Why This Is The Worst Scene In SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME | Video Essay
#videoessay #spiderman #nowayhome
Use my code TOMASSO to get $5 off your delicious, healthy Magic Spoon cereal by clicking this link: magicspoon.thld.co/tomasso_0322
In this video we dive into Spider-Man No Way Home and an issue that has bothered me since the first time I watched. It's the editing. A lot people are criticizing the cinematography, which is fine, but I really think the wasted performances from Willem Dafoe, Andrew Garfield, and Tobey Maguire are an even bigger issue. In this essay we breakdown the editing in Spider-Man No Way Home and compare it Sam Raimi's Spider-Man and Mission Impossible: Fallout. I like Jon Watts a lot but I just wish he would hold the frame.
Subscribe to my 2nd channel: • Apple Studio Display R...
Twitter: / impatrickt
Sign up for MUSICBED: share.mscbd.fm/impatrickt Use my coupon code IMPATRICKT22 at checkout to get your first month free when you purchase an annual subscription.
Fuji X100: geni.us/fujifilmx100pt (affiliate link)
SONY A7iv: geni.us/ptsonya7iv (affiliate link)
Lumix S5: geni.us/ptS5kit (affiliate)
35mm F1.8 Lens: geni.us/pt35mmsony (affiliate link)
Voiceover Mic: geni.us/ptvideomicII (affiliate link)
Dialogue Mic: geni.us/ptvideomicntg (affiliate link)
Best desk accessories: ugmonk.com/impatrickt - Use the code "impatrickt" for 10% off your order. (affiliate link)
00:00 - Intro
00:33 - The Scene In Question
01:11 - Editing Breakdown 1
01:36 - What went wrong?
02:40 - How Sam Raimi Edits
03:06 - How To Edit Plot Heavy Monologues
03:44 - Editing Breakdown 3
05:45 - Is it coverage?
06:14 - Not just villains.
06:53 - Thesis
One problem I had with all the jump cuts in the films is that sometimes it made it felt like the characters that were interacting weren't in the same room, as if they individually did their recordings then mashed them together. But when you see the behinds the scenes they are all in the same room.
Maybe the cuts were a tad excessive during the Goblin monologue, but the cuts to Electro really heightened the tension for me cause we know how much Max's powers matter to him compared to his past life when he was a nobody. You can see the gears turning in his head. You know he's enticed. Also in the roof top scene, I'm not a fan of Tom Holland's spiderman but I can still understand the cuts to Tom Holland because he's relating to the other Spider-men's words. His expression changes from apathetic, to curious, to moved. Plus, the majority of the audience are young Tom Holland fans. So you gotta think of the majority.
I think the rooftop is subjective - but re watch that goblin scene I have in this video. there's only one cut to electro but that cut spear heads the entire madness of cutting. goblin doesn't even talk normally.. he pauses so we can see May dancing around LOL
@@darkshadow5035 if everything was truly subjective and there were no objectively better way of doing things in film then there wouldn’t be entire majors in universities and private academies dedicated to the specifics of effective filmmaking, cinematography, script writing, and just about every other aspect of a film you can think of. Yes, things are a matter of opinion, but opinions are influenced by knowledge, and the lack thereof.
@@impatrickt I personally don't mind the cuts much at all because we don't need a better, more detailed focus on Willem Dafoe's Goblin. This scene isn't just a goblin speech scene like the one's from raimi films. There is a scene like those ones earlier in the film when Goblin is talking to Norman. This scene however is supposed to show the *return* of goblin. Defoe's Goblin is an already established Villain. He doesn't need such scenes with him being the primary focus anymore. The objective isn't to understand him anymore. This scene is more like an *event* instead. Aunt May's actions here are just as important as Goblin's speech, because this is an *event* that is building up to an even bigger event. Getting to hear Goblin's words is enough. Also, I don't think he is speaking unnaturally, giving time for May to do things
@@darkshadow5035 Thank you
@@bdpchamp knowledge is also based on opinions
I saw the thumbnail and was in disbelief. But I saw the video and I agree with a lot of your points. While I don’t think it ruined the scene personally, I can now recognize its flaws. I still think the scene is phenomenal and I was honestly too distracted by Dafoe’s amazing voice lol. But great video man keep it up!
Well said
Not me. This guy just trying to be something. Stupid
The whole Movie is a huge Flaw. Dr Strange is an Idiot, Peter is annoying and the other Spidermen are just there for the nostalgia. Nothing in this movie makes sense but people love it. Thats how good storytelling dies... in thunderous applause.
@@ahabduennschitz7670 Dr Strange just does the spell cuz of how arrogant the mans is. Idk u can say Peter is annoying 😂 Tom was amazing in this movie and finally had a real Spider-Man arch. Tobey and Andrew actually served a purpose in this movie with toms Peter and the idea of being rage full. Just getting the wrong idea of this movie lol
@@alexander_martinez6084 elaborate
That is one of the main things I've noticed in the differences between The Batman and No Way Home. I'm thankful the cinematography of The Batman was so top tier. I wish Spider-Man was given that extra element of artistic cinematography The Batman does. I love both films, but Batman wins me over for that reason and a few others.
We will never see such a good cinematographer work on MCU if it isn't bland cinematography it's not in the MCU
NWH had plenty of good cinematography the shot in the rain in-front of JJJ in the screen, the Electro vs black and gold suit fight had loads of artistic shots, maybe not as much as the Batman but, the Batman is much smaller movie you can’t possibly compare them, plus Marvel Studios is busy making 6 projects at a time
I don't think Batman had CGI doubles either to the point where the actors didn't even need to be there.
@@keving5004 the in-front of the screen scene was ruined with the awful cgi
@@galaxymoonlqght3732 it looks pretty comparable to the CGI shot in the beginning of the Batman where you see Gotham city, it looked pretty great Im convinced you mfs dont know what bad CGI looks like
Very well put together video man, one of those things that I feel slipped past me on initial watch since it’s easy to be so sucked into the spectacle.. but damn when it’s pointed out it’s painfully obvious lol
That scene will forever drive me nuts.
I thought that scene had to be recut for this video it was so infuriating to watch. I didn’t notice it on the first watch either.
Watch the film once just to experience it. Watch it again to look for things in the background, or use it to take a look at scenes that you weren't paying attention to the first time around, this time with the power of hindsight on your side to better understand why things happened.
Same
Here is the question. If it didn't matter to you on your first viewing, should it matter to you now?
Remove electro, only have one shot of a hand taking the serums - so when May clutches the bag we can put 2 and 2 together. Seeing her bagging items one by one like a cashier. We don't need reverse shots of everyone reacting in the same way, we can assume they remember the same exposition about Normon the audience does.
Exactly.
That is hollywood for ya
“Da hell”
Whats with this obbession that only still shots on someones face is the "correct" way to film a monologue ?
Totally agree, personally me it didn’t necessarily take me out of the scene as William Dafoe is just that good but yea it was def annoying of how much they were cutting in this scene. Probably just one shot of May getting the antidote woulda been enough for the audience. The rooftop scene I will disagree with I thought the editing was fine and wouldn’t have really changed anything with his that whole scene was edited.
Exactly I can also see where he's coming from and indeed there were too many cutaways from that scene..however it didn't really spoil the experience since Willem already established himself before as a phenomenal goblin. So I still enjoyed (and was a bit tense😄) to see that persona comes out
Strangely, the majority of the cuts don't bother me, but the one of May before the closeup of her gripping the bag of antidotes does. I figure it'd make more sense if it skipped the fullbody shot and went straight to "Fighting her holy moral mission" and her gripping the bag
I feel like that is a problem with a lot of American cinema. Too many cuts I am a fan of foreign films in part because I feel like they don't feel the need to always be cutting away. Just let the scene and me as a viewer breath by letting the scene play out instead of cutting away. Some of my favorite films and tv shows tend to have scenes were it's just a wide shot on a character or two letting the scene play out without cutting to reaction shots or to whom ever is talking. Let it breath! On a side note just found your channel through your Batman video essay, really like the way you frame and light yourself for your videos. Keep the videos coming man!
Totally agreed and spotted on
A lot of actors stemmed from theatre which is acting scenes for a lengthy amount of time. Actors like Willem Dafoe are just too good for this style of filmmaking, probs why he’s done a lot of alternative films like ‘The lighthouse’ or a very strange movie like ‘the Antichrist’. Even worked with legendary directors in Wes Anderson. There’s a reason why Scorsese described Marvel movies as “theme park rides”. They come with little effort through the huge use of CGI which pissed me off about this Spider-Man movie how they just recycled shots of Tobey and Andrew’s Spider-Men instead of making them from scratch. My biggest fear going into the movie was seeing how fake Tobey and Andrew would look in the CGI suits compared to their actual look in the originals. You’d just expect better from a high budget movie but I guess they’ve noticed how they can make money from the budget they’re given to make the movie compared to directors in the past that had to go over the budget or take it out their own pocket to make sure they made a perfect movie. It’s like they put a huge budget as an insurance policy in case they have problems but work to where they can save on the budget.
@@mast3rchief536 Well explained, these figures add up.
May I ask, what’re your favorite foreign films?
Foreign you mean Koreans movie because want they always mean when they say foreign movie
the thing that i love in the original is Norman and Goblin is not exactly separate characters. they always show Norman debating Goblin when he’s alone. they showed this either by him talking to mirror or the mask. if you understand mental sickness this is exactly how it would play out. this gives you the idea that he’s indeed talking to himself the whole time. but then they make as if Norman and Goblin separate characters in NWH. especially the “Norman is on sabbatical” line.
They make a similar mistake with Octavius. In Spider-Man 2 the arms don't control him completely, he's constantly justifying his actions to himself so the audience knows that Otto is still in there somewhere. That's why Peter is able to reach him at the end. I understand that they have to simplify the villains for screentime limitations, but they still feel... less good than they were in the Raimi movies.
May I ask something? Should we blame Watts for this. There’s been talk that Feige and others get too involved in the editing process. It makes me bummed because I like these directors but every time when I see their marvel films leaves me wondering “is that what they wanted or what they were told?” Idk. I thought the film was entertaining and fun but I like to just seeing as a side movie lol. Great vid, love it! Hope people can learn from this.
that's what I was saying at the end - I sympathize.
but people still regard Feigi as this expert level or smtn. I disagree just because a film is commercially succefeul doesn't mean it's critically acclaimed. It's just appealing to the mass just because of a spectatle.
Cinematic Mike, the MCU is the most corporately controlled thing ever. Honestly, they're made by committee movies. Remember that Favreau, who we all know can absolutely make art, was forced to proceed to start filming IM2 without a fully realized script, and was forced to shoehorn in stuff to turn it into an Avengers commercial. Norton, was fired for bullshit reasons. Film making genius Edgar Wright was fired off of Ant Man, probably for refusing to be Marvel's bitch, when he could've produced the objective best film in the franchise. They get rid of idea people, or people whose visions don't match the corporate i.e. Feige's mindset. They don't produce art. They make safe, generic theme park rides designed to appeal to the most people possible, and are quickly forgotten about because it wasn't that good, but who cares because the next one is coming out in three months. Need more proof? If anyone wants to see the blatant difference in directing and what it can produce, especially when an artistic mindset is taken by the whole team versus what Disney/Marvel have, look no further than the difference in film quality between Creed and Black Panther. Same director. I just recently saw Creed for the first time, and while I loved it, I'm pissed to realize obviously how much control Disney/Marvel must exert over their creative talents to produce a shit show like Black Panther when its director just prior gave the world another masterpiece.
@@kevrulz06 Exactly. Now, let's look at the MCU's contender, Warner Bros.' DCEU. They were notorious for their early movies, because they mostly stuck with one director, Zack Snyder. Now, Zack was allowed to do anything with his movies, but due to his lack of understanding of some DC characters, his movies sort of fell short, until his cut of Justice League came out which meant a chance for DC to redeem themselves. But his style of directing was recognizable at the very least. With the MCU, it's like all 22+ movies were directed by the same people, with the exception of Phase 1 movies. They started strong with Favreau's Iron Man, but as the MCU progressed, they kept using what I would like to call the 'Whedon-Russo' formula, where the overwhelming abundance of Joss Whedon's natural characteristic humor coincides with too much of the Russo Brothers' grey cinematography that would fit in action thrillers. And they used this formula to appeal to the masses, since what the respective directors used was successful. But it became apparent as time went on because the more I watched more of their movies, the more visually and narratively boring they became. Look at DC now, with James Gunn's The Suicide Squad (and Peacemaker) and Matt Reeves' The Batman on their high-tier movies list. WB has let these directors professionally tell a story through these characters instead of just telling them what to do. Honestly, I wish, I WISH, that Marvel Studios would do the same rather than just hiring directors for something trivial and not for their understanding of their characters as well as filmmaking skills. It's Marvel's turn to up their own game now. DC already upped theirs.
@@cyan0984 TSS,PM was Comical Shows...TSS plot is Pretty much Garbage...Batman is good (bcoz of standalone)... That's the problem of a Cinematic Universe that's why the Raimi one's were great.
As much as I enjoyed NWH, I really think that if there was no nostalgia involved and all of these characters were played by different actors the movie would probably have done a lot worse.
Thats assuming these characters would be handled the same way minus nostalgia. There would have likely been an entirely different dynamic and story structure if this was basically a sinister 6 movie played by fresh actors .
No duh, everything woulda have been different tho so there’s really no point of thinking that.
That’s like saying, “When you take all of the good stuff out, it’s a bad movie”
@@gnarly.bulblax No, not at all. If the only good things in the movie are nostalgia then it must not be a very good film.
@@Harigan Uhh no it isn't? There are plenty of things in this movie that are good outside of the old characters returning. Peter, MJ and Ned's relationship and Peter's character arc in general being two of them.
Another thing I wish they had done in the edit would have been to include the rising Danny Elfman's Goblin theme until the villains decide to betray Peter (same music as can be heard at the end of the mirror conversation scene of Sam Raimi's film). It would have made the scene better in my opinion.
You should have mentioned *Dr. Curt Conners/ The Lizard* role in this movie since he rarely talks a lot. _This character deserves some respect since what he has done in his past._
i forgot he was even in the movie
@@impatrickt feel like most people did. He had absolutely no relevance in the film lol.
As someone who loves this movie as well, I think the scene where Doc Strange casts the spell for Peter in the beginning is worse, mainly for the drastically shifting vibes Strange gives off, and then acts like it's Peters fault when it goes wrong, just a very poor character choice I think.
I never liked the idea that Strange just casts this spell out of nowhere. It was lazy writing.
@@impatrickt It´s not "lazy writing", its taken directly from a particular comicbook run/storyline. And I know you´re going to say "I don´t care about the comics, it has to work in the movie..." And I would tell you: You don´t get it, the point is that Strange is the kind of character who would do EXACTLY that, you just don´t know it yet (because you don´t know the character of Doctor Strange like comic readers do. But you will, once he gets more movies, and more character development).
@@gabrielp9646 The response would not give a reason why comic storylines would be valid or if it was lazy writing. Instead, the response would be an attack on Patrick. Him not getting it doesn’t directly change if it was lazy writing or if the comic run matters.
@@gabrielp9646 It's an issue if it doesn't make sense with the character we've seen in the movies so far. Tony Stark is also completely different from how he is in the comics, it wouldn't make any sense for him to start acting like his comic version all of a sudden.
@@gabrielp9646 even without the comics, all the other Strange appearances show that he gets way too cocky and overconfident really fast until things go really bad
There were no cuts in the first film because he was alone, there was nothing to cut to... As far as NWH, if you linger too long on the villain the other characters who are there are doing nothing instead of reacting. The scene needs to be slowed down to focus more on his lines yes, and in-between cut to some reactions that aren't over explained visually, but time restraints forced it to be jumbled. Very good point out in the editing flaws.
Willem doesn’t get his due to see Aunt May put glass tubes in a plastic bag. 🤣🤣. That missed opportunity felt like a punch in the gut to me. Imagine how Dafoe felt!!
brutal!
In what way😅?
He probably felt fine. 😄
@2:40 yea but he is talking to himself, what is there to cut to?
himself
"Dramatic cinema doesn't need to be cut like a TikTok for us to feel moved." Subscribed. (Now that the universe-breaking levels of hype are starting to die down, I'm looking forward to more content such as this where people are able to hold both their fanboying in one hand and genuine criticisms of its filmmaking in the other. I feel very similarly about this film.)
An interesting perspective, but I’d like to give my two cents. . I think the cut problem steams precisely from what you mentioned: there’s a lot of plot going around. In that speech alone, Watts needs to show the reaction of the villains to show how they react to the Goblin’s words, show Peter becoming conflicted about him and show Aunt May grabbing the cures so the final act can be set up, all the while showing Dafoe’s performance, which is quite a lot considering the first point alone includes 3 characters, which also is much more complex than just showing Osborn arguing with the Goblin, Maybe I’m just playing the devil’s advocate, but I don’t think it was without reason. With that said, I do think Watts could have shown more with less. For example, instead of showing May’s picking up all the cures, we could just cut to her real quick entering the room, then another for her exiting it with the bag and then, when the Goblin leaves and Peter and May have a talk, give the bag to Peter while telling him to go through with curing the villains, which would explain to us the audience that the cures are in the bag. That way, I think we could save some cuts and give away to Dafoe’s brilliant performance. . Another thing, while it is true that we could have some more of Tobey’s and Andrew’s performances, I think that scene in particular was edited pretty well. Maybe it’s more of a subjective thing but I didn’t feel like Watts cut away from the dialogue any sooner than he needed to. And again, each Peter is telling their story of woe to try and sympathize with Peter, so showing Holland’s reaction to their words is key (hell, throughout the scene we get a couple of shots were Watts holds the frame to allow Holland to stretch his acting skills). Anyhow, I do agree that Marvel do tend to be awfully choppy with their editing and there are worse crimes in their catalogue, I just felt like sharing my perspective. Great video man, it’s always interesting to hear the perspectives of an specific branch of filmmaking rather than just the whole concept of it.
The rooftop is subjective for sure - the apartment scene is hard for me to understand the decisions though. My answer to all that plot and other characters is just, why do we need to show all that? Why do we need to show the villains reacting? He never gave Goblin one single monologue without bouncing around. It’s odd. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
@@impatrickt Well, that’d be because the villains need a reason to not trust Peter and betray him. Granted, it’s not perfectly written, the character of Flint Marko has a big plot hole on why he’d side with Electro since their motives are clear opposites (one wants to go back to his home, the other doesn’t) and the Lizard has virtually no reason to do any of the things he does other than being a jackass BUT, regardless, that is the intent, so we have to see how the mentality of the villains change throughout the Goblin’s speech. Actually there was one detail that I like and it was the beeping sound of Electro’s mechanism which made it seemed like time bomb (which the situation essentially is), and I thought the editing of that was pretty neat. But again, subjective, and I do agree that the constant cuts to May and Peter are a bit much, specially cause their faces barely change everytime we see them so, why cut back to them? In that regard, I give you the point, specially because Dafoe’s performance is so good I wish we got 30 minutes extra with him!
@@impatrickt You didn't notice that none of the villains got a single monologue? Why you ask? Because we've been there before in the previous films. Everyone already knows the villians by now. We're not exploring their characters and the other thing the plot has already dictated the extent the depth that we see of them. The villains are simply there to serve the Spiderman's...
@@audi1982 I didn't want more monologues from anyone. huh?
Problem is, they tried to squeeze just too much into one single scene: The exposition of multiple villains' motivations; their mutually mistrustful observations of each other; the shifting group dynamics during their interactions when they calculated each others objectives and weighed their own options of talking other characters into or out of their perspectives, maybe even forming thoughts of viable alliances; the transmission of background information concerning important plot points from former movies to new parts of the audience; aunt May's maneuvers to stealthily hide the macguffin; Spider-Man trying to keep track of May's maneuvers while at the same time trying to keep the villains focussing on him; the emotional reactions of characters to each other; Green Goblin delivering his emotionally charged speech. This should have been sequenced in time and space by the script. Apparently the writers didn't even consider which medium they wrote for, and how to play its unique features to strength.
I still strongly believe Spider-Man: No Way Home is one of the best Marvel movies to date, but I must say you make a very valid point.
I agree it’s one of the better ones.
if you think this garbage movie was one of the best, then u got no taste in movies
@@bonk7057 where
@@rawpowerjagg i asked
@@bonk7057 oh no someone shares a different opinion than you 😱
In Spider-Man 1, the focus is between Norman and goblin alone. They share the scene. There is no one else In No Way Home, Norman has taken control of the scene. However, there are 5 other people involved. Norman has become the goblin. Electro is listening carefully. Sandman doesn’t know what to think. Ock is worried. May is doing the heavy lifting, whole Peter acts as the distraction for her and holds the situation together as long as he can. While I do agree, mays scene was too long. They don’t NEED to show us everything. It’s probably Cz kids watch it and won’t be able to put two and two together and release why she went in there. So yes, ugh. But overall, it’s defoes moment, yes. But ignoring the other characters reactions, thought processes and overall development in that moment would entirely make you question why they act the way they do. We have to see the characters make a firm choice. They have to make a choice. Otherwise, what good were goblins words. They weren’t for himself. His mind was made up. They were for everyone else. The shot should serve the purpose of the scene; the purpose of the monologue Good video; I love to hear what you or anyone thinks! Rami is my fav trilogy btw! “Never fails”-Otto
You can frame two or three characters in the same shot. Or do a close up pan across the room if you want to catch their expressions individually. Or frame two and do a focus pan. I dunno, there's more ways than just cutting incesantly.
@@Despair505 Can you frame 7 people in one shot without making it akward in a small room ?
Oh my god, I have been telling my friends this exact thing since the movie came out. I even made one of them watch The Lighthouse to drive the point home, that not having Willem on screen during a classic Willem monologue is absolutely bonkers, in the worst way possible. Glad to see more people talking about it!!
Good reason to show them "The Lighthouse"! Others are: Show it to them to get them to watch anything else Pattinson did. Show it to them to get them to watch anything else Dafoe did. Show it to them to get them to watch Eggers' earlier movie "The VVitch" so you all can talk about what a genius he is for (over the course of just two film productions) having created as well as perfected a whole new niche genre (mashup): well researched period piece realism meets psychologically believable thriller drama meets mythologically inspired horror movie. Show it to them for great scripting, production values and acting, cinematography, direction and editing. Show it to them so they will be thankful if they have good taste in movies, to educate and elevate their cinematic palate if they have mediocre taste in movies, or to blow their minds if they have formed no taste for movies at all.
The lighthouse is a completely different movie?
@@204cr learn to read
Differrent movie, different context. Believe it or not, but not every talking scene needs to be a stillshot on someones face. I mean, is 1917 the best Movie ever made because there is not a single cut ? Not that the movie isnt great, but cuts do have their place in a movie....
@@Ixiah27 This is more about Willem than the movies. If Jamie Foxx was delivering the monologue instead I wouldn't mind the cuts.
It wasn’t their movie, and I know you addressed this in the vid anyways, but still, none of these scenes were “about” dafoe, maguire or Garfield and your reasoning just sounds like “pay more attention to these characters” than “do what makes sense for the scene”.
watch my new short film: kzhead.info/sun/h9FtadqQbpp3poE/bejne.html
I think there were lamps in the Rooms and basement if that makes you happy.
@@adamquenano8563 solid lamps in that scene you're right
not enough beans if you ask me
I love lamp.
lamp gang
This movie was good but it can only be as good as a MCU movie. Rami made real movies .The MCU is fast paced and has camera cuts and too many jokes. If they filmed this like a real movie and took their time it could have been a masterpiece.
The rami movies are far from masterpieces and I grew up with the rami films. 2 was the closest but it wasn’t an cinematic masterpiece it was a comic book masterpiece. I agree with the jokes but let’s not act like this movie didn’t have a lot of downtime. 65-70% of this movie is literally downtime. The whole part when the peters come through the portal then talk on the roof, then go to the lab then talk about their biggest foes is like 25-30 mins of downtime and that’s not even including aunt may death. I feel like the biggest issue was the tone imo. Too many corny jokes and sudden changes of atmosphere.
@@juanbonkers6090 Spiderman 2 is a masterpiece and number 2 to the Dark Knight. The dialogue is complex the story's better the soundtracks better ect ... The atmosphere is a result of Covid. The main characters and the villians had to stay in the same area at all times. Dr stranges witch lair the apartment and the statue of liberty fight. The only time you see citizens is the opening scene because they had to do that because of the post credits scene cliffhanger and the school scene. But yeah you're right a lack of atmosphere is another problem with this movie
@@juanbonkers6090 I think the reason there is a sudden shift in tone was intentional. Peter's world literally shattered when Aunt May died. He realised that by doing what was "the right thing" Aunt May had to die for that. He felt he was at fault for trusting the villains and he was at the lowest point he has ever been, even more than Tony's death. The rest of movie had to match this new tonal shift and the whole point was that it was to teach Peter that actions have consequences, even good intended ones, and sacrifices will be made along the way. Something he knew in Far From Home, but never truly understood that until this point. And that culminates with his decision to make everyone forget his existance at the end of the movie. It is the most direct way to show Peter has grown up and now it opens new paths for him to take in the next trilogy.
The MCU is like fast food while the Rami films are like a buffet
@@zillauniverse7208 Nolans like a steakhouse
This is what happens when you have to edit for a target demographic that has ADHD
The most annoying part of NWH for me was how they executed Dafoe's final laugh as the Green Goblin, where instead of focusing on Dafoe it kept cutting to Andrew throwing the antidote to Tom. That really pissed me off since it's probably Dafoe last time in the role.
this is is what im saying!
I think that was the point. The movie was peter parker saving the villians: in this point Norman Osborne, why focus on the laughter when its the thing hurting him? Does that make sense?
His final laugh was fine, spiderman just had to cure Norman.
Do they really have to hold a shot on a laugh though? That scene was about Tom putting his anger and rage aside and do the right and responsible thing by curing Osborn. It was literally 2 seconds or less that they cut from Willem to show Andrew throwing the cure at Tom and then when Tom injects the cure into Osborn, they kept the shot on his face, showing how what he had done as the Goblin had affected him. That scene wasn't about Osborn being cured so much as it was about Tom's Peter doing the right thing despite his emotional state.
Nothing wrong with that, they just had to cure norman
The most aesthetically pleasing channel on KZhead
I felt some sort of "irritation" watching this movie, like something was "wrong", or was "lacking", but I couldn't really tell or point to why. Now that I watched your video, I know. Thank you very much, good sir.
Cheers!
This is precisely how I was feeling. It was like the filmmakers were expecting a certain emotional reaction without earning it. Same thing with the aunt may death scene.
Same
it felt like some scenes were missing
@@onelove2230 the aunt May death scene kinda felt like “this is what you get for being stupid Peter” instead of a tragic death at least to me which kinda sad tbh
Just discovered your channel and immediately subscribed . Content is so well edited and crafted. Love your insight, keep it comin🙏🏻
Thanks Jese!
Really nice breakdown! I think no way home is a good Spiderman Film but from the perspective of a traditional cinema lover a uncinematic movie.
makes you ask then does a film need to be cinematic to be good?
@@JordanTelezino I don't think a film needs to be cinematic to succeed but if it was filmed in a cinematic way, its going to have much more VALUE to it..because you know the people behind the scenes think about every aspect of the film (cinematography, editing, blocking) there's a lot of thought put into a single frame... Like Parasite, sure its a different genre, but we are talking about ''does a film needs to be cinematic?'', while i enjoy spider-man nwh, if i have to choose, i will always pick Parasite because there is so much VALUE to it. Well, that's just my opinion.
Define uncinematic please... Bare in mind art is subjective
@@mansolo3183 i know that, i think patrick willems made a video about cinematic subject. I dont want to type an essay about what i think about cinematic vs uncinematic because its long...and nobody wants to read it...and im fucking lazy...
@@PanglimaPerang0214 fair
You should analyze scenes from The Batman when it releases on digital. Great content, man, love ur channel!
I will be doing more for sure 🥂
This was one of Chris Stuckmanns problems with the film as well. He said in his review "they kept cutting away from Dafoe!!" and I totally agree that that's a mistake. Great video!
I agree with you so hard man!!! I felt those nostalgic moments could’ve been utilized so much better, especially with Tobey. I thought his Spider-Man needed a little bit more focus just like Andrew’s got, but that’s just my opinion. I miss the days when movie studios let directors make their films mostly the way they wanted. Like a lot of long takes and telling their stories in minimal shots. Thank god for Denis Villeneuve, Cari Joji Fukinaga, and Matt Reeves.
Everyone I’ve talked to about it feels this. Maybe we’ll see more one day. Who knows.
@@impatrickt I just miss the days when you went to the theaters and watched films like The Lord of the Rings, American Gangster, There Will Be Blood, or The Dark Knight, movies that were 2-3 hours long and we as a society just rocked with it and took in all of the greatness of those films. Now, streaming and social media has slightly ruined the way we watch films, we don’t appreciate them as much. But it feels like it’s slowly getting back to those times when people really payed attention and valued cinema. This is why it’s important for the industry to put the artistry and storytelling first.
@@TheAlexisBrownChannel I think a great way for corporate entities like Disney to make profit out of their projects is to take time to care and understand about a project they're making. You know why the Mona Lisa was valued highly, critically and commercially? It's because Leonardo da Vinci had one thing in mind and it's not to make money. It's to convey his emotions and expression through a painted canvas. Money is material and temporary. Feelings and emotions are memorable and they stick into your head. P.S., I think if a lot of craftsmanship is put into what you do, you end up leaving people in awe and they would want more, which establishes a symbiotic relationship with creativity and profit as long as you put creativity first.
If the Director cares for the franchise yes it will be good and if the studio cares about the movie yes it will work, just take a look the examples of SW sequel the director doesn't care specifically for fans i know fandom is toxic but still he does not care, the Suicide squad 2016 studio get incharge results catastrophe but the soft reboot 2021 works because the studio gave gunn more control WHO actually cares about the Movie itself, result it works satisfaction but not good at box office
@@RafaelHernandez-vx9ug Yes, if care is being put into a film project it probably will be most likely great. But what I see a lot nowadays in the commercial market is studios just hiring a director for a paycheck and dictating a lot of artistic choices and just making the film bland, stale, generic, and boring. Those films have no identity or character and they make so much money at the box office and more and more of them get made, because the audiences steady support the mediocrity. That’s another issue, audiences need to support the right films, but that’s very tricky for an audience member. Studios just need invest and put out quality films that tell brilliant stories going forward, instead mediocre, run of the mill, and safe films.
That's the problem, Whole movie felt like it's cuts are shortened only to fit in 2.5 hour runtime. In early 12 minutes only they rushed so hard: Peter realises he's screwed -> Tries to run -> Tries to handle legally -> Hires lawyer -> Meet with FBI -> Applies for University -> Gets letter This whole sequence felt like dude let him catch a breath atleast. Even hiring lawyer takes like days let alone FBI. They made it felt like it all happened in 1 day. University takes month to approve and reply letter.
Lamps? Lamps? Where are my lamps?
NOT ENOUGH LAMPS!
I completely agree with you with just about everything you said! Narratively speaking, this film was absolutely phenomenal! The cinematography and editing was simply put awful in some scenes. Marvel Studios needs to lift their game man…. There are very few dynamic camera shots in this film, they’re always just cut, cut, cut
I wouldn't say "very few", but ok...
Narratively it is lackluster and undercooked . Without the other 2 spidermen showing up this movie has little to offer.
@@henrychinaski5938 where
@@rawpowerjagg The whole first half.
@@henrychinaski5938 i missed the part where that's my problem
I like how you compared a scene with six people in it all reacting to what Green Goblin is saying, to a scene with a single man standing in front of a mirror and then act like you're making a sound argument.
I like how you completely missed the point of this entire video. Quantity of characters is irrelevant - especially when all they do is cutaway for garbage reactions and May fumbling around with her grocery bag. It's comically bad and hilarious. The Goblin scene from Raimi's Spider-Man could have easily bounced a 2 shot instead of holding too - honestly that's probably how Watt's would have cut it given how he cut the mask breaking scene. So brutal.
I get what you're saying but he also used the Mission Impossible Fallout scene as an example which basically has the same number of characters as the NWH scene
This was so dope, dude. I don’t know a lot about film making, so a lot of times, I don’t notice stuff like this till it’s pointed out. Great work! And I loved the ad. Super throwback vibes. So good.
Really dig where you're taking the channel these days. Kepp up the good work.
I knew there was something wrong with this movie but I couldn't consciously pin point it. All I knew is, I didn't FEEL what was happening on the screen that much. Where in the original Spiderman movies you really did FEEL it. And this makes a lot of sense! This is something all recent Marvel movies suffer from. They want to hit you in the feels but they don't wait long enough to really hit you in the gut like the scene should...
same, I was also really annoyed how there were so many cuts in the film. I thought having many cuts is normal, but after watching this I have changed my mind.
@@newwave26 Right? A perfect example of this, that I just remembered, are the scenes of aunt May in the original Spider Man. When she talks to Peter they have a full blown conversation. She speaks and gives this long monologue to Peter and we just sit there, watching and listening, completely uninterrupted. And it's great! I rewatched them a couple months ago and it was so satisfying to watch.
@@newwave26 preach bro
@@newwave26 Are you serious? We got what is considered, THE BEST SPIDER-MAN FILM TO DATE, and you're worried about how many cuts there are? Fuck off
It's soap opera for children, it's not film
You’re doing such cool videos with these reviews / essays. Inspiring dude fr
Hey man, these video essays are by far my fave of all ur content!
Glad you like them!
Not what I was expecting, but never judge a book by its cover. Or, a video by its thumbnail. Pretty great video.
I guess the mystery got you to click!
Pls do a video on NWH's cinematography! with a blue screen count and everything
I just found your channel and I love it. As a Spider-Man fan, this movie is a dream come true, and it will forever hold a special place in my heart. But from a filmmaking standpoint, it really does have some major flaws. Keep up the great content!
thanks, Brook!
Great review pal. Been waiting for someone to address this!!! Thanks for bringing some light to it! Also I agree, not enough lamps.
Honestly i have no issues with the cuts. For me it helps enhance the tension of the moment. For all my life since i saw the original Spider-Man film at like maybe 4 or 5 years old, Goblin to me felt like a joke in that first film. I just for the life of me couldn't take Gobby seriously until NWH. Jon Watts did such a great job with him in the film that he retroactively made my mind take him seriously in the 2002 film which i never had before. He genuinely felt menacing and like a threat in NWH but for the longest time I couldn't take him seriously at all until NWH the first Spider-Man film just doesn't have the same amount of tension with Goblin as the new one does to me
them essays be fueeegooooo
I agree. As a film major pursuing to become a director, I always tell myself that my films should have quick cuts (for quick and engaging pacing) but should also include long takes during the important and relevant parts of the narrative. Examples of this within NWH include when Osborn was cured, Norman’s transition to the goblin, Andrew and Tobey’s first meeting with Tom, and Peter’s final sacrifice. There are many moments in the film that follow this mentality but like you said in the video there are also moments where they don’t. I’m still learning more about directing but from what I’ve learned already I couldn’t agree more with what’s being said here.
Nice bionicles
Honestly, I feel like every once in awhile I need to sit back and think about how this movie actually happened. It honestly sounds like a dream
You're my new favourite 'video essay ist' guy. I love channels such as yours, The Closer Look, Thomas Flight, Nerdstalgic amongst many others. Keep up the great content.
those guys all rock. thanks Manas!
The cinematography of noway home was garbage
I agree, I think they were cutting the frame way too much because there were some points when I was watching the movie and I was just like “Let me see the person’s face!” Another thing I’m thinking about is that they used de-aging on Willem Dafoe to make him look like how he was in the first Spider Man film so maybe they cut the frame away from Willem just to do less editing on the face 🤔
I dont think they did - and if they did it was subtle because there's a lot of shots where they do hold on him. the scene at May's shelter in the back kitchen has an extended frame hold on his face for quite a while and he looks normal.
Afraid you're just wrong with the edits on this one. I love most of the cuts you showed. I think they were intentional and that they work well.
Right on, Jared.
marvel doesn't do justice to villains to begin with. it's just a fan serviced nostalgia for that money.
There's a shot during Tom's Peter and Goblin's final fight that stuck with me. When Dafoe whips out the blade, he whistles and gives a classic evil smile. But the way they edited it was agitating. Instead of letting the audience endure Dafoe's sinister approach in a fluent take, it was done in cuts. Blade, cut to peter, cut to whistle, cut to peter, cut to smile. Despite that, there was a lot to admire from the film. :)
That was my first gut feeling that NWH might have bad editing. I was so annoyed it cut off Dafoe's whistle. Now I'm annoyed it didn't focus on Garfield's entire speech.
@@vit968 Definitely didn't have bad editing, just energetic editing
@@jwatts94 *ADHD Writing
@@joshuameadows4922 *Nerve racking editing. Also the fact that this guy called the BEST scene in the movie, the WORST scene. Tells me all I need to know about his content. Sped to the fucking MAX
Honestly, besides Dafoe's performance and seeing Tobey and Andrew back, I thought NWH was really boring. Great first time viewing but I don't think it has much rewatchability. Especially after seeing how much love got put into The Batman, (I know I probably shouldn't compare) it just feels so cheap.
can't argue much with that - I still enjoy the moments with all three of them at the end though for sure. but its movie you can watch in clips on KZhead and be just as satisfied.
"besides Dafoe's performance and seeing Tobey and Andrew back, I thought NWH was really boring" nah you clearly dont understand what set this movie apart from just being some fan service festival. This was a true Spiderman story and probably has the most fitting ending to any CBM.
Great first time viewing is all that matters!!🤷🏾♂️
@@deanshine5201 I'd like to think that I do understand. Read a bit of the comics and Spider-Man 2 is one of my favorite movies of all time. I'm happy that Tom Holland's Spidey finally has actual consequences and hardships to deal with this time around, and with him being completely alone and making his own suit by the end of the movie, it leaves him in exactly the shitty type of situation we're so used to seeing him in. Definitely makes me excited for the next film if there is one.
@@deanshine5201 I mean that’s just his opinion bro not everything is super complicated
Starting to become one of my fav channels now fr
That "The hell?" cracks me EVERY time on cue!
I liked it. It contrasted the personalities of everyone in the room and made Goblin even creepier by comparison
Amazing breakdown. I feel like these cut issues reach an annoying crescendo by the third act. The fistfight between Holland and Dafoe literally hurt my eyes. There was a cut for every single punch, dodge, and sidestep. Also, the 'introductory shots' of Tobey and Andrew felt like an SNL sequence due to the camerawork. I've been wondering how those scenes could have been handled better(visually). Would love to hear your ideas.
Very true the introductory shots were not too good
“Da hell!” - Electro
loved this hope you make more!
"da hell?" lol
THE HELL!?
The room was filled with people, it's standard that since there's something bizarre or strange happening to someone in the room, we at least need to know the reaction or atmosphere in the room to get a feel of being in the room. Obviously, Sam Raimi didn't put cuts because it's a monologue in his case, Goblin was literally alone in those shots while in NWH, he was talking to actual people, not himself. The multiple cuts was to display how fast things are escalating during the moment and the tension happening, you have at least 5 important characters there with different standpoints and motivations, that was the challenging part but I think they did it well. The fast pacing of May was sufficient for me to show that she was smart enough to move immediately yet the voice over by Dafoe was still clear to understand that he was there for a menacing purpose.
I swear nobody watches this video lmao
@@impatrickt I watched it man, I know you used MI as an example but I think it's a totally different stake. Well I do agree with your assessment that MCU films have tendencies to over include unnecessary shots (Natasha's reaction to Wanda saving her in IW at Wakanda, a lot of moments in Civil War for the sake of quipping, etc) I don't think the apartment scene here is one of them. I think it's their way of visual storytelling how Goblin's breaking point initiated everyone's breaking point as well. The example in MI needed a still pan and a few shots for Cruise, nobody cares about the extras and why they were there. While for NWH, Electro, Ock, May, and Peter had their own things going on during the scene.
@@GHanBax you're focusing on the wrong aspect of the scene - my issue is May running around. it serves no purpose but to remove our attention of Norman/Goblin. They even pause his monologue just for her to fumble in the other room gathering serums. Do you not think that scene could have been more impactful and scary if we just saw Norman turn? I don't care about cutting to the other villains that's why I didn't even show them.
@@impatrickt I respect your point and preference but for me, I think that scene was important to show that May was actually there and is aware of what's happening. That point was the start for me to be worried for her. She was the one after all who inspired Peter to cure them (and emphasized with the cutscenes to initiate the action of gathering serums) yet while hearing the Goblin monologue, we worry for her because she's the head of the idea and Goblin would surely attack her which he did because Goblin doesn't want to be cured. Without the fast pacing, I think it would be hard to insert to the plot how they were able to gather all curing devices in one go given the destruction of the building. It was convenient enough at that point.
Loving the essays.
People just casually forgetting they had to make this film during a pandemic and the actors couldn't always be on the same set as each other.
So was the Batman.
@@impatrickt That film had issues with cutting as well as others. Your point? Or do you just need a reason to bitch?
@@impatrickt And Pattinson got covid during filming So your point?
@@VemoNotRated covid isnt an excuse to make a shit movie.
I respect your opinion and as such I respectfully disagree. The cuts were beyond necessary for this movie and any film maker would tell you that. We needed the cuts to understand what exactly was happening in this scene with the other characters. Unlike the Rami footage you showed, the NWH scene had 6 integral characters to it's plot in this scene. Also, unlike the Rami footage you showed, Goblin isn't only talking to himself or Osbourne in the NHW scene. The monologue wasn't meant for just Spider-Man. It was meant for the others to hear as well and because of that, seeing their reactions to Goblin's monologue was an absolute must. We also needed to see Aunt May gathering up the cures so we'd have context as to why she had a bag full of stuff and as to why she put herself in harms way by trying the anti-formula on Goblin. Had we not had the cuts then we wouldn't of known the other characters' intentions, emotions, reactions, and why they made the choices they made. For example, when Goblin says, "No more darker half? Did you really think I'd let that happen?" He wasn't talking to Spider-Man, he was talking to Doc Ock. He then turns his attention to Spider-Man with the "What true power can bring" line. Finally, he turns his attention to the other villains explaining how their powers are not curses, they're gifts. The cuts were absolutely necessary and doesn't take away from this scene in the slightest. Had it only been Goblin and Spider-Man in the scene then I'd agree with you, but that wasn't the case. Anyways, I digress.
they don't even cut to doc oc or the other characters - people keep saying this but they should really watch the scene again, thats why I put it in the video. it cuts to aunt may fumbling around.
@@impatrickt definitely I agree, though most people wouldn’t notice until they either have someone point it out, or until they look for things they don’t like. I don’t mind the fact we see aunt may fumbling around but it definitely did not need to be edited in such a way where every second was a cut just from a different angle. Though if i try to find a reason as to why they would perhaps edit the scene like this, then I jump back to a scene in Breaking Bad near the endgame, the cinematography is perfect through the entire show, no wild jump cuts and then at a very crucial and chaotic point in the story where things are falling apart, is the only time when they bring in a mess of a cuts with fights breaking out between the family, the direction/cinematographer just starts randomly sticking cuts of the same scene from multiple angles, while also constantly jumping to different character to see their reactions, the point of the randomness of that scene was to make it chaotic and cause confusion, as a representation of the characters in that scene were confused, lost, and upset with Walter. It really added to the scene and it only happened once throughout that entire show, though in this movie, I get the feeling they might’ve been trying to do something similar but it kinda doesn’t work because in a lot of scenes there are a few random cuts like this, so it loses impact.
@@pochi1491 you demonstrated why that breaking bad scene worked though - because they never did it before. it’s jarring, like the fight. all of the Spider-Man Jon Watts films have no visual or connective editing consistency. So it’s just messy.
Exactly. I also can't understand why the cinematography in Marvel films is so ugly...
except for dr strange
Except for every Captain America movie
Never realised this before, but you are right, hope its worked on in future movies bringing back old and loved characters
great video! what’s the outro song? is it also by Makeup and Vanity Set? you could list ur music in your videos, you have great taste 😃
Sandman felt pointless for most of the story.
I always forget he's even in it
And Lizard
Sandman and Lizard should've been cut out. Sandman's story was done and Lizard didn't need to be cured twice. The movie was already bloated with characters. Should've been the Sinister 3 or 2 just Goblin, Otto, and Electro
Love it again Patrick, you're one of my favourite creators atm. I'm inspired to do a Batman vs No Way home Video essay, but we'll see if It'll be good. Much love brother, stay grinding. Hope you and the family are well.
yes do it! at the very least you'll learn something during the process and that's what matters.
@@impatrickt Yea bro, exactly. I'm writing a video at the moment and working with my editor to make sure we get it done. After that, I'll see we get the green light and do it! I love movies and film so seeing your stuff, as a beginner in this business, is super inspiring and helpful. Thanks!
Great video as a person I love watching a lot of movies but I didn't notice the detail of holding the frame in the movie which you covered was amazing 👍
I noticed that too like he cut so many parts when Willem dafoe as green goblin again doing a villain monologue
In the end, this film will stay with me as a great cinematic experience and The Batman will stay with me as an amazing piece of art of which i will rewatch for years and years to come.
I totally agree. For me it should have just cut to aunt may getting the antidotes and the one beep on electros device to add suspense. The rest should have been the camera focusing on willems face. Show us the look in his eyes as Norman is slowly being overpowered by goblin. It would have been extremely creepy
i swear the goblin mask insert shot in 6:08 wasn’t there, or at least when i saw it in theaters. When it showed up in my next viewing on digital, it felt super off.
bro i love your video essays, the editing and writing is so on point 💪💯
thanks austin 🙏
That did kinda bother me. I was editing this scene for my Sisu meets Goblin video, and I noticed how little the scene actually focuses on Dafoe as he’s speaking. I’m glad there’s channels like these that do take a look at the more technical aspects of what makes these characters so affective outside the writing perspective.
Uh oh looks like twitter was right, hating on no way home is kinda famous now. Kinda crazy how people turned on this movie, can’t wait for people to do the same for the batman lmao
It’s like you didn’t even watch the video.
@@impatrickt crazy how most modern cinemas out there cuts that much but then overlooked because it’s not the MCU, not a big fan of Marvel in general but the cuts were perfectly fine, I mean, no one complained when they were watching in the cinema right?
@@spadeecstasy8709 it’s a complaint in every review
People just want to complain about the smallest of things
@@randomchannel1537 like you right now in this thread
Brilliant input, i wasn't sure when I opened the video but I agree with you after watching, you've got a new sub
“How to ruin the villain”- have the Green Goblin call Doc Ock ‘honey’. It wouldn’t make sense for any of Spider-Man’s top 10 villains to call another one “honey”.
i think the reason why there were so many cuts is because the director wanted to show everybodys reaction to normans change but it really didnt work
This was very well put, I love this movie to death but the editing is just unbearable at times. I’m hoping in Toms next trilogy they try to be more cinematic (idk if that’s the right word tbh). I think it would be cool if they got Raimi to direct it.
You know, on the topic of character moments not landing because we don't stick with them long enough, how do you feel about Norman being jettisoned from the movie without even having a final talk with Holland? I thought that was a waste of an opportunity. It would've been nice to see them have one final talk, maybe with Holland holding him accountable for killing May but still being willing to forgive him because it wasn't "him" and Norman opting to make amends by doing what he could to make up for his stint as the Green Goblin back in his universe.
i thought he was rushed out for sure. that was odd.
The scene this makes me think of that it should have been is Silva from Skyfall with the Rats scene and the slow walk monologue. That’s how you do a monologue. It’s perfect. I totally agree with your point.
STELLAR monologue for in Skyfall. Great call!
This film made the Goblin even better than before. What are you smoking?
better shit than you
yeah and imagine if watts held the frame
>Complains about the movie cutting to something else when it's getting good >Cuts to something else (terrible sponsor) during his own god dam video just when it was getting good Nice hypocrisy there
point proven. thanks for watching!
I don't think this is the best way to do it but this is a way to solve that very real problem. The biggest issue when he started the monologue, they tried to bring more importance to May grabbing the tubes than Goblin's speech. They could have conveyed the same information and still focus on the speech, but they just didn't have their priorities right. I think it's because whoever edited it and the director honestly believe the notion that a character is made more powerful when they speak while off screen, when in actuality it depends on the scene and even the line. "Quiet, lapdog" is a line that works perfectly when spoken off screen. "That I'd let you take away my power" does not work when spoken off screen. The goblin scene could have been fixed simply by finding a way to block the scene so that they could capture Defoe's acting while showing May sneaking in the background. Have Peter say "you don't know me" off screen, because Goblin demands screen presence and having him dominate the frame while other characters talk absolutely fits the moment. They had him pause once while she got all the tubes, which completely destroyed the flow. Have him pause his dialogue and cut to a medium of May that pans down to show her grabbing a tube. Cut back to Defoe as he continues, and every time he pauses, cut to May grabbing another tube. Quick and snappy, and it adds a beat to the speech instead of interrupting it. When she comes out, repeat the first shot of her in the background while he talks. "these are not curses" and "they're gifts" have a cut in between them, even though he actively changes expression, which is an acting beat you need to convey. Add in the reaction shot of Electro, because Goblin responds to it by smiling, and then cut back to his frown changing into a smile. Take May's reaction shot out and put the beep there instead. The next couple cuts are honestly useless and I cannot understand what motivated it. He speaks and the cut takes a second, implying we're about to get a big speech, and then it cuts to peter again while he talks, on a line that is very important to Goblin as a character; we should be seeing his face there. But we see peter, and then Goblin pauses. AND THAT'S WHEN WE CUT BACK??? WHO EDITED THIS. That's where Peter's reaction shot SHOULD have gone. They should have lingered on him as he said "while the world tries to make you choose" and then interrupt it with the second beep, THEN cut to Peter's reaction, THEN cut to Goblin as he says "Gods don't have to choose" and then linger on Electro as he says "we take" because that line is literally meant to try and persuade him. The rest is action marvel stuff so whatever, but that was such an important character moment that absolutely had a "competent" way to be done and a "masterful" way. My way wasn't even competent, just barely passing - the actual scene itself didn't even get a letter grade. It was film school level editing and blocking.
we didnt see this cut. in my theatre, the scene didnt cut.
weird
watch jaby koay's take on this. it's scary. but i assure you, we didnt have many cuts in this monologue. so iam a bit perplexed.
@@shramanlahiri6248 I know they had a few different versions of the film out at release and they also changed a lot of CGI
While I understand your point, I think that seems to be a very personal problem. I don't think it's necessarily wrong to focus the scene on something else, when the director or even the writer thinks it's more important or interesting. Sure, you personally want to see Willem Dafoe because you love him and his acting, but in reality it's not really needed to be seen unless you are an actor enthusiast who really needs to see it. And it's a fair point. But showing what's happening around The Goblin is not only a way to show plot happening, it's also meant to show how tense everyone is, how on edge everyone is because they know something terrible might happen any second. I think it is meant to show that time is running out and the good guys have to prepare for what's about to happen. I think it's a fair choice to focus on that, and it doesn't mean that Jon Watts is a worse director than Sam Raimi. (although that's not really a fair comparison to begin with ... to be fair) And yes, I am a fan of one shots or scenes with little cuts as well, but I think a lot of cuts can work in some instances as well, and I think that Spider-Man scene is actually a scene where it does work, because it represents the confusion about what's going on, the hectic tension in the scene, with them having to act fast, therefore - fast cuts. I'm not saying, that you could not do the scene better with less cuts. You might. In my opinion, there is no wrong choice here, it's just a matter of preference. And even in the 3 Spiderman scene that you point out in the end of your video, there is an argument to be made that we need to see what Andrews and Tobeys words mean to Tom Hollands Peter.
It’s awful. Objectively.
@@impatrickt you're awful. Objectively.
@@impatrickt lmao the more I see you reply the more I've come to realize you're just a sad little boy who doesn't know how to deal with other opinions. This is usually seen in people who had trouble socially developing in childhood, probably didn't have many friends and use whatever perceived power you can grasp to try and berate people. Roll your eyes but we both know deep down I'm right XD
I think you’re being a bit too picky. The great thing about Willem DeFoe is that he’s amazing on and off screen. You don’t need to physically see him to understand what’s going on, he’s a voice machine. I feel the same watching him as I do listening to him. He could have done this scene over the phone and it still would have made me shiver. It still would have been amazing. Maybe that’s what Jon was trying to show us.
Nah
@@impatrickt Yeah.
@@davidphuggins nah - he doesn’t even talk when he’s off screen lol
Very well made video. A fantastic point, and you got that point across very well. I hate seeing a large amount of cuts. Especially in very rapid succession.
And now when you mentioned that scene (and cuts) I’m thinking about it 😳
So, basically you didn't like the scene because the camera doesn't stay on Dafoe's face to get his full performance and it cuts too much... Okay, I disagree completely. I believe the cutting gave better context to the other characters. The only reason why others scenes in the Raimy Spiderman could hold shots like that is because they only had one or two characters in those scenes. That scene in Spiderman 1 with Dafoe talking to himself in the mirror NEVER would have worked as a single shot if there were literally 5 or 6 other people in that room like in No Way Home. The Raimy films were smaller and much more simplistic than No Way Home or really any modern Marvel movie. Thus, they could use more focus on that simplistic nature. Allowing for single shots on someone like Dafoe or Peter and MJ eating dinner. That's why the more choppy nature for No Way Home not only works for it, but enhances the overall experience. I want to see the other character's reaction to the Goblin arising. Electro and Otto's reaction were real and made sense. Especially, for they're respective characters. The only reason that scene in mission impossible worked as a single shot with so many characters, is because those characters aren't INFAMOUS Marvel super villains. They're just side characters, we know them, know how they'd react and also in that clip they're not really doing anything anyway but listening to the conversation. The villains are 2 seconds from going crazy again in that scene in No Way Home, so the audience needs to see they're reactions, otherwise if the scene solely focused on Dafoe (Which it still did) the audience would feel suffocated during the scene from the lack of content. I and many other people wanted to see how everyone reacted to The Goblin's change, and it worked. So, I see where you are coming from, but I disagree completely. Especially, for a film like this. Also the cinematography was great. I don't know what you were going on about that for...
You don’t see the other characters. It cuts to Aunt May fumbling around in the other room. Maybe read the comments on this video and see if you’re on the right track for how the audience felt. The fact that you’re literally describing editing like a montage because the audience would feel bored is why so many blockbusters suck now. It’s also quite literally one of the worst shot films of the last 20 years. But there’s plenty of people that have made videos and articles about that. I won’t beat a dead horse.
@@impatrickt To say No Way Home is one of the worst shot films in the last twenty years, is both a bold statement and completely wrong and bias. To also say that most blockbusters "suck" is also bold and a wrong statement. This is literally coming from you, the guy who supposedly watched No Way Home like 5 times. A movie that apparently, in your definition, "sucked". Don't get me wrong, No Way Home isn't ground breaking or anything in cinematography, but to say it's cinematography is out right bad, is not true at all what so ever. I also never said anything about wanting shots to be a montage. I said that in a movie like No Way Home there are just too many important main characters to solely focus on just one character, for a whole sequence, like in the apartment. You are confusing "good" with "perfect". The shots and cinematography could be better as any movie can be, but do not call good movies bad, just because their cinematography isn't galactic levels of perfection. I'm all for having your own opinions on topics, but that does not make your opinion right. Especially, when you're already bias toward the topic. Like blockbusters.
I totally agree with so much of this. It was so nice to see the old characters return, and there are great performances all around, but the movie just has so many issues with its execution and contradictions around its messaging
Id love to see a breakdown from you about what makes a good one-er. Like, the one from True Detective S1, 1917, or that foreign film that I can never remember
im planning a true detective revisit video. will definitely speak about it.
It’s all subjective Pat. I agree a bit to many cuts in that scene., but…for me “lost in words” technique when the villain or hero monologues about a sensitive subject, the more j cuts the better…I like narrative things to flash in my eyes while I hear a deep voice delivering a threat or a scary story about a certain moment in time/place. So, I won’t say it was a mistake but it could’ve been a bit more refined. Cheers man, great essay again…and again👍💪
It’s fucking brutal dude lol
@@impatrickt …but the lamps?🤣
@@CrisConstantin not enough!