Why Movies Suck Now Part Two: The Reality
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
What are your opinions on My Big Fat Greek Wedding, anyway?
Anyway, thanks for opening my eyes to the theater situation!
Anyway, thanks for opening my eyes to the theater situation!
I'll be honest, I have very little standard in what I watch. Pretty much the only thing I avoid with a passion is somethig I have zero interest in (Twilight without the "Zone") and those god aweful "Spoof" series of movies. I actually made the mistake of watching Date Movie since a hot geek redhead was in it.
But I still insist on my friends knowing about the oddball stuff that wouldn't get play otherwise and vice versa. I first saw Momento when a buddy told me we have to rent it. And I've recently repaid that by having him watch White Christmas over the hollidays.
Otherwise, bring it on.
Average movie that's nothing special - Fire it up
Stunning piece of visual art - Why the hell not
Even the American Godzilla had some redemption - Jean Reno, Matthew Broderick, Hank Azaira
I'm Moriarty70 and I love movies.
But I still insist on my friends knowing about the oddball stuff that wouldn't get play otherwise and vice versa. I first saw Momento when a buddy told me we have to rent it. And I've recently repaid that by having him watch White Christmas over the hollidays.
Otherwise, bring it on.
Average movie that's nothing special - Fire it up
Stunning piece of visual art - Why the hell not
Even the American Godzilla had some redemption - Jean Reno, Matthew Broderick, Hank Azaira
I'm Moriarty70 and I love movies.
I try not to watch too much junk as dicks like Michael Bay don't need anymore money. I try not to let the popular junk like Burton's desecration of Lewis Carrol because while something MAY be popular at the time the truly good movies will be remembered while junk will be forgotten to the sands of time.
Well to be truthful, I think the reason movies suck now is because they aren't fun... What do I mean by that? Well, lets take a look at a movie called Terminator 2. This movie is a very much loved film. But consider this, It has the biggest effects and large Hollywood budget like movies today have. But Terminator 2 has a couple of things other movies today lack.
-Characters we like and want to see live.
-Action scenes that have context and don't try to stretch their length for too long.
-A mix of Humor, Fear and other emotions. if characters in a movie hold the same emotional state in a movie for too long, it becomes boring.
this can also be said about movies like Star Wars.
In the movie Avatar, we mostly want the Military to win. Because the Na'vi are dull and boring. When you want the villians in a movie to win more then the Heroes, it's the movie makers fault.
In Star Wars, Darth Vader and The Emperor are great villians, but we don't want them to win.
The main characters in Star Wars are people who you feel like have become close friends to you, and you want to see them come out in the end A-OK.
I am not an expert critic, I am not the master of Critical Opinion. these are just my thoughts on why Movies suck now.
-Characters we like and want to see live.
-Action scenes that have context and don't try to stretch their length for too long.
-A mix of Humor, Fear and other emotions. if characters in a movie hold the same emotional state in a movie for too long, it becomes boring.
this can also be said about movies like Star Wars.
In the movie Avatar, we mostly want the Military to win. Because the Na'vi are dull and boring. When you want the villians in a movie to win more then the Heroes, it's the movie makers fault.
In Star Wars, Darth Vader and The Emperor are great villians, but we don't want them to win.
The main characters in Star Wars are people who you feel like have become close friends to you, and you want to see them come out in the end A-OK.
I am not an expert critic, I am not the master of Critical Opinion. these are just my thoughts on why Movies suck now.
He has put him self in that group in the past, so I'm sure he does now too.HG131 said:
Anyway, I really liked this article. Especially the part about the elitist geeks. Whenever I find a movie or game that I think is awesome, my first instinct is to show it to as many people as I can so that they can experience the awesomeness themselves. I never understood why someone would try hide it from them.
Certainly I agree that every decade seems to have its own motif when it comes to the movies. This past decade was certainly the rise of the superhero movies, with cartoon adaptations being the understudy. But when you say 20 out of 100 will be worth watching, I really hope you mean out of every ten years. I can't honestly say I've seen more than 20 movies in that last ten years, mostly because while I am not a snob, I just haven't heard of many movies that really grab my attention as being something I'd want to watch.
Basing screenplays around popular books and movies is fine. Obviously, they do it because the studios know they will already have a built-in audience, and it's not a huge risk to them to make the movies because they anticipate they will make their investments back. I'm not all that crazy about them re-hashing old movies to try and update them for a modern audience, regardless of their actual financial outcome (such as War of the Worlds and The Day The Earth Stood Still). They might make a decent reproduction, but often they do not live up to the original. Take The Honeymooners movie they made a while ago where they replaced the original cast and made them all black to appeal to a niche audience. That didn't even make much sense, and apparently didn't make enough money to warrant a sequel. In situations like that, I'm glad. Ok, you proved you could do it and some people would see it. I'm just happy they didn't feel the need to continue to shove it down our throats like all that Tyler Perry shit. Did his plays really need big-screen counterparts, and a spin-off series of television shows? Not in my book. Basing movies on loose stereotypes is just lazy sociological writing that takes basically no imagination, but comes down to the bottom line: will this dumb idea make money? If that is ever a consideration you must make as as studio head, I say skip it in the future. Why bring your credibility into question to make a quick buck? Integrity is a lost trait these days, and it seems more and more studios and producers are more interested in making money than making a good name for themselves (I'm look you at you, George Lucas). I can't really suggest a good idea for a great movie, but it doesn't appear that a lot of people can do any better if the current movies are any indication.
Good articles, Bob. Keep it up!
Basing screenplays around popular books and movies is fine. Obviously, they do it because the studios know they will already have a built-in audience, and it's not a huge risk to them to make the movies because they anticipate they will make their investments back. I'm not all that crazy about them re-hashing old movies to try and update them for a modern audience, regardless of their actual financial outcome (such as War of the Worlds and The Day The Earth Stood Still). They might make a decent reproduction, but often they do not live up to the original. Take The Honeymooners movie they made a while ago where they replaced the original cast and made them all black to appeal to a niche audience. That didn't even make much sense, and apparently didn't make enough money to warrant a sequel. In situations like that, I'm glad. Ok, you proved you could do it and some people would see it. I'm just happy they didn't feel the need to continue to shove it down our throats like all that Tyler Perry shit. Did his plays really need big-screen counterparts, and a spin-off series of television shows? Not in my book. Basing movies on loose stereotypes is just lazy sociological writing that takes basically no imagination, but comes down to the bottom line: will this dumb idea make money? If that is ever a consideration you must make as as studio head, I say skip it in the future. Why bring your credibility into question to make a quick buck? Integrity is a lost trait these days, and it seems more and more studios and producers are more interested in making money than making a good name for themselves (I'm look you at you, George Lucas). I can't really suggest a good idea for a great movie, but it doesn't appear that a lot of people can do any better if the current movies are any indication.
Good articles, Bob. Keep it up!
Dubbed movies? I don't think so. If you're too lazy to read subtitles, you don't deserve to watch the movie. Besides, have you heard a dubbed movie before? The English speaking voice actors pout about as much emotion into it as a cardboard box, and the only exception I've seen is Afro Samurai, and that's because they had Samuel L. Jackson and Ron Perlman acting in it.
I kinda liked My Big Fat Greek Wedding :$
I hardly go to the cinema anyways. But I tend to feel the reason the film is dubbed is the same reason they dubbed Mad Max: that "mainstream" audiences are xenophobic & thick who will only watch a film if it's in (American) English with at least a recognizable actors voice if not their face in it. I don't like paying $10-20 for the chance to sit in a darkened room & be told I'm a cretin for doing so.
I hardly go to the cinema anyways. But I tend to feel the reason the film is dubbed is the same reason they dubbed Mad Max: that "mainstream" audiences are xenophobic & thick who will only watch a film if it's in (American) English with at least a recognizable actors voice if not their face in it. I don't like paying $10-20 for the chance to sit in a darkened room & be told I'm a cretin for doing so.
A few points and questions...MovieBob said:
Re: Point 3 - I don't go to the cinema's much as a) I lack many real world friends who want to see the geeky movies I like, and b) everything you said in point 4 - that said, I did make the effort for District 9 and Kick Ass.
I would personally prefer it if going to see a movie alone wasn't such an unpleasant experience, in that you get alot of looks and the like from the other movie goers, but anywho...
Re: Point 5 - Who's Tyler Perry?
Re: Point 6 - Actually, yeah, this is very true for virtually every product humanity as ever produced. In fact, I wonder if the only caveman paintings that survive were made by the Uwe Bolle's of the day and in fact much better examples where lost to history.
I was interested by his dubbing comment. I hate dubs. I HATE dubs. I can't watch a dubbed movie because it completely ruins the film for me. I can understand how people might argue that anime can be dubbed (since its a cartoon) but as someone who watches shitloads of anime I've found English dubbing to be almost universally awful. Even "good" dubs are inferior to the original so I see no reason in watching them. What usually happens though is they get mediocre voice actors to try and match the lips, which were meant to sync with Japanese, not English, and they end up speaking awkwardly and devoid of the proper emotions to compensate.
That's just anime though. Dubbed LIVE ACTION movies are inexcusable. You can kind of pretend the lips sync if its a cartoon but with real actors it looks incredibly stupid.
Anyway tl;dr, fuck dubs.
That's just anime though. Dubbed LIVE ACTION movies are inexcusable. You can kind of pretend the lips sync if its a cartoon but with real actors it looks incredibly stupid.
Anyway tl;dr, fuck dubs.
I agree with the last answer the most. The only reason there are so many good movies from the past is that we've already been there and have sorted out the good from bad.
Oh, and look. More insults directed at the mainstream. I kind of don't want to start trouble with this, but I'm working on 'defender of the mainstream' as a title here.
Isn't the whole purpose of art to cause an emotional response in people? Mostly a good response? If shows like Jersey Shore and series like Twilight can bring out a much greater positive emotional response in so many more people than many of the intelligent movies like Splice, what does that say about the whole issue? Maybe stripping down the pieces of art that causes positive emotional responses until it's barely more than the basic structure works better than tacking on shitloads of easter eggs and similar things for the viewers to feel smug about themselves for finding?
Oh, and look. More insults directed at the mainstream. I kind of don't want to start trouble with this, but I'm working on 'defender of the mainstream' as a title here.
Isn't the whole purpose of art to cause an emotional response in people? Mostly a good response? If shows like Jersey Shore and series like Twilight can bring out a much greater positive emotional response in so many more people than many of the intelligent movies like Splice, what does that say about the whole issue? Maybe stripping down the pieces of art that causes positive emotional responses until it's barely more than the basic structure works better than tacking on shitloads of easter eggs and similar things for the viewers to feel smug about themselves for finding?