Quit It
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
I think its only going to get worse as we get older. The more movies I've seen the more I can predict what new movies are going to be like.
One of the joys of having netlfix I can go back and watch old movies that newer movies try and emulate. Hollywoods ran out of ideas thats why we have Yogi the bear and other old movies being remade, because its cheaper/easier to use the same formulas over and over.
It'd be nice if you did some more foreign movies.
Australian movie called Animal Kingdom came out last year and I enjoyed it because it presented a story and characters that I hadn't seen before.
One of the joys of having netlfix I can go back and watch old movies that newer movies try and emulate. Hollywoods ran out of ideas thats why we have Yogi the bear and other old movies being remade, because its cheaper/easier to use the same formulas over and over.
It'd be nice if you did some more foreign movies.
Australian movie called Animal Kingdom came out last year and I enjoyed it because it presented a story and characters that I hadn't seen before.
Itd be nice if more foreign movies made it to America.gphjr14 said:
Anyhow i do absolutely hate it when the producers squander the scource material in favor of something more generic.
Oh, and theres a syntax error on the first page of the article.
Concerning the first one: Metalocalypse did an episode that pretty much fits Bob's idea for a subversion...
"He had to lose Everything to find the One thing that really matters."
I see where you're coming from, and that story would definitely be interesting if made carefully. But if it was just a story about a rich guy proving money CAN buy happiness then it's even more shallow than that particular clichée.
It could be combined with the rebuke of anti-intellectualism perhaps. A kind, but somewhat disillusioned person who returns home to find that s/he's sitting on the skills and knowledge to solve many of his/her hometown communities problems but is met only with hostility, eventually even from his/her family. I guess the only problem is that it really can't be a comedy or feel-good movie and thus not likely to do much business.
The thing about the X-men outfits still seems incredibly minor, and I think only really hard-core fans could take offense at such a throw-away line. Other than that tiny criticism the writer had on (one variety of) the outfits from the comics the movie itself doesn't deviate far from the source's style.
I see where you're coming from, and that story would definitely be interesting if made carefully. But if it was just a story about a rich guy proving money CAN buy happiness then it's even more shallow than that particular clichée.
It could be combined with the rebuke of anti-intellectualism perhaps. A kind, but somewhat disillusioned person who returns home to find that s/he's sitting on the skills and knowledge to solve many of his/her hometown communities problems but is met only with hostility, eventually even from his/her family. I guess the only problem is that it really can't be a comedy or feel-good movie and thus not likely to do much business.
The thing about the X-men outfits still seems incredibly minor, and I think only really hard-core fans could take offense at such a throw-away line. Other than that tiny criticism the writer had on (one variety of) the outfits from the comics the movie itself doesn't deviate far from the source's style.
Most people just don't like the language barrier or the cultural references that are widely unknown in American culture. The movie I mentioned named Animal Kingdom was suggested to me by a co-worker, prior to that I never knew about it and based on the title I'd never thought it was about an Australian crime family. Its received mostly positive reviews, but most of the negative ones are from people who said they couldn't understand the dialog.??? If English is your first language and you can't understand an Australian person you've got issues.gigastar said:
You know what plot I am tired of. The Punisher plot.
They killed his wife and kids, now hes got nothing to lose and he's gonna TAKE. THEM. DOWN.
Done countless times and its just lazy. It gives the character infinate motivation and lack of self-reguard. Sets up an clear cut enemy organization to slowly get to the top of. It works well to set up a plot and thats the problem. Its so easy to cart it out every time.
The action film equivalent of amnesia for video games.
They killed his wife and kids, now hes got nothing to lose and he's gonna TAKE. THEM. DOWN.
Done countless times and its just lazy. It gives the character infinate motivation and lack of self-reguard. Sets up an clear cut enemy organization to slowly get to the top of. It works well to set up a plot and thats the problem. Its so easy to cart it out every time.
The action film equivalent of amnesia for video games.
First "X-Men" movie. It could be seen that the reason Cyclops said, "Would you prefer yellow spandex?" is because he is aware of the ugly yellow and blue combination that Prof X and Magneto wore back when they were doing the field work, and he is giving a legitimate criticism of how silly it looks. At the time it was a finger to the fanboys, now it just looks like he was giving a specific rebuttal to Wolverine because he knows what he is talking about.
I'm in that weird camp that think the black suits looked more functional and cool. Like a tactical uniform should. I generally dislike the X-Men being portrayed as super heroes and prefer to think of them as a very elite ethnic militia, fighting for equal rights and good graces on behalf of their minority groups.
I'm in that weird camp that think the black suits looked more functional and cool. Like a tactical uniform should. I generally dislike the X-Men being portrayed as super heroes and prefer to think of them as a very elite ethnic militia, fighting for equal rights and good graces on behalf of their minority groups.
Well that is a bit different, in Taken his daughter is alive and there is a dramatic sense of time as well as a greater need for finesse and to generally not die as the hero. All this is absent in Punisher plot, where hero just need to do as much damage before they die/ credits roll. In the punisher plot you can suicide bomb the baddie headquarters at the end and go out samurai style.TheWonko said:
One additional archetype I'd like to add to this mix:
"Insert Cause Here" is obviously right!
This is basically a propaganda structure, designed as a vehicle for a particular worldview, with the protagonist having Mary Sue tendencies and the antagonist being an over-the-top straw man. If you agree with the movie's message you may enjoy it (although it's not exactly a message film then, is it?); if not, you will probably revile the experience (something about being represented by an over-the-top evil straw man doesn't fit well with many people), assuming you even see it in the first place. It may have an actual plot to go along with its message, or the message may play second-fiddle to whatever else the film is up to, but the subtext is always there, always pushing its viewpoint at anyone watching the movie.
In the past (say, the 60s and before), I suspect these films tended to be Christian vehicles; I can't really speak to this as I am not that much of a nostalgia critic (seewutIdidthere?); in the present, they seem to be overwhelmingly liberal in nature. "V for Vendetta," (anti-conservative) "Kingdom of Heaven," (anti-Christian) "The Kids are All Right," (pro-gay marriage) "Avatar," (environmentalism, anti-conservative, anti-globalism/imperialism) and dozens more.
And if the main plot isn't a finger-pointing menace, there will be at least one minor character, there to set up a particular viewpoint/people group and then to die/lose horribly in a way that makes it crystal clear what the authors think of that particular viewpoint. For just one example, Outlander (a forgettable film about Beowulf from 2008) has a Christian straw man who's basically in the movie to present his viewpoint (promptly ignored by the main characters), then demonstrate its flaws by dying horribly to the monster.
This structure is sort of an extension of your last listed item ("The distinguished gentlemen from the Generic Party has the floor."), only rather than indicting the movies in question for not outright labelling their pointing fingers, I'm concerned that they're pointing fingers at all. "Prince of Persia" would (in my opinion) have been a better movie had it not tried to draw parallels to the Iraq war, and it would have been a lot easier to sit through, too.
Half your potential audience is conservative, Hollywood. You do yourself no favors by making fun of us in your movies.
"Insert Cause Here" is obviously right!
This is basically a propaganda structure, designed as a vehicle for a particular worldview, with the protagonist having Mary Sue tendencies and the antagonist being an over-the-top straw man. If you agree with the movie's message you may enjoy it (although it's not exactly a message film then, is it?); if not, you will probably revile the experience (something about being represented by an over-the-top evil straw man doesn't fit well with many people), assuming you even see it in the first place. It may have an actual plot to go along with its message, or the message may play second-fiddle to whatever else the film is up to, but the subtext is always there, always pushing its viewpoint at anyone watching the movie.
In the past (say, the 60s and before), I suspect these films tended to be Christian vehicles; I can't really speak to this as I am not that much of a nostalgia critic (seewutIdidthere?); in the present, they seem to be overwhelmingly liberal in nature. "V for Vendetta," (anti-conservative) "Kingdom of Heaven," (anti-Christian) "The Kids are All Right," (pro-gay marriage) "Avatar," (environmentalism, anti-conservative, anti-globalism/imperialism) and dozens more.
And if the main plot isn't a finger-pointing menace, there will be at least one minor character, there to set up a particular viewpoint/people group and then to die/lose horribly in a way that makes it crystal clear what the authors think of that particular viewpoint. For just one example, Outlander (a forgettable film about Beowulf from 2008) has a Christian straw man who's basically in the movie to present his viewpoint (promptly ignored by the main characters), then demonstrate its flaws by dying horribly to the monster.
This structure is sort of an extension of your last listed item ("The distinguished gentlemen from the Generic Party has the floor."), only rather than indicting the movies in question for not outright labelling their pointing fingers, I'm concerned that they're pointing fingers at all. "Prince of Persia" would (in my opinion) have been a better movie had it not tried to draw parallels to the Iraq war, and it would have been a lot easier to sit through, too.
Half your potential audience is conservative, Hollywood. You do yourself no favors by making fun of us in your movies.
Hmm... some interesting points, the best being the last one.MovieBob said:
While I do lean for more to the right (consider me a Consitutionalist that isn't a religious bigot) then Hollywood, but I can at least respect that your backing your own side.
As stated in the Prince (even if it is the most quoted book ever written sracastically) is that "If your nuetral, you make two enemies."
Hardly, that plot has been around for far longer. At least Liam Neeson made it interesting by virtue of being Liam Neeson.Ibn-Hakam al-Bokhari said:
Nice article except for opne point.
Now I want to preface this by saying that I'm pro-science and I aknowledge that the only way I'm able to even say this is the result of thouisands of lives dedicated to scientific research and I hate the wjole Rousseauian idea of the natural state being perfect. But that doesn't change the fact that "Technology is dangerous!" totally has real world precidence. The most important scientific development of the 20th centuary was first used to kill 250,000 people and then began a political situation where the whole world was under constant threat of annhilation that lasted for almost 45 years. You say that scientific advance allows us to save lives and that's true, but it has allowed us to take them far more effciently.
Great article. Can't say I disagree with anything present in it. I'm also happy to see some outright jabs at Hall Pass which, being one of the few R rated comedies out, I had thought about seeing and now will probably skip.
One note: there actually is a great movie about a guy having a mid-life crisis, quitting his high-paying job and trying to live simply. The movie is called 'Lost in America' and stars Albert Brooks. He finds not only that he can't handle the simple life on the road, but that neither can his wife and that he misses being upper-middle-class. Spoiler: in the late '70s and early-to-mid '80s Albert Brooks was brain-meltingly funny. Check it out if you've never seen it. Or watch it again. It's amazing.
One note: there actually is a great movie about a guy having a mid-life crisis, quitting his high-paying job and trying to live simply. The movie is called 'Lost in America' and stars Albert Brooks. He finds not only that he can't handle the simple life on the road, but that neither can his wife and that he misses being upper-middle-class. Spoiler: in the late '70s and early-to-mid '80s Albert Brooks was brain-meltingly funny. Check it out if you've never seen it. Or watch it again. It's amazing.
