The Cinematic Motion Picture News Thread

[epilogue]

a great example of how I agree that not all cash grabs are useless. There are examples of how they can be great artistic pieces made by passionate people.

But seriously, I think we just disagree about how often this happens. I'm just glad to see you say it DOES happen, and I would suggest that the amount of on-screen passion that translates to you, someone who admits he is somewhat suspect when it comes to a lot of big studio properties and might have different aesthetic interests than many mainstream filmmakers, isn't necessarily indicative of the amount of artistic passion those filmmakers have for the projects.

Um... I'd argue that you're aesthetic is vastly different from the majority of the movie going public.

[Kaius]

Wait, I thought LV was pro-remake and durd was anti-?

In general I'm anti-remake because the vast majority of them are unoriginal, uninspired cash grabs, yes.

At the end of the day, I agree with vermin. I just want good movies. But I'd prefer good original content. Failing that, remakes are fine, if they're good. Problem is, most aren't.

Team durd.

[LoathedVermin72]

a great example of how I agree that not all cash grabs are useless. There are examples of how they can be great artistic pieces made by passionate people.

But seriously, I think we just disagree about how often this happens. I'm just glad to see you say it DOES happen, and I would suggest that the amount of on-screen passion that translates to you, someone who admits he is somewhat suspect when it comes to a lot of big studio properties and might have different aesthetic interests than many mainstream filmmakers, isn't necessarily indicative of the amount of artistic passion those filmmakers have for the projects.

Um... I'd argue that you're aesthetic is vastly different from the majority of the movie going public.

I didn't say anything about the moviegoing public, Joey.

[Kaius]

Just look at all of the great versions Peter Pan... Or Dracula.

[epilogue]

a great example of how I agree that not all cash grabs are useless. There are examples of how they can be great artistic pieces made by passionate people.

But seriously, I think we just disagree about how often this happens. I'm just glad to see you say it DOES happen, and I would suggest that the amount of on-screen passion that translates to you, someone who admits he is somewhat suspect when it comes to a lot of big studio properties and might have different aesthetic interests than many mainstream filmmakers, isn't necessarily indicative of the amount of artistic passion those filmmakers have for the projects.

Um... I'd argue that you're aesthetic is vastly different from the majority of the movie going public.

I didn't say anything about the moviegoing public, Joey.

And I never said there wasn't a level of artistic passion in mainstream filmmakers.

[LoathedVermin72]

Wait, I thought LV was pro-remake and durd was anti-?

In general I'm anti-remake because the vast majority of them are unoriginal, uninspired cash grabs, yes.

At the end of the day, I agree with vermin. I just want good movies. But I'd prefer good original content. Failing that, remakes are fine, if they're good. Problem is, most aren't.

Honestly I'm not really sure this is true. I'm not saying most remakes are as good or better than the films they're remakes of, but I don't think the bad-to-good ratio is any worse than all other movies. And like I said, I don't care if incidental things like subject matter are "original" or not - I only care about the quality of the film itself.

[LoathedVermin72]

a great example of how I agree that not all cash grabs are useless. There are examples of how they can be great artistic pieces made by passionate people.

But seriously, I think we just disagree about how often this happens. I'm just glad to see you say it DOES happen, and I would suggest that the amount of on-screen passion that translates to you, someone who admits he is somewhat suspect when it comes to a lot of big studio properties and might have different aesthetic interests than many mainstream filmmakers, isn't necessarily indicative of the amount of artistic passion those filmmakers have for the projects.

Um... I'd argue that you're aesthetic is vastly different from the majority of the movie going public.

I didn't say anything about the moviegoing public, Joey.

And I never said there wasn't a level of artistic passion in mainstream filmmakers.

Didn't you? You said most remakes are uninspired. Does that not indicate a lack of passion on behalf of the filmmakers?

[McParadigm]

You guys haven't even gotten into movies that combine several franchises to new effect. What are your thoughts on Aliens Vs. Jurassic Park?

Also, why does JJ Abrams hate the troops?

[epilogue]

Wait, I thought LV was pro-remake and durd was anti-?

In general I'm anti-remake because the vast majority of them are unoriginal, uninspired cash grabs, yes.

At the end of the day, I agree with vermin. I just want good movies. But I'd prefer good original content. Failing that, remakes are fine, if they're good. Problem is, most aren't.

Honestly I'm not really sure this is true. I'm not saying most remakes are as good or better than the films they're remakes of, but I don't think the bad-to-good ratio is any worse than all other movies. And like I said, I don't care if incidental things like subject matter are "original" or not - I only care about the quality of the film itself.

Sure. I get that. But for me the quality takes an automatic hit by being a remake. The remake has to work harder on me from the get-go by virtue of it's retread.

And I'll amend my comment to: the problem is, most of them aren't as good as the original and therefore, not worth the money it cost to make them.

[LoathedVermin72]

Wait, I thought LV was pro-remake and durd was anti-?

In general I'm anti-remake because the vast majority of them are unoriginal, uninspired cash grabs, yes.

At the end of the day, I agree with vermin. I just want good movies. But I'd prefer good original content. Failing that, remakes are fine, if they're good. Problem is, most aren't.

Honestly I'm not really sure this is true. I'm not saying most remakes are as good or better than the films they're remakes of, but I don't think the bad-to-good ratio is any worse than all other movies. And like I said, I don't care if incidental things like subject matter are "original" or not - I only care about the quality of the film itself.

Sure. I get that. But for me the quality takes an automatic hit by being a remake. The remake has to work harder on me from the get-go by virtue of it's retread.

And I'll amend my comment to: the problem is, most of them aren't as good as the original and therefore, not worth the money it cost to make them.

Yeah, I just fundamentally disagree with this 100%.

[epilogue]

a great example of how I agree that not all cash grabs are useless. There are examples of how they can be great artistic pieces made by passionate people.

But seriously, I think we just disagree about how often this happens. I'm just glad to see you say it DOES happen, and I would suggest that the amount of on-screen passion that translates to you, someone who admits he is somewhat suspect when it comes to a lot of big studio properties and might have different aesthetic interests than many mainstream filmmakers, isn't necessarily indicative of the amount of artistic passion those filmmakers have for the projects.

Um... I'd argue that you're aesthetic is vastly different from the majority of the movie going public.

I didn't say anything about the moviegoing public, Joey.

And I never said there wasn't a level of artistic passion in mainstream filmmakers.

Didn't you? You said most remakes are uninspired. Does that not indicate a lack of passion on behalf of the filmmakers?

The end result. But I'm sure many of them were passionate about making a movie. Few people would go through all of that if they weren't feeling it. But usually the films end up flat and uninteresting: feeling uninspired.

[epilogue]

Wait, I thought LV was pro-remake and durd was anti-?

In general I'm anti-remake because the vast majority of them are unoriginal, uninspired cash grabs, yes.

At the end of the day, I agree with vermin. I just want good movies. But I'd prefer good original content. Failing that, remakes are fine, if they're good. Problem is, most aren't.

Honestly I'm not really sure this is true. I'm not saying most remakes are as good or better than the films they're remakes of, but I don't think the bad-to-good ratio is any worse than all other movies. And like I said, I don't care if incidental things like subject matter are "original" or not - I only care about the quality of the film itself.

Sure. I get that. But for me the quality takes an automatic hit by being a remake. The remake has to work harder on me from the get-go by virtue of it's retread.

And I'll amend my comment to: the problem is, most of them aren't as good as the original and therefore, not worth the money it cost to make them.

Yeah, I just fundamentally disagree with this 100%.

I know you do, boo. We've been restating a version of it for like four pages now.

[LoathedVermin72]

Wait, I thought LV was pro-remake and durd was anti-?

In general I'm anti-remake because the vast majority of them are unoriginal, uninspired cash grabs, yes.

At the end of the day, I agree with vermin. I just want good movies. But I'd prefer good original content. Failing that, remakes are fine, if they're good. Problem is, most aren't.

Honestly I'm not really sure this is true. I'm not saying most remakes are as good or better than the films they're remakes of, but I don't think the bad-to-good ratio is any worse than all other movies. And like I said, I don't care if incidental things like subject matter are "original" or not - I only care about the quality of the film itself.

Sure. I get that. But for me the quality takes an automatic hit by being a remake. The remake has to work harder on me from the get-go by virtue of it's retread.

And I'll amend my comment to: the problem is, most of them aren't as good as the original and therefore, not worth the money it cost to make them.

Yeah, I just fundamentally disagree with this 100%.

I know you do, boo. We've been restating a version of it for like four pages now.

Agree to disagree, I guess.

Even though you're wrong.

[epilogue]

And I'll add it didn't have to be this way. The remake culture could have been very different. But the way Hollywood has gone about their retread business is the problem. And I just don't think "different" is a valid excuse. Do it better or do something else. On these points we seem to disagree. And I can't imagine anything changing either's mind.

[epilogue]

Wait, I thought LV was pro-remake and durd was anti-?

In general I'm anti-remake because the vast majority of them are unoriginal, uninspired cash grabs, yes.

At the end of the day, I agree with vermin. I just want good movies. But I'd prefer good original content. Failing that, remakes are fine, if they're good. Problem is, most aren't.

Honestly I'm not really sure this is true. I'm not saying most remakes are as good or better than the films they're remakes of, but I don't think the bad-to-good ratio is any worse than all other movies. And like I said, I don't care if incidental things like subject matter are "original" or not - I only care about the quality of the film itself.

Sure. I get that. But for me the quality takes an automatic hit by being a remake. The remake has to work harder on me from the get-go by virtue of it's retread.

And I'll amend my comment to: the problem is, most of them aren't as good as the original and therefore, not worth the money it cost to make them.

Yeah, I just fundamentally disagree with this 100%.

I know you do, boo. We've been restating a version of it for like four pages now.

Agree to disagree, I guess.

Even though you're wrong.

Now, now, Jordan. Subjective and all that.

[Rangi Guy]

The movie shouldn't be called Point Break if it's not about a bunch of surfers robbing banks to fund their endless summer.

[epilogue]

I love all you guys.

[Kaius]

How do you guys feel about literary icons like Peter Pan or Dracula or Jesus being rebooted every generation or more? These well-established and quite popular stories that predate cinema that filmmakers can cash in on? Are these any better or worse than someone rebooting an original movie?

[BurtReynolds]

How do you guys feel about literary icons like Peter Pan or Dracula or Jesus being rebooted every generation or more? These well-established and quite popular stories that predate cinema that filmmakers can cash in on? Are these any better or worse than someone rebooting an original movie?

It's fucking boring at this point.

[LoathedVermin72]

How do you guys feel about literary icons like Peter Pan or Dracula or Jesus being rebooted every generation or more? These well-established and quite popular stories that predate cinema that filmmakers can cash in on? Are these any better or worse than someone rebooting an original movie?

If you have something interesting to do, do it. I don't see why it would matter if the subject matter has been explored before.