Someone Explain to Me What Exactly Is The MTV-Style of Directing?

[Addicted2Bayhem]

I hear this phrase all the time and it confuses me.

People (well, critics) who wanna bash certain action films say Bay, Tony Scott, and other flashy action directors use the MTV style?

What is the MTV style exactly?

I watch MTV all the time. They show music videos and Real World and all that stuff. I am not sure what directors they are talking about but the directing seems pretty normal to me. If anything, CSI and CSI: Miami have the jumpy, colorful, flashy, hyper editing style that Bay and Tony Scott use so often.

[X-Nightcrawler]

Well people define it as 'loud', 'quick cutting' and intense enough to disorient the road runner.

What I don't get is why they call TCM remake 'MTV directed' and they don't do that with the 'Saw' movies which seem to just embody everything everyone calls 'MTV'.

[dfd3657]

Originally posted by X-Nightcrawler
Well people define it as 'loud', 'quick cutting' and intense enough to disorient the road runner.

What I don't get is why they call TCM remake 'MTV directed' and they don't do that with the 'Saw' movies which seem to just embody everything everyone calls 'MTV'.

One of my friends (who actually owns his own film company) HATES the Saw movie for exactly that reason (the MTV style directing).

[Tyler_Durden_208]

Originally posted by X-Nightcrawler
Well people define it as 'loud', 'quick cutting' and intense enough to disorient the road runner.

What I don't get is why they call TCM remake 'MTV directed' and they don't do that with the 'Saw' movies which seem to just embody everything everyone calls 'MTV'.
I'm actually with you on that. I thought the way TCM was shot was quite refreshing as far as mainstream horror goes, and that Saw was way too damn jumpy and flash-cutting (even though not enough to still cut out my enjoyment, the sequels another story).

[bigred760]

I always considered "MTV style" directing to be like that of a music video - a stereotypical MTV music video (when they still existed :D). Lot of quick cuts, quick action, some jump cuts, all while music is blasting louder than hell. Whether or not that's a bad thing is up to one's own interpretation and opinion.

I think Michael Bay qualifies to a degree. Maybe Tony Scott in his Top Gun days, but his style has changed somewhat recently, and I think that new style doesn't quite qualify.

[Jim H]

They also overuse loud sound effects, to create a disorienting "wall of noise" effect. MTV-style editing can help a movie if used sparingly or extremely skillfully, but often it makes the movies tedious and in the worst cases, headache inducing.

[The Heart Collector]

Originally posted by bigred760
I always considered "MTV style" directing to be like that of a music video - a stereotypical MTV music video (when they still existed :D). Lot of quick cuts, quick action, some jump cuts, all while music is blasting louder than hell. Whether or not that's a bad thing is up to one's own interpretation and opinion.

I think Michael Bay qualifies to a degree. Maybe Tony Scott in his Top Gun days, but his style has changed somewhat recently, and I think that new style doesn't quite qualify.

Tony Scott's new style is MTV style X 1000000

[Crazy Dud]

Originally posted by Tyler_Durden_208
I'm actually with you on that. I thought the way TCM was shot was quite refreshing as far as mainstream horror goes, and that Saw was way too damn jumpy and flash-cutting (even though not enough to still cut out my enjoyment, the sequels another story).

Agreed. I don't know what makes the TCM remake "MTV style." The cinematography is steady and methodical. This is the exact opposite of "MTV stlye" cinematography. Saw uses quick cuts and flashy visuals and sound to a hindring degree. The first one didn't overuse it, but Saw II was severely guilty. Hopefully Saw III will be more of a return to the original. The trailers have been hopeful.

[Digifruitella]

if you want an idea of "mtv style" scene then, this is the most perfect I think. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfiK7hnNu3k

[ardekprod]

I watch MTV also and I think I understand it. It might be the flashiness of the whole film or the tone as in being hyped over, but if it is called the MTV style of directing, I think it is interesting and if they continue to do it, then I believe they will stumble on something of a new generation of directing. But....who knows.:)

[adamjohnson]

Originally posted by Addicted2Bayhem
I hear this phrase all the time and it confuses me.

People (well, critics) who wanna bash certain action films say Bay, Tony Scott, and other flashy action directors use the MTV style?

What is the MTV style exactly?

I watch MTV all the time. They show music videos and Real World and all that stuff. I am not sure what directors they are talking about but the directing seems pretty normal to me. If anything, CSI and CSI: Miami have the jumpy, colorful, flashy, hyper editing style that Bay and Tony Scott use so often.

Michael Bay-style = MTV style.

Meaning, quick cuts, 'jump' scares if it's horror, and generally frenetic editing.

Basically, all syle and no substance. And no style. (nothing unique anyway)

[X-Nightcrawler]

Originally posted by Crazy Dud
Agreed. I don't know what makes the TCM remake "MTV style." The cinematography is steady and methodical. This is the exact opposite of "MTV stlye" cinematography. Saw uses quick cuts and flashy visuals and sound to a hindring degree. The first one didn't overuse it, but Saw II was severely guilty. Hopefully Saw III will be more of a return to the original. The trailers have been hopeful. I agree, it irritates me. The directing in the TCM remake not only is the antithesis of 'MTV', but it's also goddamn BEAUTIFUL.

[Crazy Dud]

Originally posted by X-Nightcrawler
I agree, it irritates me. The directing in the TCM remake not only is the antithesis of 'MTV', but it's also goddamn BEAUTIFUL.

It is interesting to note that the visual look of the film is sleek and glossy like so many of today's films, yet it still managed to be a very gritty film. In fact, I found that strange contrast to be a strong point for the movie. It was unsettling to have so much gloss on such a gritty film.

[Tuukka]

In order to understand the term, you need to know some history.

Music videos made their breakthrough in the early 80's, mainly thanks to MTV.

They offered directors a new, artistically experimental platform. Features are too expensive to experiment, commercials are done to sell a product. Music videos were of course meant to sell a product, but they had much greater artistic freedom.

This new art form established new visual rules, which were removed from movie tradition:

- Very fast cutting
- Very stylished lighting, often uber-glossy
- Constantly moving cameras with cranes and tracks
- Mixing different film stocks and experimental film processing

...Just to name a few.

Of course MTV as a channel became itself a fusion of all these new styles, and the general look of the channel was always cutting edge. Many of the world's best animators, graphical designers, ad companies, and even experimental short movie makers, etc, worked to provide MTV the official look of the channel.

Feature films didn't really catch up with these new trends until the early 90's. So the birth of "MTV-style directing" in feature films was born back then. Of course in the 15+ years following that, all these stylistical gimmicks have been so embraced by Hollywood, that the term is not really strictly related to MTV or music videos anymore.

BTW, one rather important innovation which changed the look of cinema in general in the early 90's was the arrival of non-linear digital editing. Avid provided the first non-linear platform for editing in -88. The change from analog to digital permanently changed the way how movies are edited, and increased the amount of cuts and tightened the pacing.

[someguy]

I always took MTV style directing as trying to cater to people with short attention spans.

[CletusHorniblow]

Originally posted by Tuukka
In order to understand the term, you need to know some history.

Music videos made their breakthrough in the early 80's, mainly thanks to MTV.

They offered directors a new, artistically experimental platform. Features are too expensive to experiment, commercials are done to sell a product. Music videos were of course meant to sell a product, but they had much greater artistic freedom.

This new art form established new visual rules, which were removed from movie tradition:

- Very fast cutting
- Very stylished lighting, often uber-glossy
- Constantly moving cameras with cranes and tracks
- Mixing different film stocks and experimental film processing

...Just to name a few.

Of course MTV as a channel became itself a fusion of all these new styles, and the general look of the channel was always cutting edge. Many of the world's best animators, graphical designers, ad companies, and even experimental short movie makers, etc, worked to provide MTV the official look of the channel.

Feature films didn't really catch up with these new trends until the early 90's. So the birth of "MTV-style directing" in feature films was born back then. Of course in the 15+ years following that, all these stylistical gimmicks have been so embraced by Hollywood, that the term is not really strictly related to MTV or music videos anymore.

BTW, one rather important innovation which changed the look of cinema in general in the early 90's was the arrival of non-linear digital editing. Avid provided the first non-linear platform for editing in -88. The change from analog to digital permanently changed the way how movies are edited, and increased the amount of cuts and tightened the pacing.

I was going to give my own definition; but saw this one and realized that anything I pointed out would fail in comparison. Nice job Tuukka!

[Scarface98.9]

MTV style is generally a disorienting, colorful and 1-2 cuts a second type of shooting that is usually meant as directorial masturbation. Tony Scott embodied the worst of that style with Domino and his BMW short flick because they were flashy and colorful, but didn't have a point or make any sense whatsoever

[The Postmaster General]

I think that it just refers to movies that are cut like music videos in that the music and images drive the scene. It plays out like a music video more than a traditional movie. The only reason it's called "MTV-style" is because MTV is synonymous with music videos.

I really don't think that fast cuts and these other criteria are a big indicator, other than is the current trend with music videos.

Unless I'm mistaken, this was the first ever non-music video format piece of work to be branded "MTV-style direction":

http://youtube.com/watch?v=-Tnyp9tRXRo

[Brando @$$ Fat]

I've seen the term used to describe Adrian Lynne, of all people.

[deftdelivery]

Originally posted by The Heart Collector
Tony Scott's new style is MTV style X 1000000

See: Domino.

[The Postmaster General]

Originally posted by Brando @$$ Fat
I've seen the term used to describe Adrian Lynne, of all people.

Creepy. I just recommended Jacob's Ladder in the last thread I checked.

[Monotreme]

Interestingly, the term MTV-style directing is not applied to the surge of music video directors who have (mostly brilliantly) broken in the feature film directing - Spike Jonze, Michel Gondry, David Fincher, Mark Romanek, John Glazer, and all the others. It is also interesting that directors like Alejandro Gonzalez Innaritu or Darren Aronofsky, both of whom use fast editing and extremely creative and disorienting camera angles, are NOT labelled MTV-style directors. No, I think that MTV-style directing doesn't necessarily mean fast cutting, but it referrs to a certain artificial, refined look that MIchael Bay and Tony Scott movies usually have. That, coupled with extreme cases of over-breakdown of scenes and a use of sound so irritating that sometimes you just what to take a shotgun and blast out the speakers in the movie theatre, create what I think MTV-style directing is.