2 ms·
Once a movie's defence involves it having "politics" that is a bad sign - even a 3-hour movie isn't really long enough to give politics a treatment that is inte
by roenxi 2y ago
Once a movie's defence involves it having "politics" that is a bad sign - even a 3-hour movie isn't really long enough to give politics a treatment that is interesting; the storytelling is too turgid. Game of Thrones seasons 1-3 had politics, intrigue and a bevy of nuanced characters and showcased why something like the Star Wars prequels didn't really work. A good political story needs to be long and gritty and requires an inspired writer with a deep grasp of social dynamics (Lucas fell down here pretty hard - if he had a better grasp of his own limitations he wouldn't have attempted to tell a political story).
And the politics of the prequel was uncomfortably black and white. "There is Good v. Evil and Evil Won At Politics!" is an approach with a frustratingly low-functioning level of emotional intelligence; that just isn't how interesting politics works. Part of what made GoT such a sensation was political storylines were done properly.
- naasking 2y ago> even a 3-hour movie isn't really long enough to give politics a treatment that is interesting; the storytelling is too turgid I think Oppenheimer did pretty well on that. Better than I would have expected if someone had described it before I had seen it.
- slibhb 2y agoProbably the best political movie of all time is Z. It's 2 hours and not very nuanced.