Stop Blowing My Mind!
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
There is so much wrong with this article I don't even know where to begin, and I'm not sure if I should begin at all as it appears as though everyone either agrees with me or is ignoring the issue entirely.
I'll just try to make it quick.
Just because a movie is geeky doesn't mean it's intelligent or mind-blowing, and not liking a geeky movie may have far more to do with personal tastes than it does with intellectual capabilities.
Watchmen isn't better than Dark Knight just because the heroes wore primary colors, and while a Batman reboot would be fine with having the traditional gray/blue with bat symbol costume, the current series of movies would suffer heavily for it.
The fact that bad movies from the geek genre failed isn't a sign that the genre as a whole is losing popularity.
And you're not better than other people because you have an interest in super heroes and Megaman.
EDIT: Almost forgot, Al Gore is not a science nerd. He either doesn't understand or intentionally exaggerates the evidence supporting his side of the argument to pretend that we fully understand the climate and there's no room for debate, even though we don't and there is.
I'll just try to make it quick.
Just because a movie is geeky doesn't mean it's intelligent or mind-blowing, and not liking a geeky movie may have far more to do with personal tastes than it does with intellectual capabilities.
Watchmen isn't better than Dark Knight just because the heroes wore primary colors, and while a Batman reboot would be fine with having the traditional gray/blue with bat symbol costume, the current series of movies would suffer heavily for it.
The fact that bad movies from the geek genre failed isn't a sign that the genre as a whole is losing popularity.
And you're not better than other people because you have an interest in super heroes and Megaman.
EDIT: Almost forgot, Al Gore is not a science nerd. He either doesn't understand or intentionally exaggerates the evidence supporting his side of the argument to pretend that we fully understand the climate and there's no room for debate, even though we don't and there is.
I read this post, starting fuming with indignance (Who is this idiot, they admit it's out of context but that doesn't affect their opinion, did they bother to watch the youtube video which gives all the context you need, etc. etc.) and then I noticed it was Bob *sigh* moving on...MovieBob said:
*mumble*Seriously, why do I even read this stuff, it's the most "hit or miss" content to the Escapist...*mumble*
Edit: Interesting trivia with that Xena thing, but that is still not directly applicable to the Darwyn quote.
Ehh... I believe you're forgetting to take into account this economic depression the world is in now. Sure, we're recovering, but people are still skittish about what to spend their money on.
For me, I'd rather believe the Geek era has just begun. Geek numbers are rising, and irrelevant of how much the conservative fight against us, they'll eventually (hopefully) die off and leave us be.
For me, I'd rather believe the Geek era has just begun. Geek numbers are rising, and irrelevant of how much the conservative fight against us, they'll eventually (hopefully) die off and leave us be.
I have to say I've actually enjoyed more NEW films in the last 2 years than in the entirety of my life before that. I mean, more NEW films, when they were new. I've enjoyed tons of 80s and 90s films, sure, but I watched them with at least a five-year gap between when they came out and when I saw them.
But recently I've been watching films in theaters or just out of theaters and really enjoying them. And many others I've really wished I had the money or time to see in theaters. Usually I look at every new release and sigh a sigh of complete weariness, sad that nothing coming out has anything to do with any of my interests.
But yeah, that bubble will burst. I wish we could get a proper Garth Ennis Punisher MAX or Preacher movie out of it. Transmetropolitan might be an interesting film experiment if presented in the style of hard-hitting film journalism.
But recently I've been watching films in theaters or just out of theaters and really enjoying them. And many others I've really wished I had the money or time to see in theaters. Usually I look at every new release and sigh a sigh of complete weariness, sad that nothing coming out has anything to do with any of my interests.
But yeah, that bubble will burst. I wish we could get a proper Garth Ennis Punisher MAX or Preacher movie out of it. Transmetropolitan might be an interesting film experiment if presented in the style of hard-hitting film journalism.
Good grief, Scott Pilgrim is not some inspired, creative force. It, alongside Juno and that Nick & Norah tripe, is a triumph of marketing and demographic pandering, nothing more than the result of a group of hired think-tanks trying to zero in on one of the most obnoxiously self-aware cultures ever in modern society. (I of course realise it's based on a comic!)
I love your eloquent musings Bob and I know you're not one of the pretentious twats to be found in said movies so the only conclusion I can come up with as to why you don't immediately scorn these films is that you simply aren't as exposed to the levels of 'indie' idiocy that I have been.
Where I am from, Ireland, all the 'hip' clothing shops are sellings vintage tees with comic book characters emblazoned on the front. Of course not 5 years ago people wouldn't be seen dead in such attire but now every trendy idiot brandishes this apparel in a bid to attain 'geek' cred. Surely this must get to you? Maybe it doesn't...
It's similar to that piece on racism you did regarding Resident Evil 5. While some people saw Whitey with a badge shooting at Black people and instantly thought "RACIST!!", others, like myself who grew up in a relatively racism free world just said "No, not necessarily, relax!"
Perhaps you look at a film like Scott Pilgrim and, being somewhat less accustomed to the insidious world of 'indie', merely judge it based on its merits as a film (which I suppose is exactly what you are required to do).
Unfortunately when I look at this film, all I see is the calculated aesthetic, the typical soundtrack, even the premeditated 'indie' fonts used in the opening credits and say to myself "Well, this will go down great with the 14-25yr old, suburban dwelling, caucasian market."
I love your eloquent musings Bob and I know you're not one of the pretentious twats to be found in said movies so the only conclusion I can come up with as to why you don't immediately scorn these films is that you simply aren't as exposed to the levels of 'indie' idiocy that I have been.
Where I am from, Ireland, all the 'hip' clothing shops are sellings vintage tees with comic book characters emblazoned on the front. Of course not 5 years ago people wouldn't be seen dead in such attire but now every trendy idiot brandishes this apparel in a bid to attain 'geek' cred. Surely this must get to you? Maybe it doesn't...
It's similar to that piece on racism you did regarding Resident Evil 5. While some people saw Whitey with a badge shooting at Black people and instantly thought "RACIST!!", others, like myself who grew up in a relatively racism free world just said "No, not necessarily, relax!"
Perhaps you look at a film like Scott Pilgrim and, being somewhat less accustomed to the insidious world of 'indie', merely judge it based on its merits as a film (which I suppose is exactly what you are required to do).
Unfortunately when I look at this film, all I see is the calculated aesthetic, the typical soundtrack, even the premeditated 'indie' fonts used in the opening credits and say to myself "Well, this will go down great with the 14-25yr old, suburban dwelling, caucasian market."
Gah, I can never take these seriously when the examples of "good movies" are terrible. Tarentino's Death Proof? that movie was so terrible it jumped over the so bad it's good that he was going for and circled round back to just plain bad. And Watchmen? Really? You can't figure out why people didn't go for it? That movie probably would have been a hit back when the comic was, in an era where the story was even vaguely applicable to the masses. These days the story of Watchmen is so dated that to someone who doesn't appreciate it from within the context of the time it was written, will find it a wordy pretentious piece of crap. So yeah, of course Watchmen bombed, they stuck hard to the comic, and that was written for an audience that hasn't been the norm for 25 years.
Since when is Jon Stewart nerdy? He makes fun of his own technical ineptitude on the show all the time, he's funny but I don't get why you used him as an example of a nerd comedian. Besides, Conan's getting a new show anyway.
I hate this attituse that MovieBob is developing, this whole "people don't get these awesome films, most moviegoers are idiots". I loved Scott Pilgrim, thought it was the bees knees but I can understand that for alot of people you don't want to see it due to it being not your thing. I didn't see superman returns due to the fact that I never liked superman. Does that make me idiotic? No it just means my subjective tastes differ from others. Likewise I knew people who hated Iron Man and viewed it just as fast food cinema going and that's fine.
If we are entering a new era though, part of me thinks that's good. If we stop this whole subserviance to geek culture thing and a whole newe genre appears then good.
If we are entering a new era though, part of me thinks that's good. If we stop this whole subserviance to geek culture thing and a whole newe genre appears then good.
Where the hell do you live? (Would Dublin be a good guess?) I wear superhero shirts and I stand out for it.
I agree and disagree here. Watchmen did have great acting and writing and was intelligent, but the end effect was that it still is not as strong as Dark Knight. Watchmen was one of those movies where, for at least my group of friends, was "as good as it could be, but just an okay movie". Dark Knight, on the other hand, had barely a thing wrong with it. I think the comparison between the two as "dark, thought provoking films" is a little unfair.SpiderJerusalem said:
Blind Side 2: Blind Sider
Frankly, I have not been enjoying this geek movie boom as much as most.
I disliked Spider-Man, Spider-Man 2, Batman Begins and Dark Knight. I am not certain exactly why, but in the case of the batman movies, it's because they are ashamed to be super hero movies. It's been awhile since I saw the Spider-Man movies, so I'm not sure where they went wrong except for maybe the special effect were more unconvincing than in the George Reeves Superman TV show.
But maybe I'm just bitter. It used to be there would be one, maybe two geeky movies a year, at least that got mainstream promotion, so it was easy to catch all of them. Now there's a bumper crop and I'm not spending my entire paycheck to go to the movies.
Hey, that could be it. Having all these movies come out is just the 1983 video game crash again. They've flooded the market and now everyone gets a much smaller piece of a very big pie. Which is does not mean that the market for these movies isn't growing. Just that the filmmakers are trying to exploit that market far beyond what it's able to handle, so it looks like these movies are bombs.
This could lead to a geek movie "crash' which just means that studios won't be making them anymore or will simply be making fewer of them, which might not be a bad idea. And making some good ones for a change wouldn't be bad, either.
Frankly, I have not been enjoying this geek movie boom as much as most.
I disliked Spider-Man, Spider-Man 2, Batman Begins and Dark Knight. I am not certain exactly why, but in the case of the batman movies, it's because they are ashamed to be super hero movies. It's been awhile since I saw the Spider-Man movies, so I'm not sure where they went wrong except for maybe the special effect were more unconvincing than in the George Reeves Superman TV show.
But maybe I'm just bitter. It used to be there would be one, maybe two geeky movies a year, at least that got mainstream promotion, so it was easy to catch all of them. Now there's a bumper crop and I'm not spending my entire paycheck to go to the movies.
Hey, that could be it. Having all these movies come out is just the 1983 video game crash again. They've flooded the market and now everyone gets a much smaller piece of a very big pie. Which is does not mean that the market for these movies isn't growing. Just that the filmmakers are trying to exploit that market far beyond what it's able to handle, so it looks like these movies are bombs.
This could lead to a geek movie "crash' which just means that studios won't be making them anymore or will simply be making fewer of them, which might not be a bad idea. And making some good ones for a change wouldn't be bad, either.
I am reasonably certain I have seen sports team mascots with more sex appeal.Scrumpmonkey said:Well lets hope tron gets a boost via it's obvious appeal to *ahem* descerning males
In fairness, most moviegoers are profoundly stupid.370999 said:
Indeed, Superman is a terrible character. Though that doesn't necessarily mean the movie was badly made.370999 said:
Those people are pretentious morons. They were under the impression that claiming to dislike something everyone else liked would make them look clever or in possession of some esoteric film based knowledge. Iron Man is a great movie, whether someone likes it or not. End of discussion.370999 said:
Aye, Dublin indeed. I only mentioned I live in Europe as American and European society are completely different. We don't have any jocks here, our schools are not segregated into different factions like 'nerds' or 'preps' or anything like that. I suppose it would be accurate to say that over here we'd have people into dance/rap music(scumbags), indie music (indieheads) and metal(goths & Metalheads). And I hate them all!370999 said:
Anyway, years ago I would be ridiculed for having the audacity to wear a Sonic the Hedgehog T-shirt but now, like I said, these 'indieheads' have in a way taken gaming away from me. I wore my Sonic t-shirt to show my love of Sonic and, by extension, gaming. Nowadays they'll wear the same t-shirt out of some ironic gesture or something. Because they're just so cool, too much so for school in fact!
We differ here as most movie goers are IMHO of average intelligence. If you have some intelligence test that contradicts that I will revise my opinion.
Not sure about that, the film possibly just didn' appeal to them kinda like how the Expendable didn't appeal to others. Seeing as we lack any mathmatical formula to determine a great movie we are stuck with using the consensus position which is not always optinium.
I am Irish as well ( A longford man) however this division is not what I am familiar with, though that is possibly due to Longford being more Bohemian then where I live. This triablism is not what I am familiar with.
Bob, I know you appreciated Watchmen's effort, and so did I, but let's be honest: it was a bad movie. It was EXACTLY the kind of cerebral story that should have warranted someone the POLAR OPPOSITE of Zack Synder as director. Think about it.
Seriously.
Ask yourself how the fuck he turned WATCHMEN into a Superhero action movie.
The acting was terrible on all fronts but Jackie Earl Haley -- and much like the prequel Star Wars movies, I can't help but notice that a lot of these actors are good in other roles; so, again, the director is to be blamed.
Just imagine how brilliant Watchmen could have been in hands of (sigh, yes, going here) Nolan. Or Robert Rodriguez. Or Tarantino. Imagine Watchmen by SCORCESE; fuckin A! That's what you could have had. That's what you should have EXPECTED.
And now remember what you got: a stilted, bloated, poorly-acted, far-too-visually-dominated crack-fest adaptation of a very slowly-paced graphic novel, whose only saving graces were the intelligent themes and ideas shining through from the source material, and a pitch-perfect script by David Hayter.
I liked 300. You liked 300. We all admit Snyder's got a visual eye--and yes, I'm sure he's one of "us". But Watchmen was terrible, and it's one of the most perfect examples of why you don't let a fanboy get too close to the object of his adoration: because he can't grant himself the objective distance necessary to ensure that what comes out in the end is of good quality.
So let's stop with the self-righteous 'step too far into my realm' melodrama already. It's not the masterpiece-that-didn't-make-it. It's not the Superhero Fight Club. Nobody's going to look back in twenty years and point to Watchmen as a cinematic touchstone. Get over it.
----------------
Also: Scott Pilgrim failed financially because they marketed it like a 'Michael Cera movie'. Without googling it, it was almost impossible to tell about its video-game themes or aesthetic, and WHY oh WHY did they not HAMMER HOME, 'From the director of Shaun of the Dead'?? I know among MY group of friends, I had to drag everyone kicking and screaming (though we all had a blast) and I imagine it'll do well on DVD.
Seriously.
Ask yourself how the fuck he turned WATCHMEN into a Superhero action movie.
The acting was terrible on all fronts but Jackie Earl Haley -- and much like the prequel Star Wars movies, I can't help but notice that a lot of these actors are good in other roles; so, again, the director is to be blamed.
Just imagine how brilliant Watchmen could have been in hands of (sigh, yes, going here) Nolan. Or Robert Rodriguez. Or Tarantino. Imagine Watchmen by SCORCESE; fuckin A! That's what you could have had. That's what you should have EXPECTED.
And now remember what you got: a stilted, bloated, poorly-acted, far-too-visually-dominated crack-fest adaptation of a very slowly-paced graphic novel, whose only saving graces were the intelligent themes and ideas shining through from the source material, and a pitch-perfect script by David Hayter.
I liked 300. You liked 300. We all admit Snyder's got a visual eye--and yes, I'm sure he's one of "us". But Watchmen was terrible, and it's one of the most perfect examples of why you don't let a fanboy get too close to the object of his adoration: because he can't grant himself the objective distance necessary to ensure that what comes out in the end is of good quality.
So let's stop with the self-righteous 'step too far into my realm' melodrama already. It's not the masterpiece-that-didn't-make-it. It's not the Superhero Fight Club. Nobody's going to look back in twenty years and point to Watchmen as a cinematic touchstone. Get over it.
----------------
Also: Scott Pilgrim failed financially because they marketed it like a 'Michael Cera movie'. Without googling it, it was almost impossible to tell about its video-game themes or aesthetic, and WHY oh WHY did they not HAMMER HOME, 'From the director of Shaun of the Dead'?? I know among MY group of friends, I had to drag everyone kicking and screaming (though we all had a blast) and I imagine it'll do well on DVD.
You have great faith in the movie going public I must say! Well, of course many an acute mind visits the cinema from time to time but when you take into account the mass of cretins who also go the average is brought down a fair amount. I certainly can't produce an official tally of their intelligence so my only source would be that I worked in a cinema for a year and I love going to the cinema myself! Sturgeon's law must also come into the equation I'm sure you'll agree.370999 said:
Apologies, when you mentioned these people referred to Iron Man as 'fast food cinema' I got the impression they thought it was beneath them, which certainly seems pretentious. When a film so universally loved is disliked by an individual they tend to be only saying this to make you think they know something you don't. Of course if they just didn't like it then that's fair enough, albeit a shame. The Expendables was a terribly made movie regardless of who liked it. To use a musical analogy... U2 the band. Suppose I hated them. It matters not, they make good music whether I like it or otherwise!
I guess it varies from school to school and town to town. Such labels were once based on individual groups. The existence of these labels led to people augmenting their appearance, musical taste, personalities and even cigarette brands to better suit the 'requirements' of the group they wish to assimilate into. Metalheads will grow their hair to become 'more metal'. Emos will all of a sudden start reading Twilight novels and collecting Tim Burton crap all in the hopes of appearing 'more emo'. Accordingly self-proclaimed 'indieheads' will wear vintage tees, skinny fit jeans, all of a sudden turn vegan and watch 'quirky' films. That is why Juno was 'so cool' and had a Kimya Dawson soundtrack. That is why Nick & Norah was soaked in Indie essence. It's also why the indie comic Scott Pilgrim was chosen to be made into a movie. It was marketed deftly to these cretins. The industry thrives on these credulous slaves.
I envy you!
This may sound harsh, but it really doesn't matter to me if the geek trend continues. What I want to see from the film industry is thought-provoking, sincerely-told stories with artistic merit and high entertainment value.
But I know that instances of any of these things are few and far between, and that's not likely to change anytime soon because Hollywood does not work that way. Like all the other people who've had their hearts broken by mass media, the geeks are just going to have to take what they can get.
But I know that instances of any of these things are few and far between, and that's not likely to change anytime soon because Hollywood does not work that way. Like all the other people who've had their hearts broken by mass media, the geeks are just going to have to take what they can get.