I’m pondering the nature of form over substance within visual media.
I went to see Promare today, it had a limited run in a local theater. And despite being utterly devoid of anything I’d consider “substance” I very much enjoyed it.
Which got me thinking. What is required for a movie to be good on spectacle alone?
And where is the delineation between a popcorn flick, where the movie is mostly spectacle but feels hollow, and one that is mostly spectacle yet still feels fulfilling to watch?
I’ve noticed that it’s more common with animation. Exceptional animation seems to bouy a movie better than a live action film of the same level of cheese.
There is something to be said about the fact that movies are, at their cores, visual and auditory art. They are stories, of course, but stories conveyed almost entirely with motion and sound. And when the motion and sound are extremely good, there is a tipping point where we are willing to forgive a distinct lack of structure.
I’m just not sure what that threshold is, and what constitutes its parts.