What is plagiarism? Where did plagiarism come from? Who made plagiarism? Where am I, plagiarism? Can you help me?My Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/HbombMy ...
you misunderstand, scene changes are not 'breaking points', even with a title card. an -intermission- is, an end in an episode is. i don't know why you've invented this exotic application for the concept of scenes to exonerate clear failures of organization
I'm not invested, just saying I disagree with you assertion. Personally I think they function fine as "intermission points", I've used them as such myself.
If you prefer them to be broken up into individual videos that's a valid preference but I personally don't have a problem with this other style.
i am invested, i care about the author, the medium, and the subjectmatter. the laziness this project was slapped together with is an obstacle for me and others to learn or experience anything salient buried in there, and since the guy has had good things to say in the past, it's a disappointment.
but your dismissive attitude crops up every time people are talking about media length, either 'skill issue' or 'i don't really care, why do you care?'. what you did to experience that video was work. you organized & played it how you liked, at a pace that worked for you. but folks don't want to work to see something, and your assumption that your methods would work for all is incorrect. how long can these intermissions be? will somebody forget important details? how independent is each 'chapter', can they stand on their own? when the author wrestles these, they can organize the work to support intended pauses---when the audience does it they're rolling a dice. i can pause in the middle of any movie, technically, and possibly come back remembering perfectly, or not. but an intermission that was made with intention re-establishes and information on either end are organized with it in mind.
Okay well you actually have more substantive objections than just "it's long", most of which are coming from people who probably don't care for the author anyway (I don't particularly like him myself) and would probably happily watch a long ass video from someone else on a topic they find interesting.
Regardless, you can make you criticism, even try and make it to Hbomber directly if you like, and/or not watch the video and unsub to try and send him the message that he needs to edit these down a bit. You could make your own video essay on why video essays are too long. You can also post on HexBear about it but that has little to no chance of actually affecting this trend. But at the end of the day clearly some people either are fine with or even enjoy these long videos cuz they keep getting views.
not here to change anything but your mind, the substantive objections are beneath all the 'it's long' debates, whether the people formulate it that way or not. film isn't science exactly but it can be understood better than flattening it to matters of taste. the non-debate-y version of this lecture is simply "how do people watch all that TV but not 6 hour movies?"
film isn't science exactly but it can be understood better than flattening it to matters of taste.
True but I think debates over what is and isn't too long are more subjective. I've made the point elsewhere, but there plenty of narratives movies as long or longer than this video that are very good, and if anything it's harder to make a good long narrative film cuz there's less good points to pause if you need to take a wiz or grab a beer.
If you think it would be better broken into a multi part series fine, I just don't agree with the idea that long form is inherently bad. If you want to argue the length is detrimental in conjunction with other flaws, like poor pacing and structure, that'd be fine.
i just watched War and Peace (for like the fourth time, it's really good), that's 7 hours long but it's well paced, and subdivided into normal film length chunks. but i absolutely could not have watched it back to back, it'd be murder, especially if you excised the connecting tissue at the beginning and end of each part.
the removal of intermissions has actually happened with the extended cuts of the lord of the rings films. those were on DVD originally, and each film was broken up by the need to switch discs, a physically-imposed sort of intermission, but one nonetheless. but these days the whole damn things are on streaming and they are noticeably more interminable.
Dividing a piece of media up into chunks that provide people with breaking points where they can go and take a piss or a nap is editing.
you misunderstand, scene changes are not 'breaking points', even with a title card. an -intermission- is, an end in an episode is. i don't know why you've invented this exotic application for the concept of scenes to exonerate clear failures of organization
I'm not invested, just saying I disagree with you assertion. Personally I think they function fine as "intermission points", I've used them as such myself.
If you prefer them to be broken up into individual videos that's a valid preference but I personally don't have a problem with this other style.
i am invested, i care about the author, the medium, and the subjectmatter. the laziness this project was slapped together with is an obstacle for me and others to learn or experience anything salient buried in there, and since the guy has had good things to say in the past, it's a disappointment.
but your dismissive attitude crops up every time people are talking about media length, either 'skill issue' or 'i don't really care, why do you care?'. what you did to experience that video was work. you organized & played it how you liked, at a pace that worked for you. but folks don't want to work to see something, and your assumption that your methods would work for all is incorrect. how long can these intermissions be? will somebody forget important details? how independent is each 'chapter', can they stand on their own? when the author wrestles these, they can organize the work to support intended pauses---when the audience does it they're rolling a dice. i can pause in the middle of any movie, technically, and possibly come back remembering perfectly, or not. but an intermission that was made with intention re-establishes and information on either end are organized with it in mind.
Okay well you actually have more substantive objections than just "it's long", most of which are coming from people who probably don't care for the author anyway (I don't particularly like him myself) and would probably happily watch a long ass video from someone else on a topic they find interesting.
Regardless, you can make you criticism, even try and make it to Hbomber directly if you like, and/or not watch the video and unsub to try and send him the message that he needs to edit these down a bit. You could make your own video essay on why video essays are too long. You can also post on HexBear about it but that has little to no chance of actually affecting this trend. But at the end of the day clearly some people either are fine with or even enjoy these long videos cuz they keep getting views.
not here to change anything but your mind, the substantive objections are beneath all the 'it's long' debates, whether the people formulate it that way or not. film isn't science exactly but it can be understood better than flattening it to matters of taste. the non-debate-y version of this lecture is simply "how do people watch all that TV but not 6 hour movies?"
True but I think debates over what is and isn't too long are more subjective. I've made the point elsewhere, but there plenty of narratives movies as long or longer than this video that are very good, and if anything it's harder to make a good long narrative film cuz there's less good points to pause if you need to take a wiz or grab a beer.
If you think it would be better broken into a multi part series fine, I just don't agree with the idea that long form is inherently bad. If you want to argue the length is detrimental in conjunction with other flaws, like poor pacing and structure, that'd be fine.
i just watched War and Peace (for like the fourth time, it's really good), that's 7 hours long but it's well paced, and subdivided into normal film length chunks. but i absolutely could not have watched it back to back, it'd be murder, especially if you excised the connecting tissue at the beginning and end of each part.
the removal of intermissions has actually happened with the extended cuts of the lord of the rings films. those were on DVD originally, and each film was broken up by the need to switch discs, a physically-imposed sort of intermission, but one nonetheless. but these days the whole damn things are on streaming and they are noticeably more interminable.