Free MMORPG Forums

Claudedenja · 10-14-2011, 07:50 PM

I believe I have a topic that may draw such a discussion. My friend Jake Knott made an article, surprisingly it caught my attention, I never knew he was so serious with his feels against movies. He's completely right IMO.

http://www.ubspectrum.com/arts/hey-hollywood-why-so-boring-1.2647933?MMode=true

Read the article, discuss.

Avarance · 10-14-2011, 08:46 PM

Hollywood, James Cameron and Quentin Tarantino aren't the only ones in the world making films.

He says Hollywood writers are running out of ideas but what about Terrence Malick's Tree of Life that came out this year? It has some of the most stunning cinematography I've ever seen and I've seen a lot of movies... There's also Drive which is another brilliant movie that was filmed in LA studios...

Ronin · 10-15-2011, 03:14 PM

Well, he writes that Inglorious bastards is showing the way, but Top gun is overrated.

In 10 years everyone will write that Inglorious bastards was overrated, but whatever new mainstream blockbuster with the biggest marketing budget is the front runner is like nothing ever seen before.

WW II movie and innovative in one sentence. ****, compare Inglorious bastards to a bridge on the river kwai and deerhunter, not even to mention apocalypse now and you see what it really is:
Mainstream entertainment. A bloody comedy. A collage of completely out of context jokes into some story that more than loosely ties them together which is entirely replaceable with that of 1000s of WW II movies, of which most are better.

Didn't Kill Bill I and II basically surf the wave of early modern sequel cinema so hardcore like it hasn't ever been done before?

Tarentino doesn't measure up, just like Peter Jackson doesn't.
They both are mediocre and can't really tell a story. If there is any complexity to it it goes missing.
(I am ready to change my view on this if he ever creates anything that is comparable to Pulp fiction again. Too bad that a copyist asked to copy himself is bound to have a hard time. Well, there is Reservoir Dogs, but aside from that not much.)

When he would be asked to design a story where he can't copy 90% of the shots from some obscure indies and foreign films I wonder what the result would be. I guess it would be hardly watch-able.
He gets the most out of his derivative collage style, you have to give him that, but the ceiling on that is pretty low to be honest, if you only excel in one aspect of the art.

Cameron however is an innovater, he is right on that.

Finally. Yes I agree. There are really a lot of movies that aren't as good as they are made out to be. People listen to the advertising talk way too much. Hollywood was always about mass-production. Though. It just got better at it. That means more interesting movies still, even though the proportion has gone down and many won't be running in cinemas very long.

You have to be a little picky and do your homework I guess, but it's worth it imo.

shadowsworn · 10-15-2011, 03:15 PM

I'm going to see Drive today.

Bacn · 10-15-2011, 03:55 PM

The reason movies like Footloose and The Thing are getting "remakes" is because those movies will make money. People already know what Footloose and The Thing are and so when they're announced movie studios get an instant load of hype around it due to the name alone. If a franchise has good brand recognition than that can be used to reach good sales figures. People will go to see a new film in a franchise they know even if they never saw the original, due to the hype(See: Sales figures of Star Wars and Toy Story films).

The reason more "original" movies don't dominate the film industry, as most people wish was the case, is because starting up a new franchise is very, very, very difficult. People do not have the time or money to go to see every movie that's out there. So when they see a movie in a long-running franchise next to a less-know film, they are more than likely to choose the less original film because their money is limited and they know what they're going to get with an old franchise. That leads to new franchises getting killed off.

At the end of the day, movie studios have to decide between making reboots, remakes and sequels in order to stay in business or fund more creative projects and lose money in order to create films that are of a very high-quality. It doesn't matter how much you want good movies to be made, they're huge gambles that no studio wants, nor should be forced, to make.

shadowsworn · 10-16-2011, 02:34 AM

is bacn talking or movies or videogames now

rhetorical question. bacn is obviously talking about both!

Abhorsen · 10-16-2011, 02:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ronin

compare Inglorious bastards to a bridge on the river kwai and deerhunter, not even to mention apocalypse now and you see what it really is:
Mainstream entertainment. A bloody comedy. A collage of completely out of context jokes into some story that more than loosely ties them together which is entirely replaceable with that of 1000s of WW II movies, of which most are better.

the way u describe Inglorious Bastards is exactly what it is and what it was suposed to be, mainstream entertainment but at its best.

also i dont think i've ever seen such an epic build-up to a sudden shooting scene in a movie then the one in that basement in Inglorious Bastards :P everytime i watch it it cracks me up lol

Raiyne · 10-16-2011, 06:19 AM

As always, the problem really lies with the people who consume all that shit.

The informed never really complain about the lack of good music, books or movies.

Bacn · 10-16-2011, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shadowsworn

is bacn talking or movies or videogames now

My post only pertains to video games if you replace the word "sequel" with "first person shooter".

gratscorpio · 10-16-2011, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bacn

The reason movies like Footloose and The Thing are getting "remakes" is because those movies will make money. People already know what Footloose and The Thing are and so when they're announced movie studios get an instant load of hype around it due to the name alone. If a franchise has good brand recognition than that can be used to reach good sales figures. People will go to see a new film in a franchise they know even if they never saw the original, due to the hype(See: Sales figures of Star Wars and Toy Story films).

The reason more "original" movies don't dominate the film industry, as most people wish was the case, is because starting up a new franchise is very, very, very difficult. People do not have the time or money to go to see every movie that's out there. So when they see a movie in a long-running franchise next to a less-know film, they are more than likely to choose the less original film because their money is limited and they know what they're going to get with an old franchise. That leads to new franchises getting killed off.

At the end of the day, movie studios have to decide between making reboots, remakes and sequels in order to stay in business or fund more creative projects and lose money in order to create films that are of a very high-quality. It doesn't matter how much you want good movies to be made, they're huge gambles that no studio wants, nor should be forced, to make.

The new Thething is not a remake (no worries I thought so as well) it is actually a prequel that deals with the first scientist camp that delt with it. The movie will also explain in more detail what the thing is, i.e where it came from etc whats its purpose.

That being said I am super hyped to see it.

scorpio

10-14-2011, 07:50 PM	#1 (permalink)
Claudedenja Lockhart’s are forever Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: NY Posts: 393 Reputation: 20	Hollywood, Why so boring? I believe I have a topic that may draw such a discussion. My friend Jake Knott made an article, surprisingly it caught my attention, I never knew he was so serious with his feels against movies. He's completely right IMO. http://www.ubspectrum.com/arts/hey-hollywood-why-so-boring-1.2647933?MMode=true Read the article, discuss. __________________ ~Waiting for Guildwars 2~ ]

10-14-2011, 08:46 PM	#2 (permalink)
Avarance Sandman's Slave Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 3,871 Reputation: 278	Hollywood, James Cameron and Quentin Tarantino aren't the only ones in the world making films. He says Hollywood writers are running out of ideas but what about Terrence Malick's Tree of Life that came out this year? It has some of the most stunning cinematography I've ever seen and I've seen a lot of movies... There's also Drive which is another brilliant movie that was filmed in LA studios... __________________ last.fm mubi currently playing: はーとふる彼氏

10-15-2011, 03:14 PM	#3 (permalink)
Ronin OnRPG Elite Member! Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Hitman Victor Posts: 4,923 Reputation: 302	Well, he writes that Inglorious bastards is showing the way, but Top gun is overrated. In 10 years everyone will write that Inglorious bastards was overrated, but whatever new mainstream blockbuster with the biggest marketing budget is the front runner is like nothing ever seen before. WW II movie and innovative in one sentence. ***, compare Inglorious bastards to a bridge on the river kwai and deerhunter, not even to mention apocalypse now and you see what it really is: Mainstream entertainment. A bloody comedy. A collage of completely out of context jokes into some story that more than loosely ties them together which is entirely replaceable with that of 1000s of WW II movies, of which most are better. Didn't Kill Bill I and II basically surf the wave of early modern sequel cinema so hardcore like it hasn't ever been done before? Tarentino doesn't measure up, just like Peter Jackson doesn't. They both are mediocre and can't really tell a story. If there is any complexity to it it goes missing. (I am ready to change my view on this if he ever creates anything that is comparable to Pulp fiction again. Too bad that a copyist asked to copy himself is bound to have a hard time. Well, there is Reservoir Dogs, but aside from that not much.) When he would be asked to design a story where he can't copy 90% of the shots from some obscure indies and foreign films I wonder what the result would be. I guess it would be hardly watch-able. He gets the most out of his derivative collage style, you have to give him that, but the ceiling on that is pretty low to be honest, if you only excel in one aspect of the art. Cameron however is an innovater, he is right on that. Finally. Yes I agree. There are really a lot of movies that aren't as good as they are made out to be. People listen to the advertising talk way too much. Hollywood was always about mass-production. Though. It just got better at it. That means more interesting movies still, even though the proportion has gone down and many won't be running in cinemas very long. You have to be a little picky and do your homework I guess, but it's worth it imo. __________________ Stay frosty. Last edited by Ronin; 10-15-2011 at 03:37 PM.*

10-15-2011, 03:15 PM	#4 (permalink)
shadowsworn Retired Staff Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 9,130 Reputation: 246	I'm going to see Drive today. __________________ From which of this oak shall I hang myself?

10-15-2011, 03:55 PM	#5 (permalink)
Bacn It's Bacon!!! Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dogenzaka Hill Posts: 7,868 Reputation: 228	The reason movies like Footloose and The Thing are getting "remakes" is because those movies will make money. People already know what Footloose and The Thing are and so when they're announced movie studios get an instant load of hype around it due to the name alone. If a franchise has good brand recognition than that can be used to reach good sales figures. People will go to see a new film in a franchise they know even if they never saw the original, due to the hype(See: Sales figures of Star Wars and Toy Story films). The reason more "original" movies don't dominate the film industry, as most people wish was the case, is because starting up a new franchise is very, very, very difficult. People do not have the time or money to go to see every movie that's out there. So when they see a movie in a long-running franchise next to a less-know film, they are more than likely to choose the less original film because their money is limited and they know what they're going to get with an old franchise. That leads to new franchises getting killed off. At the end of the day, movie studios have to decide between making reboots, remakes and sequels in order to stay in business or fund more creative projects and lose money in order to create films that are of a very high-quality. It doesn't matter how much you want good movies to be made, they're huge gambles that no studio wants, nor should be forced, to make. __________________ First Came The Question Then Came The Answer

10-16-2011, 02:34 AM	#6 (permalink)
shadowsworn Retired Staff Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 9,130 Reputation: 246	is bacn talking or movies or videogames now rhetorical question. bacn is obviously talking about both! __________________ From which of this oak shall I hang myself?

10-16-2011, 06:19 AM	#8 (permalink)
Raiyne Feedbacker Join Date: May 2006 Location: The Middle of the Stairs Posts: 13,389 Reputation: 126	As always, the problem really lies with the people who consume all that shit. The informed never really complain about the lack of good music, books or movies. __________________ Everytime I post, I think Murph is about to BROFIST me. -- Loric Last.fm Hey Raiyne

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode