What I first think has to be accepted, before we devalue the notion of storytelling entirely, is to see that pretty much everything is narrative. Pierrot Le Fou is story. The Turin Horse is story. Dog Man Star is story. Scorpio Rising is story. Even Wavelength is story.
The problem isn't story. The problem is in what people expect from a story, and then, the ensuing fallout when those expectations aren't met. All of which inevitably can lead to some pretty dull and toothless comments about a film, especially when put in the wrong hands.
Some examples of the problem with storytelling affecting artistic appreciation below.
1) Nothing happens
2) There weren't any likeable characters
3) it lacked a clear resolution
4) it isn't realistic
5) it didn't make sense
6) it didn't need to be so long
Etc etc
The reality is that none of these are actually legitimate complaints about whether a movie was good or not. They might be reasons why it didn't work for a person, but they are still all elements which can intentionally be used by the director to get to the emotional places they are trying to access. Sometimes what storytelling might tell us is completely wrong of ineffective, is actually completely necessary for the film to do what the director is hoping to accomplish.
So what causes so many people to use these above examples as some kind of Trump card to prove a movie wasn't any good? Well, in short, they've been spoiled by the kind of storytelling that is basically designed to stop actual engagement with the film itself. That is meant to encourage passive viewing habits. That must immediately engage to the point of completely dulling our senses to any other pleasures or insights the film may have.
And in this way Minio is right. If you are just showing up for the storytelling, you actually probably don't like 'cinema' that much. Which, sounds offensive to some, but it's not since most of those people would happily rail against anything in the film that doesn't directly service story ie, the cinema parts.
Where I think Minio overstates the case though is that storytelling, even fairly traditional story telling, can be just as much an artform as all the other more esoteric elements. What a story decides to show, and decides not to show, is no different than what notes a musician decides to play, or chooses not to play.
Ozu, by any measure, and probably according to Ozu himself, is primarily a storyteller. He just happens to do this through film. But his particular cinematic style is deliberately stripped down mostly in order to push the story forward. And what is revolutionary about his approach, and ultimately artful about it, is the use of that style allows all the quieter elements of very traditional stories to seem as loud as your regular (and usually boring) narrative beats. He is turning what are essentially stories that, in bad hands, would be soap opera fare, and opening these same basic stories into something we don't passively accept, but need to observe.
And this is just as cinematic as anything Kubrick or Dreyer or Godard have ever done with their more pure fits of moviemaking.
The problem is most people aren't very artful with storytelling. So it ends up getting a bad rap for those looking for something more. Something cinematic.
The problem isn't story. The problem is in what people expect from a story, and then, the ensuing fallout when those expectations aren't met. All of which inevitably can lead to some pretty dull and toothless comments about a film, especially when put in the wrong hands.
Some examples of the problem with storytelling affecting artistic appreciation below.
1) Nothing happens
2) There weren't any likeable characters
3) it lacked a clear resolution
4) it isn't realistic
5) it didn't make sense
6) it didn't need to be so long
Etc etc
The reality is that none of these are actually legitimate complaints about whether a movie was good or not. They might be reasons why it didn't work for a person, but they are still all elements which can intentionally be used by the director to get to the emotional places they are trying to access. Sometimes what storytelling might tell us is completely wrong of ineffective, is actually completely necessary for the film to do what the director is hoping to accomplish.
So what causes so many people to use these above examples as some kind of Trump card to prove a movie wasn't any good? Well, in short, they've been spoiled by the kind of storytelling that is basically designed to stop actual engagement with the film itself. That is meant to encourage passive viewing habits. That must immediately engage to the point of completely dulling our senses to any other pleasures or insights the film may have.
And in this way Minio is right. If you are just showing up for the storytelling, you actually probably don't like 'cinema' that much. Which, sounds offensive to some, but it's not since most of those people would happily rail against anything in the film that doesn't directly service story ie, the cinema parts.
Where I think Minio overstates the case though is that storytelling, even fairly traditional story telling, can be just as much an artform as all the other more esoteric elements. What a story decides to show, and decides not to show, is no different than what notes a musician decides to play, or chooses not to play.
Ozu, by any measure, and probably according to Ozu himself, is primarily a storyteller. He just happens to do this through film. But his particular cinematic style is deliberately stripped down mostly in order to push the story forward. And what is revolutionary about his approach, and ultimately artful about it, is the use of that style allows all the quieter elements of very traditional stories to seem as loud as your regular (and usually boring) narrative beats. He is turning what are essentially stories that, in bad hands, would be soap opera fare, and opening these same basic stories into something we don't passively accept, but need to observe.
And this is just as cinematic as anything Kubrick or Dreyer or Godard have ever done with their more pure fits of moviemaking.
The problem is most people aren't very artful with storytelling. So it ends up getting a bad rap for those looking for something more. Something cinematic.