Editing, Pacing, and Tension in Modern Cinema - a Look at Two Star Wars scenes.

[@ToriRocksAmos]

So I just rewatched both scenes and this how I felt about them: - OG scene: There are several moments bumping up the tension in more or less subtle ways, like saying "lock s foils in attack position" and "accelerate to attack speed" or a little later the bombers and some of luke's squad mates dying. But there's always some time for the feelings to settle and to calm down yet still keeping the overall tension, allowing it to build up more and more. With each dramatic event the situation gets more and more dire for the rebels (and) our heroes, first the bombers get destroyed, then Lukes squad gets picked apart and the one guy who actually made it close enough to fire his shot missed. There's almost nobody left who could actually do it, only 3 fighters (luke and 2 wing mans). We are constantly reminded how little time is left and we see the rebels in the base getting more and more concerned. And just as Luke is about to get shot Han shows up allowing Luke, who decides to listen to the voice of his "uncle" ben and trusts in his feelings, to pull it off. Ofcourse I've seen Star Wars a new hope a number of times, since I was little. But this scene or idk part of the movie in general still works. I know what's going to happen but I can't help but fear for my heroes. - TFA: Really cool visuals, it looks like somebody increased the detail level from "low" in a new hope to "ultra" in tfa. Love the cockpit perspective shots, really stunning. Honestly, even better than in TLJ imo. But when they kept attacking the thing without success I didn't feel as much, I didn't care as much. And as Poe flew in there and blew i t up I actually thought for a second: "Wait that was it? No way". I only watched TFA once, I didn't feel any need to rewatch it so I didn't quite remember how long this scene was (watched it in fullscreen). But yeah after watching a new hope first and then immediatly tfa my thought was literally "That's it?!" The og scene is like a slow cooked meal, roasted chicken with veggies. The same scene from TFA was like a cheeseburger from McDonald's.

[@TiagoRib93]

I remember lefting the movie theatre saying to myself "wow, amazing movie!". But later on as I watched it a couple more times, a feeling of emptiness started to settle in me. I don't mean to sound poetic, but now this movie makes me kind of sad. Without Lucas, Star Wars will become nothing more than a trademark.

[@davfree9732]

I didn’t get that feeling with AOU but then, I’m not as close to the franchise. I did feel like something was wrong with TFA and going back to see it again, knowing the beats of the movie, it struck me how ADHD the film is. There’s nothing under the crust. Its all pastry with no filler. The MTV generation is strong in JJ

[@livefire666]

I completely agree with your assessment. I also think this can be seen very well in the Star Ship Troopers action scenes where you can clearly see everything that is happening with long wide shots instead of tons of short shots smashed together in most modern action scenes.

[@dustlesswalnut]

Man, the original is so fucking good. editing mastery, visual storytelling at its finest. The TFA version is visual vomit, all flash and confusing as hell. And to think, in 1977 people said Star Wars was too fast-paced, haphazardly edited, and so forth. I wonder how TFA will age as time goes on. It seems to me like it will fade into obscurity but people said the same about SW.

[@ToriRocksAmos]

Makes you wonder how movies will be edited in 10 years when our attention span has degraded below seconds. Movies won't be longer than 30 minutes and each scene just a couple of seconds. It will be 30 minutes (or less) of memberberries and memes. Like this classic of modern cinematography: kzbin.info/www/bejne/f4rRpJmMarNlpJo

[@Sturzfaktor2]

Interestingly in one of the earlier cuts of the Death Star trench run, Luke is shown to do three runs. The third time he listens to Obi-Wan, turns off the targeting computer, and succeeds. While this gives more importance to the force (a rhyme on the scene with the training remote aboard the Falcon, if you will ;), the first two runs were cut because they dragged, leaving a well-rounded final result.

[@robo-roger7815]

@@ToriRocksAmos Weirdly though, movies haven't gotten shorter with time, just faster and faster paced

[@Jared_Wignall]

Well said sir. A New Hope has a much better edited, paced scene. It establishes everything we need to know without making us feel like we're kinda dumb and don't know what's going on.

[@marq_8976]

Original SW: engaging, entertaining, silly, fun, the tension builds up as I want Luke to succeed, "use the force" and score in the bw gives me chills, I am smiling, enjoying it although I have watched it many times and I know what happens. TFA: SHAKY CAM, expository dialog, WTF is happening?, EXPLOSIONS, oh great good guys won let's go home.

[@kirabowie]

In the original, even though it's been YEARS since I've seen it last, I still remember it happening. Not only that, it was exciting to watch. I felt for the guys that didn't make it. And when Luke hit the mark & the Death Star exploded, I was cheering! As for TFA... I had totally FORGOTTEN they even had a similar scene despite having seen it more recently that ANH. XD And watching it just now, I realize it was cuz, far from being exciting, it was boring, cuz you knew they'd win from the start. I seriously think they need to slow the pacing down so a scene has a chance to resonate with the audience, instead of whizzing by in a "blink & you'll miss it" moment.

[@maciejukasiewicz7661]

You could do a comparision on how the Force was introduced and explained in the OT, the Prequels and TFA. I believe there is a lot to cover here. On the topic of this video however, it seems the modern movie was trying too hard to emulate a video game experience. Problem is the creators clearly did not have any idea that a good gaming experience does not consist solely of 'shit flying fast and plot being shouted'. The original was based more on WW2 dogfights and it was clearly more familiar to its contemporary audiences (and audiences today). Nothing to say on the subject of buildup and tension though; TFA has none of it.

[@mattd5857]

Wow, comparing the two side by side, the super fast editing of TFA scene really kills the tension. In ANH each time a rebel fighter is shot down there's several seconds dedicated to it, before and after; we see the doomed pilot panic as he's zeroed in on, we're given a pilot shot of the TIE fighter with the cold skull-like pilot pulling the trigger mercilessly and after the death we get reactions from the other rebel pilots. You really feel for the rebels as they're picked off one by one. In TFA the same thing happens but we have no context, we just see x-wings going down in flames with little tension. The TIEs are killing rebels but we don't feel the same fear for the heroes that we got from ANH.

[@TheAlfsterino]

The plot of finding Luke was all of 5minutes of the film if that. Little shiney droid with nearly complete map gets found at start of film. Other shit happens for the next tawdry 2+ hours. grumpy old battered droid wakes up with missing bit of map. Young woman who has only been around for a few days goes and finds him. Everything else is just meaningless eye-candy padding.

[@mipierno]

Watching the original trench run, then the starkiller assault is like drinking a glass of Dom Perignon and following it up with a glass of Chateau Diana ($6 a bottle at your local CVS). I must have watched episode 4 well over 200 times in the course of my life. Yet it still grabs me by the heart, induces goosebumps, and brings me to the edge of my seat. Can't say the same for The Fart Awakens. I've seen it twice and that's more than enough. Despite some quality visuals here and there, the bottom line is that it's a weak, rushed, misguided story with horrendous pacing and a grave lack of a musical ear in the storytelling. JJ Abrams doesn't understand music, among many other things that constitute good filmmaking, and the Star Wars universe suffered for it. Thanks for this video, David. I agree 100%.

[@DVSPress]

JJ actually cut score out of parts of the movie that you can hear on the soundtrack CD.

[@gallendugall8913]

Those aren't plot climaxes in episode seven. The plot is "find Luke Skywalker" and everything else is padding. So they're padding climaxes.

[@gallendugall8913]

As for the two scenes I can't compare them because the Abrams scene makes me doze off a minute in. Modern action is boring and you have given me the reason why I find it so boring - there's no tension. Now I shall go around pretending that I came to that conclusion on my own. MUWAHAHAHA! What would I like to see? Well I have been watching Hitchcock films. If you think a discussion about his style would be interesting for you. Nothing worse than watching someone try to be interested in a topic. I think To Catch A Thief must be his worst film and it's still very watchable.

[@DVSPress]

Hitchcock was a master of building tension in stories. One of my favorite quotes from him was "There is no terror in the band, only in the anticipation of it." Also, "finding Luke" was a set-up they quickly abandoned and rendered moot in favor of "new death star! Squeeeeee!" Then we add a scene at the end - "remember the set up? No? Let's pretend like the film makers didn't forget either." God, TFA's plot was such a train wreck.

[@simplythebest2k]

Which makes the starkiller base scene useless it had nothing to do with the supposed climax. is yet another proof how movie is a mess... ☻/ /▌ / \

[@gallendugall8913]

David Stewart It is exactly like everything else Abrams has ever made. Strong first third set up, then he keeps adding stuff until he reaches something he can call an ending. I call it Schlieman Style Storytelling!

[@OrtegaSeason]

Which is NOT how a dramatic narrative is supposed to be executed, and shows JJ can't write for shit.

[@jonathangarcia3125]

The siting of the Force Awakens has any tension. The original New Hope trench run was epic and appeals more for emotions a feelings with only images. Nice video man

[@Deepfreeze32]

I firmly believe this difference is also due to the directors. Lucas was a film prodigy, and was renowned for his method of visual storytelling in film school. I had read (I can't remember where) that Lucas had at one point said that you should be able to understand the general plot of Star Wars without knowing a word of English. Everything should be communicated visually, and dialogue is almost treated as a sound effect. This is part of why people bash the prequels: the dialogue sucked. Because Lucas never intended to write good dialogue, but tell an interesting story visually. The writing played second fiddle. If this is true, it explains much. The script revisions for A New Hope, and the teleplays for Empire and Jedi being written by other writers. It suddenly makes sense why people laud the original trilogy over the prequels on issues that weren't things Lucas cared about. In short, Lucas was a director first, writer second. Abrams is a writer first, director second.

[@OrtegaSeason]

"Abrams is a writer first, director second." The writing in TFA was terrible though.

[@dustlesswalnut]

+Adon Wolfe He was born in 1944, and never had any particular love for film. His interest in his younger years was cars. He tells wonderful visual stories but he's said time and time again that movie making was never a passion or desire for him, and that he didn't grow up watching lots of films. He wound up making movies because he was desperate to do anything other than work for his dad's stationary company.

[@dustlesswalnut]

+Adon Wolfe I don't have a specific source for you, just hours and hours of interviews with him over the years.

[@PelenTan]

So do you think it's a good trend or a bad trend? Personally I come down on the "bad" side. Movies have gotten longer but have less. I came out of TFA feeling like I had been on a 2+ hour roller coaster ride. Fun, but not satisfying. Is the move towards putting in as much non-stop action as possible just feeding an addiction?

[@DVSPress]

I mostly think it is a bad trend, but there are individual movies that I think work within a tightly edited style. The first avengers movie was definitely a non-stop affair, but overall, I enjoyed it. Transformers, not so much.

[@NathanielAbernathy]

Just seeing this video now. I've seen ANH many times, and know the outcome, but the tension is so perfect, that even now it still feels like there is a chance that they will fail to destroy the Death Star. There is hopelessness, they know this is a long shot. The TFA is just weak in comparison. There is no tension, there is barely anything cohesive. It was only 4 mins long and I couldn't stay interested, as it just lacks forward movement. ANH moves along as we see all of the pilots killed, the cut-aways to the Empire and Rebels, until finally the climactic moment. TFA never feels hopeless. The First Order builds a new Death Star, but the Rebels show up and are dominant with only 2 on screen casualties, meanwhile ANH, only 3 fighters survive the fight. Poe is confident, accurate, and can do no wrong, while Luke is nervous, scared, and lucky (faith in the Force), but mostly fallible.

[@Peteruspl]

It was also way way more realistic. Maybe not hard sci-fi but it made sense all around the surface level. Rebels had much smaller force, but it was still adequate to the task and their plan based off the blueprints was also reasonable, hard to immediately counter and certainly worth the sacrifices... if desperate. Still VII had at least a lick of sense left, VIII was a new low in this department. All comanders idiots, all battle plans ranging from uninispired to batst crazy and a "confrontation" between forces at a level of a grizzly bear and a human toddler.

[@josephhein9497]

This is the EXACT reason I can't stand TFA. :/

[@-navi5238]

Two factor authentication??

[@OrtegaSeason]

One thing you didn't specifically mention although alluded to is the different ways in which the "Super Weapons" are introduced into the narrative. In Ep4 the Death Star is mentioned in the opening crawl, mentioned by characters in the first five minutes and finally seen just under 40 minutes in. In Ep7 Star Killer Base is first mentioned 50 minutes in, in clunky expositional dialogue that doesn't really explain anything. It's then seen 20 minutes later when it's fired at planets that we know nothing about.Moreover, I'd say that the existence of SKB kind of undermines the central conflict we're presented with. Why does it matter if Luke comes back to assist the Republic/Resistance if the First Order already has a weapon that can destroy them? Why bother trying to chase after this map in the first place, they should have just fired the weapon to begin with.

[@DVSPress]

They also clearly don't need Luke, as they were able to destroy the super weapon without his help. Why even bother finding him?

[@OrtegaSeason]

David Stewart Also, the conflict over "finding Luke" is further undermined by the fact that he already failed at training a new generation of Jedi. When we first see Snoke he's worried that now that the map is in the hands of the resistance they might bring Luke back to train a new batch of Jedi. Then 5 minutes we hear Han explain that Luke's order was destroyed by Kylo and the other Jedi were all killed. These plot points clearly don't fit together. Why is Snoke worried? It's like they had multiple different story outlines for Ep7, and then just jumbled different concepts from all of them together to create the end product.

[@OrtegaSeason]

Which also raises the question of why Leia is even looking to get him back in the first place? Even if Luke did come back and managed to train a few Jedi without screwing up again, how much of a difference is that really going to make against the first order? If the Republic already have a military then surely the quickest way to defeat the first order is open warfare and Leia's efforts should be focused on making THAT happen. I would think the fact that the Republic aren't fighting the FO is a much bigger contributer towards the later's strength, than Luke's absence.

[@JerettOlson]

Wow, there is big difference between the two movies. "A New Hope" battle scene was far better. I never thought about how soon the tension for this scene started and slowly builded up and builded up until resolution at the end. Through the whole scene of the movie you are un sure if they are going pull it off, because saw so many fail attempts. In "the Force Awakens" you do not have same tension and you expect them to win, there is no possibility that they might fail.

[@ProJatior]

Dude see Rouge One. I felt completely different about that film then I did TFA. I'm not saying it's perfect or anything but if we support any Disney Star Wars it seems like the Anthology's are our best bets! Gareth Edwards did a great job. I cried and was left satisfied. Things just felt like (to me anyway) that things flowed. I wasn't talked down to the movie treated its audience with respect. I can't speak for you but just know that someone who puts TFA in near last place.. (Last place only if there is a great fan edit of AOTC.) throughly enjoyed this. Look up the screen writers or whatever you need to do before hand but I wouldn't personally pass this theater experience if I were you. In my opinion it's what, in principle, TFA should have been. I can't do anything but say how I feel. If I am somehow wrong I apologize.

[@ElOchentero]

Totally agree!

[@dadnoonan]

You are an example of what you try to explain. Show first, tell after. Pacing has changed today.

[@gmmay70]

Another contrast between the two movies is how the focal point of the attack is far more precise AND clear to the audience in Ep IV than Ep. VII. This lets you know exactly when the protagonist has achieved his goal, whereas it's not as clear in Ep. VII. The music also helps a great deal at this point in Ep. IV as well since it maintains the tension of the climactic moment. In Ep. VII, the whole thing is drawn out closer to Ep. VI's climax, as they're mucking around trying to resolve the character drama between characters we don't care nearly as much about at this stage as we did in Ep. VI. That's another facet of why this climax just didn't work - you can't get us to care more about the character dynamics through editing.

[@AceTechHD]

Have you noticed how like every action movie trailer is the same? Deep bass sound cut to black. Deep bass sound again and cut to black lol.

[@DVSPress]

Yeah the Rogue One trailer could have been literally for any movie if you removed the storm troopers.

[@samwallaceart288]

What about Return of the Jedi? That Death Star attack has *a lot* more in common with this one than the A New Hope did; Return of the Jedi's death star attack has A: a side character taking the lead on the attack, B: the main characters are *in* the thing they are attacking, C: they are waiting on the main characters turning off some sort of defense mechanism, D: it shares screentime with other simultaneous fight-scenes, and E: it is not the emotional climax of the film. I'm not saying your point is wrong, but it does need to be kept in perspective that the Starkiller attack is a secondary scene, much like the secondary (even tertiary) nature of the Return of the Jedi equivalent sequence.

[@happydappyman]

A real shoutout? New favorite video! xD But seriously thanks for the answer. My comment was not the most coherent of ramblings so I'm glad you were able to sort it out and make it sound like a smart question ;) . This video did help me put the words (and an example) to what I was feeling. I think I used an example of someone having to tell us his emotional state, but I think you're right when you say it's more often about badly timed plot exposition. Also it's usually from someone who shouldn't be explaining it (like a pilot to another pilot when they've all been briefed). When poe talks about the sun disappearing, you're exactly right, that's the type of cringe I was talking about. And Just listen to the music in the old scene, it's enough to get your heart racing. The new one has loud explosions though.. and stuff... happens... and you don't care what it is

[@DVSPress]

Sound design in the two scenes is also miles apart. The original is exciting - the blasters are loud and intimidating. The new one is just overall very, very loud, which doesn't make the explosions nearly as effective.

[@happydappyman]

Yeah I like the video you did on volume maximisation. I must say, I prefer the old way when it comes to pacing. We've traded deep meaning for instant gratification. This fast paced and loud style just sacrifices so much it seems. Music, sound effects, character development, subtlety, emotional impact. You name a good technique and it's probably minimized or altogether missing from movies like episode 7. I want to say I understand why they do it, cause it holds people's attention and all that. But honestly it doesn't hold my attention cause I find it hard to care. At least that was my problem with ep.7 but that could be more down to the fact it broke so many rules of StarWars.

[@wilde4945]

One of my main points I have made in the past of the new SW movie, the attack on starkiller should have been a fifteen minute tour de force showcasing ILM's latest technological achievements and advancements... in less than four minutes... yeah, OK.

[@PlainsPup]

Good movies used to be like a smooth French silk ice cream. Today, what passes for a good movie is more like a loaded energy drink: all thrills and sensations, but no real, lasting joy. The whole industry has gone that way, and I don’t know what can be done to save it.

[@markj6606]

It's really true. The X-Wing scenes in Force Awakens are total crap. Even the awful Phantom Menace space battle is better. The Force Awakens lightsaber battle isn't that great because of the context. They should have had Rey trying to distract Kylo while the others destroyed the base. Pretty much the only good action scene in the movie is the Millennium Falcon chase, but the characters are to cartoony to care about. That scene would have been awesome if it was Han Solo's daughter piloting the Falcon. (The TIE fighter escape is decent, but it goes to fast for me.)

[@jagsdomain203]

The first mivie there was a brefing, we see the pilots getting into the planes and seeing the spacestation then the fight begins. We see our friend Luke under attake and we know they need to go down a trench and shot this pipe. The next movie we have planes flying around and shotting the roof of this thing then they get in a trench but we dont know why then poe does this impossable thing of flying inside a dudade and shoots at things then the planet weapon goes boom very very slowly. Hummm which one is better?

[@simplythebest2k]

I think it really is in the editing where the movie goes to shit.... money vs art. Which is a contradiction because if the movie is successful they can make more money, but they want to focus on the time so that the movie has more screenings in the theater. you should probably make a video on that.

[@Keatron3]

Watched both of them. Seen them before. Surprisingly I find the seconds between each cut didn't seem that different for me. In fact, the new Star Wars had some longer cuts because if the possibilities with new cgi and effects.

[@DVSPress]

What? I can't believe you were watching the same thing I was.

[@Keatron3]

David Stewart the video you link to for the new Star Wars starts with a 10 second clip and then at 0:23 seconds it is another 10 second clip of the fighter sweeping down to the planet. Pretty long shot times! Would you agree? I would agree though that most modern cinema is much faster paced. Great quality video upload by all means though. Thanks for sharing.

[@matoussverak5320]

I agree with most of what you say, but not with the idea that fast cuts necessitate those dialogues. Consider movies by Paul Greengrass, the master of fast cuts and clarity. In Bourne Ultimatum, everything is understandable and understandable through visuals only.

[@matoussverak5320]

Even though Bourne Ultimatum is based on different strategy of expectations than Star Wars, I would not doubt Greengrasses ability to communicate what would be appropriate for SW. I think he is one of the reasons fast cuts are so popular nowadays and people try to imitate his narrative strategy too. In individual scenes in Paul Greengrasses movies, the ingenious hero does something the spectators do not understand, the spectators can quickly speculate and in few shots he is !surprised! by the outcome. Because He has enough information about the surroundings and the goals of the people involved to speculate (which severely lacks in the new SW) and be surprised. The Waterloo scene is a beautiful example of this, the long run and fight with Desh and the car chase would make great subjects for comparison to the space fight scenes you talk about. In the grand scope used nearly all the time, that is great for spy movies about mystery and extremely talented individuals, not mythical stories about hero's journey. The story and identification with the characters work completely differently in those two instances, but directors of new movies, J.J. Abrams especially, do not understand this. So they copy the fast cuts with the logic of the flow of information without considering the movie !they! are making. They forget about and sacrifice the whole in the service of the parts. And even the parts they do clumsily.

[@matoussverak5320]

Thinking about it more and more, maybe the fact that the space fights are in 3d would pose some more problems than car chases and the Desh run, but Greengrass surpassed the 2d logic of those scenarios in both of those instances using roofs and multiple planes of movement. I would love to see him film a space fight tho...

[@DVSPress]

Well, I think looking at the Bourne movies, thought the action is quite tight, there are still scenes of pause throughout that help expose the goals of the plot. TFA lacked these scenes and tried to pack in as much action as possible, and other movies do as well. Then the audience doesn't know what the goals of a scene are, and the characters have to just come out and say it.

[@matoussverak5320]

I went on tangents so it is my fault for not being clear, sorry for that, so i will leave the Bourne example aside and concentrate on the scenes from SW7. When you look at the way the fight is presented in the movie, there are "supposed" moments of tension building - in parallel montage in different places, so they don't work. There is also a stop in action after the start of the attack for fifteen seconds after 0:30 mark, between 1:35-1:55 there is just talking. They stop the attack and say what could have been shown, without really building any tension, but the space for it is there. But even without them, there are more fundamental problems. And I would recommend those changes: 1. Show the position of the sun and use it as some kind of countdown. Do not talk about it, show it. How it nears the horizon, do not just go from light to dark. Do not talk about it in many sentences once. That would add tension. 2. You could establish the pilots more beforehand and make us care more. In the SW4, we know a little bit about them. That would help the next point too. 3. Use the dog fights as small stories, not just snippets. 0:45 Zip is supposed to save the fat guy. What do we see next? A cannon shoots down x-wing, and than the fat pilot not caring anymore. We do not see her saving him. We should. 4. 1:45 talking about the death of pilot n. 1. You can show killing of the n. 1, basically you could use that cool shot from before, when the canon hits the x-wing. It is a POV from x-wing - you can just establish from which x-wing you are looking at the shot down and then show the reaction of the pilot of this x-wing, whispering in a hurt and defeated surprise "Number 1 is down, he is down!" 5. In the same scene they talk about the brand new hole in the oscillator. You can simply show that - the explosion from the inside, than from the outside, show the hole and then show an x-wing changing course and in the audio you can hear only "Change of the plan, cover me!" to add tension, understanding and suspense. Or you could use some ping-pong shots, squadron shots and face shots to use only visuals. My point is that you could do so much better visually, with the same amount of time. There are many pauses, but they are used solely for dialogue as you said "painting the plot for you". You can combine smaller portions of dialogue and better visuals to make it reactive and not solely explanatory. You can give the aspects bigger function than just eye-candy and make shots of pilot faces not into chunks, but use them throughout. Even this action packed scenes and films can be done with much bigger tension, clarity and causal logic without compromising, and maybe even expanding the action-fill aspect (hence the Bourne example). IMHO there was a room for it, the problem is in the script and shot choices, not with it being too action-filled.

[@TheAlfsterino]

Greengrass's editing and shakey camerawork gave me a migraine watching that film to the point that I left the cinema. The only real migraine I have ever had. He's a hack.

[@lordmango6060]

Yeah, “talking the plot” to the audience is kind of necessary when your editing is so tight and quick. Otherwise, people won’t understand what the heck is going on. I mean, look at the Transformers movies. My brain turns off most of the time because nothing is really explained

[@alexstone2616]

A major problem with modern cinema.

[@lonjohnson5161]

This seems to be in the control of the director and editor. How can a screenwriter influence this?

[@perpetualloading]

The links aren't there.

[@DVSPress]

Check now.

[@cortedemico]

the original seemed dry. even then i thought the trench scene was a bit long or repetitive. i think it was because of the model and the track they used. the new shit is going a bit overboard with these new technologies and making it it too busy and impossible. seems like they just can't help but to go overboard with everything these days. just meet in the middle already.

[@camreese]

Compare the cantina in 7 to the one in 4

[@camreese]

Huge contrast

[@NotOrdinaryInGames]

A pseudo-counter-argument: You are just a grandpa, living in the past, afraid of the superior modern methods!

[@simplythebest2k]

or their pilots have downs so he has to remind them.....and the audience ;) Jar Jar Abrams thinks your special.

[@TheAlfsterino]

MTV style fast editing, snap zoomy shakey out of focus camera work has destroyed narrative cinema which is now just for the blipvert Max Headroom generation that can't concentrate for more than a few minutes. The handheld cameras should be banned, real film should be used, digital editing (which really is why such fast editing can be done) should be banned because that would make editors and directors pace scenes better.

[@DVSPress]

Let's just stop seeing films that suck!