# Why All Movies Are The Same

## Метаданные

- **Канал:** Now You See It
- **YouTube:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Qb-4wgpU8o
- **Источник:** https://ekstraktznaniy.ru/video/41098

## Транскрипт

### Segment 1 (00:00 - 05:00) []

look at this ah it's beautiful i like this one the door one dog goes one way and the other dog goes the other way have you ever noticed how many movies poke fun at art took me like three hours to finish the shading on your upper lip lots of movies make fun of art and the artist especially highbrow contemporary art there's that age-old gag where someone confuses an everyday object for a modern work of art criticism of contemporary art does make sense since it's so much more interpretive and high concept when compared to a typical movie when people try to interpret modern abstract art it often feels like they're just making it up honeymoon and that's one of the many reasons why this scene in goodfellas is so hilarious he doesn't attempt some pseudo-intellectual criticism he just describes what's in the painting but when it comes to movies poking fun at art and art criticism there is a bit of a contradiction going on here right in betelgeuse nobody takes delays sculptures seriously and the bizarre house remodeling gets played for laughs i know just as much about the supernatural as i do about interior design but both the sculptures and the house fit the aesthetic of the overall film in a way the film is making fun of not just the characters taste but also the over-the-top style of the film itself there's a sort of meta self-deprecation going on here a film like parasite will make fun of over analyzing art but also invite the viewer to do the exact same thing in the movie itself whether intentional or not making fun of contemporary art within a contemporary film exposes a crucial element of filmmaking when it comes to making movies the people making them are a little biased of course filmmakers aren't going to be interested in abstract art because they've devoted their lives to working in perhaps the most populous art form there is movies you want to go to the movies yep every movie has one thing in common they're made by people who make movies let's see how this obvious yet overlooked idea might add a fresh new understanding to some classic films and give us insight into the limitations of film itself how's everybody going in 1992 snl ran a sketch that made fun of old school observational comedy here's our opening question what's the deal with airplane food and now decades later has remained an iconic phrase that people use to make fun of stand-up comedy cliches you know what don't get no respect airplane food i think this phrase has remained relevant because to this day pretty much every single comedian at some point in their career has made a joke about air travel i'm sure your favorite comedian has done it at least once it's such a popular topic that the laugh factory youtube channel even has its own compilation of comedians just making airline jokes so why is that is there something about air travel that's just universally funny or does the frequency of those jokes have more to do with the comedians themselves think about it if you're a working comedian and there isn't a global pandemic going on your life consists of flying around to different cities to perform stand-up a comedian's job depends on air travel so when they make jokes about it they're sticking to what they know and filmmakers do the same thing in the form of the film within a film genre contains movies about writing and directing like a comedian constantly flying a filmmaker is constantly working to get a movie made so a movie about that process is sticking to what they know the genre has been popular since the beginning of hollywood one of the more recent examples is menk a movie about writing the screenplay for the movie citizen kane which itself has a film within a film in the form of a documentary about charles foster kane and citizen kane is itself a movie all about different forms of mass media including filmmaking theater and journalism just like many other critically acclaimed films of the last 10 best picture winners six prominently feature movies television theater or journalism and that's no coincidence it makes sense that oscar voters would vote for movies about industries they participate in and it makes sense that filmmakers would gravitate to telling stories they're inherently familiar with on the surface it does seem somewhat uninspiring that a screenwriter would just write a story about their own job many of these films have the exact same tropes like the writer dealing with writer's block or the struggle over whether or not to have a happy ending but like any genre filmmakers have found ways to experiment with this formula in barton fink a playwright moves to hollywood to write a screenplay the film has the classic film within a film tropes but it uses them in a unique way fink claims to want to write about the common man yet he ignores his neighbor who happens to know exactly what he needs as roger eber pointed out the film could be read as an analogy to the rise of fascism in europe the film takes place at the start of world war ii and fink a jewish leftist intellectual ignores the appeal of fascism to the common man until it's too late the film is intentionally ambiguous enough to not have such a clear-cut interpretation but regardless the surprising twists and turns of barton

### Segment 2 (05:00 - 10:00) [5:00]

fink show how a film about writing a screenplay can be about much more than the screenplay itself martin fink shows that the filmmaking process can represent different ideas but more films actually do the reverse they don't use filmmaking as a metaphor for they use something else filmmaking take parasite which is not about making movies or about the entertainment industry but about a poor family trying to scheme their way into jobs working for a wealthier family in perhaps the most well-known segment of the film we see the filmmaker's bias break through the elaborate execution of the peach fuzz heist requires perfect acting choreography and direction in other words the kim family puts on a performance they even use the same language a director the film has nothing to do with cinema directly yet the characters act like filmmakers to show who's in control in this sequence the family directs the heist so the camera follows their movements precisely it's only later in the film when their plan begins to unravel that the camera follows behind them unable to see what will happen next and later other people become the directors of the family's movement it makes sense that a film director would use something like control of the camera to represent a character being in control because that's precisely how a film director's control plays out on a film set even set pieces in parasite contain elements of filmmaking bong joon ho said they purposefully built the giant glass window in cinemascope ratio to make it feel like the characters are watching a film screen making this window so cinematic further contrasts it with the very uncinematic windows in the semi-underground department when people call things cinematic they're describing moments that feel perfectly suited for cinema and what's more suited for cinema than these film within a film moments where the movie pushes the art form to its limits and we can feel the presence of the movie makers themselves the thing about there will be blood um there was really no cinematic set pieces in the movie well then i saw the film again and i was completely wrong that the putting out of the oil fire is absolutely positively a set piece it's a brilliant cinematic set piece this scene in there will be blood feels so cinematic in part because like parasite it has elements of a film within a film look at how daniel plainview moves his arms in this shot to direct his crew to add explosives to the fire he might as well be saying action throughout the film plainview fulfills the role of a director or a producer like a producer he has to seek out funding for his project and like a director he manages the construction of his set and gives orders to his crew eli sunday is another director he literally directs a congregation and he serves as the main antagonist in the film because he challenges the directorial authority of plane view notice how throughout the film whichever character is in control is the one directing the other character once you start looking for these film within a film moments you start to see them everywhere consider one of the most cinematic films of all time 2001 a space odyssey the monolith went through several designs before kubrick settled on the iconic black slab is it a coincidence that like the window in parasite the monolith is the same shape as a film screen and we get this shot where the monolith literally becomes the screen we're watching not only that but how is the shape of the other most cinematic object a camera maybe these were coincidences 2001 has dozens of totally valid interpretations but when you recognize that any filmmaker's personal life revolves around filmmaking doesn't it make sense that they would construct objects and plot elements in their films based on what they know i'm not saying that all these filmmakers intentionally tried to make a film within a film but what i am saying is like a comedian talking about air travel a film set is full of people whose profession is making movies so they will inevitably bring that perspective into their creative choices that perspective also explains why movies make fun of contemporary art it's because it's a completely different art form it's no surprise that the populist medium of movies will disregard the exclusive and pretentious art scene and instead focus on characters and set pieces that relate back to filmmaking itself when it comes to art artists tend to express what they know and not just in movies authors like stephen king often write about writers like in king's novels the shining and misery but what makes filmmaking stand out is that it's a competitive highly specialized industry full of nepotism most successful filmmakers have to devote their lives to their craft as a result the people who make movies tend to make a career out of it and that means we'll always get the perspective of that hard-working career filmmaker the drawback to this phenomenon is that we often get stuck with a particular archetype take lala land a film about a musician and an actress the two main characters are obsessed with trying to break into their industries to the point that they can't make time for each other it's the classic archetype of the down on their luck artist devoting their lives to do what they're destined to do and that archetype doesn't just exist in movies about artists interstellar is about a mission in space but the life of the main character feels similar to the life of a director he's a person called to perform his craft at the expense of being unable to see his family for long periods of time because of the nature of being a devoted artist we'll tend to get lots of grand

### Segment 3 (10:00 - 12:00) [10:00]

movies about fulfilling one's destiny and less movies about how the vast majority of people live their lives the truth is most of life isn't cinematic it's mostly just people trying to get by that's why i'll always appreciate low budget less cinematic movies films like nomad land and moonlight don't revolve around people trying to make it the films instead find the beauty and tragedy in everyday living and yet even those movies have cinematic moments every movie is the same because every movie is made by people who make movies that sounds extremely obvious and meaningless at first but understanding that reality is absolutely crucial to understanding cinema as an art form but you know another reason why every movie is the same because you can enjoy all of them without having to think about any of this stuff i can watch parasite and just think i like this one family goes one way the other family goes the other way one is going east and that's always going west so what when it comes to watching movies it's important to branch out and see more than just filmmaker-centric hollywood movies and one way to do that is by exploring documentary films documentaries focus less on the typical experience of a filmmaker and instead explore fresh ideas that often have nothing to do with filmmaking my recent favorite is the documentary pizza love story which like any great movie changed how i thought about things in this case it made me appreciate pizza even more than i already did you can watch that documentary and thousands more by signing up for curiosity stream is all about big budget non-fiction videos and if you sign up for curiosity stream with the link in the description you get access to curiosity stream and nebula the streaming service that supports exclusive ad-free videos from youtube's top education creators including yours truly you can get this incredible deal for less than fifteen dollars a year just fifteen dollars for an entire year all you have to do is click that link in the description clicking that link is a great way to show your support for this channel and for high quality educational content online thanks to curiositystream for sponsoring this video and thank you to my lovely patreon supporters i love you all