{"version": "1.0", "type": "rich", "title": "listen, every director of anything that uses licensed music since 2014\n I know you are aggressively shoving your licensed music...", "author_name": "kontextmaschine", "author_url": "https://kontextmaschine.com", "provider_name": "kontextmaschine", "provider_url": "https://kontextmaschine.com", "url": "https://kontextmaschine.com/post/620362349289832448/", "html": "

kontextmaschine:

\n\n

brazenautomaton:

\n

listen, every director of anything that uses licensed music since 2014

\n

I know you are aggressively shoving your licensed music in my fucking face because you saw Guardians of the Galaxy do it

\n

but in Guardians of the Galaxy, that licensed soundtrack existed in-universe in the form of a mixtape that had great emotional significance to the main character and whose existence was frequently reinforced. the music was woven into what the movie was about.

\n

you didn\u2019t do all that, you\u2019re just dropping everything twice a scene so you can stuff two licensed music tracks in the viewer\u2019s face and it\u2019s obnoxious, stop doing that

\n
\n

Is this an actual critique?

This reminds me of the early 90s when labels consolidated to majors and people complained the 80s music-video/Miami Vice/21 Jump Street aesthetic had taken over and in the new pop-scored aesthetic scenes were servicing the music rather than vice versa with orchestral scores (which had been a holdover from live theater) and movies were servicing the soundtrack

\n\n\n

this tied in with anti-selling out and anti-brand extension themes, like you would not believe how much shit movie novelizations (which before widespread videotapes were the way to experience big movies once they were out of theaters; also often included substantial shit that the novelizer made up and added to canon himself) came in for

"}