What does Cred Forums think of Oh Brother Where Art Thou?

Good fun, quite enjoyable. I love all the 30's talk and how the time period is represented.

The real guys that sang that are dead now, right? IIRC they were like in their 60's or something when that movie came out.

wow someone who's never been to reddit being called a redditor, I do see that here every day.

>cinemagraphic malaise
>by-the-numbers score.
>Not even trolling

definitely pick one

AYY YO FAGGOT YOU DROPPED YOUR QUEER 'PINIONS BACK YONDER

I don't like Reddit, goddammit.
I'm a dapper Cred Forums man.

Kek

>O*

ftfy

Seriously the worst opinion of all time

It was fun. It had a great soundtrack and good dialogue. It was the first major film to use DI for the entire film. The plot meandered and had no real plan but that was what the writers were going for with the intentionally blurry retelling of the odyssey.

It wasn't poorly made in any way, so any complaints can literally be boiled down to opinions.

>bland
It's got great rhythm, it's a simple adventure story with varied twists and turns that.

>full of forced 'deep' references, simultaneously removing the viewer from the experience and smothering what slim core of a plot there was
maybe but who cares. When I first saw it I didn't notice any references and it was still coherent so those references don't affect the plot in a negative way.

>It attempts to cover for its cinemagraphic malaise and sand-castle structure with studio-vault 'humor' and a by-the-numbers score.
wtf is "studio vault humor"? What's wrong with a standard score with no bells and whistles? Not every movie can have an amazing score done by some legendary composer.

>cinemagraphic
that word doesn't real dumbass

>sand-castle structure
WAAAH WAAAAH IT ISN'T SOME UBER-DEEP TRANSCENDENTAL STORY ABOUT LIFE AND DEATH WAAAAAAH

>lack of sound mixing
examples. this is a dumb claim, at least back it up somehow.

>high-school yearbook photo lighting quality
I'll give you that I don't like the exaggerated color grading, which unfortunately is a staple for these kinds of period films. However the fact that you blame it on lighting and not color grading makes me think you don't really know what you're talking about and just throwing around buzzwords.

Not only are you pretentious and condescending, you're also a huge faggot.

this

The color grading feels dated now, but at the time it was groundbreaking and I think won sfx awards.

this guy has the answer and needs everyone to know it

The exaggerated grading is actually because prior to this movie they did everything with filters and the technology had just come out to do it digitally. So they did it on everything but the sky and clothes of the characters in every frame. It cost 30% of their budget. You really can't say they did it haphazardly considering they literally changed it frame by frame

>You really can't say they did it haphazardly considering they literally changed it frame by frame
I never said it is done haphazardly, I won't doubt for a minute that they put lots of work and cash into it. The result just isn't that good. It's just too much. They overdid it because it was something new and they got carried away, which is a common issue when new technologies are employed, and the results suffer from it. This becomes noticeable as soon as the novelty has worn off. Just like early talkies, for example, or early Technicolor films. And it isn't something that's somehow inevitable. I can't think of examples with color grading, but Fritz Lang's M from 1931 (his first sound film) is a prime example of early sound done right, just as Gone With the Wind is a prime example of early color done right. Goes to show that using a new technology doesn't have to mean you abuse it.

>People like this live as functioning members within society
Scary