Lilty and Stitch would be a fun movie.

What Jesse said, but more. Emotionally manipulative IS the term for per se poorly extracted emotion. It's ex ante pejorative. There's another Latin term I'm trying to think of, but two will have to do. Anyway, If you know John Williams's swelling score is what's making you mist up, you feel kind of dirty. But plain old crying at movies is not necessarily manipulated.

So you don't think this depends on the aim of the movie? I mean, what about when such elements are incredibly stylized by design?

Unless the aim of the movie is to make the audience think about sound design, then the sound design shouldn't call attention to itself. Good stylization isn't distracting in the way I'm talking about. (Unless the audience has been to film school and is unable to turn off that part of their brain. Not that I would know anything about that.)

So you don't think this depends on the aim of the movie? I mean, what about when such elements are incredibly stylized by design?

Unless the aim of the movie is to make the audience think about sound design, then the sound design shouldn't call attention to itself. Good stylization isn't distracting in the way I'm talking about.

"Aaand star wipe... and out!"

There's another Latin term I'm trying to think of, but two will have to do.

De facto? Pro tem? Nolo whatever?

In medias res?

Good stylization isn't distracting in the way I'm talking about.

So, for example, breaking the fourth wall isn't bad in and of itself; it's breaking the fourth wall badly that's bad.

(Unless the audience has been to film school and is unable to turn off that part of their brain. Not that I would know anything about that.)

Heh, or someone who reads WAY to many academic film journals.

Where he laments how many more people he could have saved? How many people his pin was worth, his car, etc.?

That's what made me cry.

P-C is me.

Still have little interest in WotW, despite the generally good reviews. I'll probably wait until it's on DVD.

Me too.

I have a question about the resistance to emotional manipulation. I don't quite get it. I have no problem with it, as long as it's good. Go ahead, fuck with me, is my motto with the arts. I love Dickens' novels and that's what he was all about. I don't mind intellectual manipulation, emotional manipulation, pop songs making me get up and dance--go ahead, make me think, make me feel, why not? Of course, if the film or book is bad, I don't like it, manipulation or no.

I love being emotionally manipulated by the arts. I like the feeling of losing control but at the same time knowing that such weakness isn’t going to have dire consequences in my life. What I don’t like, as others have mentioned, is when it becomes “The Emotionally Manipulative Scene – Grab your Kleenex!”. I enjoy the more subtle moments. Music, or the lack of same (see Buffy – The Body, Hush), really adds to the effect if done properly.

I have a question about the resistance to emotional manipulation. I don't quite get it. I have no problem with it, as long as it's good

So, for example, breaking the fourth wall isn't bad in and of itself; it's breaking the fourth wall badly that's bad.

I think it's safe to assume that if X is being complained about, then the complainer thinks that X is being done badly. Done well, the topic wouldn't come up at all.

Not neccesarily, Jessica. It may be true on this board, but my FiL, for example, thinks any movie which makes him have ANY feeling that he finds uncomfortable--which is any feeling beyond humor and suspense-- is "emotional manipulation." That's his phrase and it has everything to do with his limited comfort range of feeling and nothing to do with the film itself. And I have heard that notion from other folks in my life as well.

De facto? Pro tem? Nolo whatever?

I called a philosopher I know. I was thinking of a priori but probably meant ex hypothesi.