|
Post by deadpool on Feb 25, 2011 12:15:45 GMT -5
Ok well first of all I loved the evil dead series and sorry if I was sounding like I was knocking them. Secondly I have no denial that inception was a great success and that if I saw it I would like it. I am all for origional films but I also enjoy the comic book movies. I can't wait for the avengers and green lantren and the dragonball reboot (fingers crossed). Now if the studios choose to ignore stuff like inception then that is truly a great loss but it does not make me loose faith in those studios.
Also do all films need a big budget? The social network was a fairly inexpensive film and that's all it needed to be. If you made the budget like 50 million then all you would get is more of a paycheck for those involved. Basically giving stuff like that a bigger budget isn't solving any problems all you are doing is giving money from one type of movie to another. Now one thing I agree with is the monopoly thing. That was one movie I looked at and kind of thought really? But then again you never know. Put the right creative team behind it and it could be the next inception.
Now inregards to the marketing and the merchendice I personally love it. A good promotion can make a movie all the much better for the experience. It makes the movie more than just a movie it becomes an event in your life. Like for example I think I will always remember the summer when episode 3 came out because I remember collecting the M&M packages and drinking the star wars pepsi bottles. And that goes double for episode one. It takes the movie and creates a stronger memory behind it. Let's face it star wars would not be as strong of a legend as it is now if it wasn't for the action figures and toys. Sure they were out to make money off of them but hello this is earth money makes the world go around. The toy industry makes millions of jobs for people around the world why is it bad?
|
|
|
Post by bouncingbrick on Feb 25, 2011 14:45:56 GMT -5
Ok well first of all I loved the evil dead series and sorry if I was sounding like I was knocking them. Secondly I have no denial that inception was a great success and that if I saw it I would like it. I am all for origional films but I also enjoy the comic book movies. I can't wait for the avengers and green lantren and the dragonball reboot (fingers crossed). Now if the studios choose to ignore stuff like inception then that is truly a great loss but it does not make me loose faith in those studios. Also do all films need a big budget? The social network was a fairly inexpensive film and that's all it needed to be. If you made the budget like 50 million then all you would get is more of a paycheck for those involved. Basically giving stuff like that a bigger budget isn't solving any problems all you are doing is giving money from one type of movie to another. Now one thing I agree with is the monopoly thing. That was one movie I looked at and kind of thought really? But then again you never know. Put the right creative team behind it and it could be the next inception. Now inregards to the marketing and the merchendice I personally love it. A good promotion can make a movie all the much better for the experience. It makes the movie more than just a movie it becomes an event in your life. Like for example I think I will always remember the summer when episode 3 came out because I remember collecting the M&M packages and drinking the star wars pepsi bottles. And that goes double for episode one. It takes the movie and creates a stronger memory behind it. Let's face it star wars would not be as strong of a legend as it is now if it wasn't for the action figures and toys. Sure they were out to make money off of them but hello this is earth money makes the world go around. The toy industry makes millions of jobs for people around the world why is it bad? Making money isn't bad. Sucking the creative and artistic integrity out of the industry is. And that's exactly what marketing departments are doing all over Holywood. And, no, all movies don't need big budgets and special effects (for the record, The Social Network had a budget of about $40 million not including promotional costs), but that's exactly what I am discussing. Big budget movies are dying creatively. The studio system has taken everything artistic and creative about film and tried to wrap it up in a shrink-wrapped, test audience, cookie-cutter package. There's no creativity there. There's no art there. It's just mindless fluff. Personally I'd rather the next Inception be Inception, and not Monopoly.
|
|
|
Post by deadpool on Feb 25, 2011 19:52:22 GMT -5
Ok please explain to me what marketing departments are doing to movies and how studio films are not creativity or art. Even movies that are not origional can still be creative. Iron man 2 had a lot of creativity and so did karate kid.
|
|
|
Post by bouncingbrick on Feb 27, 2011 19:03:22 GMT -5
Ok please explain to me what marketing departments are doing to movies and how studio films are not creativity or art. Even movies that are not origional can still be creative. Iron man 2 had a lot of creativity and so did karate kid. To be honest, I'm not sure how I can more convincingly explain that films like Monopoly and Battleship aren't creative in their conception. But I can show by example. Pirate of the Caribbean. The first film was as good as could be expected from a film based on a theme park ride but that was mostly because of the talent of director, Gore Verbinski. Then, when the film turned out to be a hit, they churned out sequels that lacked the charm and wit that was in the original. It's all just a blatant cash grab. As to your examples, I haven't seen Karate Kid, but Iron Man 2 is pretty aweful. I don't see much creativity in a bloated commercial for The Avengers movie. There's a reason John Favreau isn't returning for the third film. Again, you keep diverting from the subject of the article. Hollywood didn't learn anything from one of the most successful films of last year. That's a terrible thing. We should have a dozen original projects slated for the next two years based on Inceptions box office alone. But we don't.
|
|
|
Post by deadpool on Feb 27, 2011 19:19:59 GMT -5
A deviate from the article because I feel that we have resolved the issue and we agree on it. It is unfortuanate but not the end of studios. Now I felt like iron man 2 was so much more than a commericial for the avengers you really only have about 2 or 3 scenes that are. It had it's own unique story that really put tony starks character through a lot. As for monopoly and battleship you are judging films you havn't seen. Yes they are not based on origional things but hey only 3 and a half (i count social network as half) of the 10 oscar nominated best pictures are completly origional. I think that even adaptations are origional in their own way.
Also one thing I wanted to clarify. Earlier you said that people like rami and nolan should get big budget creative control even if the films are not very good. Now are you saying that it is ok for a good filmaker to make a bad movie but not a not very good film makers? You say you don't like bad movies but based on that you seem ok as long as the filmmaker is popular. Sorry if that is not what you meant but thats just how I read it could you please clarify.
|
|
Dr Handsome
Full Member
...but you can call me Eric.
Posts: 240
|
Post by Dr Handsome on Mar 2, 2011 0:38:15 GMT -5
Nobody likes bad movies but I'd certainly be more interested in seeing a failed Christopher Nolan movie that presumably comes from a place of creative inspiration than a failed Uno movie from the mind of some profit fueled marketing team. It's got nothing to do with bad filmmakers-- it's got everything to do with commercials posing as cinema.
And I honestly don't know why anyone would argue for bad cinema. I'm not a cold hearted bastard bent on destroying careers but I still don't see any reason to champion a job poorly done. Bad cinema is bad cinema-- we can only hope the director's next film works out better.
|
|
|
Post by deadpool on Mar 2, 2011 23:56:46 GMT -5
That's exactly what I'm talking about. There will always be less then average movies but that dosn't mean that you should give up on the filmakers or the studio.
|
|
|
Post by bouncingbrick on Mar 3, 2011 16:40:15 GMT -5
That's exactly what I'm talking about. There will always be less then average movies but that dosn't mean that you should give up on the filmakers or the studio. They think Inception's succcess was a fluke and not a result of creative and talented filmmaking! When exactly do we give up on them?!?!?
|
|
|
Post by deadpool on Mar 3, 2011 16:59:48 GMT -5
Personally never. I believe in infinite amount of chances with everything really. I also believe that the views of some of the studio heads should not reflect the whole studio.
|
|
|
Post by bouncingbrick on Mar 3, 2011 17:15:45 GMT -5
Personally never. I believe in infinite amount of chances with everything really. I also believe that the views of some of the studio heads should not reflect the whole studio. Show me the studio executives who are taking chances with more films like Inception, and I'll agree with you.
|
|
|
Post by bouncingbrick on Mar 11, 2011 16:25:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by deadpool on Mar 11, 2011 22:01:38 GMT -5
Yeah that is a shame that they are rushing into production without the script even ready that is a bad move. Now this is another subject I wanted to bring up but I don't think it needs it's own thread and it relates to this. A lot of people tend to get refunds if they don't like a movie. Now I think that is fine if they leave the movie and ask for the refund within the set time limit. However some people feel that if the movie was bad they should be able to get a refund even if they watched it all. I don't know about you guys but that seems unfair what do you guys think.
|
|