost all interest in seeing the new Harry Potters! I've theorized it has to do with two things:1. The Wizarding World at Universal. I literally went to Hogwarts. That experience has ruined the movies for me. They seem dull in comparison and I feel I've gotten everything I possibly could from Harry Potter with the exception of sex with the Kerri Greene lookalike. But I'm working on it since she moved to my town for some reason.2. God hasn't composed the music since movie 3. He and his crazy trailer music was a major (well, main) reason I went to see the original movie. It's possibly (probably) the best thing to come out of the Harry Potter franchise, with the exception of getting young people reading again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Mark 3,631 Posted December 14, 2010 Share Posted December 14, 2010 holy shit what a total waste of time that was (Dawn Trader the movie) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt C 454 Posted December 14, 2010 Share Posted December 14, 2010 Why isn't there a 'both' option? I liked both scores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now