Post Random Movie-Related Thoughts You Have

[tragabigzanda]

Whenever there's active promotion on the part of somebody else, whenever I see somebody all dolled up for a fancy photograph and someone's handing out flyers or whenever there's active promotion for something like that, as an imposition on my day, I hate all those people and I want them to fail. I have a visceral reaction to advertising and promotion. There's just something about salesmanship that grates on me on a very base level and I react very negatively towards it. I want those people to suffer and I want their enterprises to fail.

[BurtReynolds]

I think sci-fi is or at least was primed to replace superheroes for dominance, but they've really dropped the ball on big space operas recently, except for the success of Guardians of the Galaxy.

Still, I think there is an audience for it based on the success of Gravity, The Martian, and others.

[LoathedVermin72]

Man I would love it if sci-fi were good again. That genre is a shadow of its former self.

[E.H. Ruddock]

I think sci-fi is or at least was primed to replace superheroes for dominance, but they've really dropped the ball on big space operas recently, except for the success of Guardians of the Galaxy.

Still, I think there is an audience for it based on the success of Gravity, The Martian, and others.

I said it before and I'll say it again, we are ready for a Pandorum sequel. That could be epic.

That was a serious post, btw.

[Strat]

i like star warz

[tragabigzanda]

Whenever there's active promotion on the part of somebody else, whenever I see somebody all dolled up for a fancy photograph and someone's handing out flyers or whenever there's active promotion for something like that, as an imposition on my day, I hate all those people and I want them to fail. I have a visceral reaction to advertising and promotion. There's just something about salesmanship that grates on me on a very base level and I react very negatively towards it. I want those people to suffer and I want their enterprises to fail.

[LoathedVermin72]

I think sci-fi is or at least was primed to replace superheroes for dominance, but they've really dropped the ball on big space operas recently, except for the success of Guardians of the Galaxy.

Still, I think there is an audience for it based on the success of Gravity, The Martian, and others.

I said it before and I'll say it again, we are ready for a Pandorum sequel. That could be epic.

That was a serious post, btw.

That ending was such a tease.

[E.H. Ruddock]

I think sci-fi is or at least was primed to replace superheroes for dominance, but they've really dropped the ball on big space operas recently, except for the success of Guardians of the Galaxy.

Still, I think there is an audience for it based on the success of Gravity, The Martian, and others.

I said it before and I'll say it again, we are ready for a Pandorum sequel. That could be epic.

That was a serious post, btw.

That ending was such a tease.

Man. Think of what they could do with that.

[epilogue]

Technological factors are more to blame than social ones I think, but that's not a sexy answer.

I'm not looking for sexy answers, I'm looking for factors. Expand, please.

[epilogue]

Technological factors are more to blame than social ones I think, but that's not a sexy answer.

Came here to post a variation on this. I don't think the guaranteed ticket sales of nostalgia films has anything overtly to do with 9/11, Vietnam, etc. I think it's simply a matter of:

1. The streaming/torrent model, when combined with the current quality of home cinema viewing, makes going to the movies a useless endeavor for many fans, and

2. The technology behind these films makes replication of FX, score, and post-production in general incredibly easy, so much so that it stifles innovation;

3. The US creative class has become so marginalized that there are two types of workers: rich kids who can tinker on their pet project as much as they like, and grunts who go work for Disney and draw 800 views of Woody the cowboy during their 9-hour shift.

If the only films that are guaranteed to put butts in theater seats are ones with big FX, then that's what the studios are going to keep making. And if it's considerably easier to pay your employees to churn out the guaranteed product, rather than encourage them to innovate, then wouldn't that path make the most sense for a large studio?

This does not account for any kind of thematic or aesthetic content, though. The question isn't why big studios are pushing these movies (because that's obvious); the question is why "the only films that are guaranteed to put butts in theater seats are ones with big FX," and more specifically, why the type of FX-driven films that are filling seats are doing so.

Yes, and I'd take this one step further, because, for me, it isn't just about big FX movies, but also, specifically, nostalgia pieces. Forget big FX. Why is modern cinema churning out virtually nothing but repackaged youth?

[epilogue]

Also, I think a lot of the superhero IP came with a hefty pricetag, and the studios that invested in that IP needs to show a solid ROI in a relatively short amount of time. So that's why they come up with a ten-year plan to release a Star Wars film every summer: not because we necessarily want one every summer, but because it was a fucking expensive purchase, and they need to make that money back ASAP, so they can then buy the next huge IP.

Again, I don't disagree with what you're saying, but it's a more narrow conversation. I'm more interested in looking beyond the economics of it all. But maybe I'm naive. Maybe it's only about the economics of it all. But it seems like, especially if we look back at previous decades, that this is new territory when we consider the sheer volume. Something else is happening, no? There has to be some cultural component.

Right?

[epilogue]

Technological factors are more to blame than social ones I think, but that's not a sexy answer.

Came here to post a variation on this. I don't think the guaranteed ticket sales of nostalgia films has anything overtly to do with 9/11, Vietnam, etc. I think it's simply a matter of:

1. The streaming/torrent model, when combined with the current quality of home cinema viewing, makes going to the movies a useless endeavor for many fans, and

2. The technology behind these films makes replication of FX, score, and post-production in general incredibly easy, so much so that it stifles innovation;

3. The US creative class has become so marginalized that there are two types of workers: rich kids who can tinker on their pet project as much as they like, and grunts who go work for Disney and draw 800 views of Woody the cowboy during their 9-hour shift.

If the only films that are guaranteed to put butts in theater seats are ones with big FX, then that's what the studios are going to keep making. And if it's considerably easier to pay your employees to churn out the guaranteed product, rather than encourage them to innovate, then wouldn't that path make the most sense for a large studio?

This does not account for any kind of thematic or aesthetic content, though. The question isn't why big studios are pushing these movies (because that's obvious); the question is why "the only films that are guaranteed to put butts in theater seats are ones with big FX," and more specifically, why the type of FX-driven films that are filling seats are doing so.

because there is little reason for most of us to see other kinds of movies in theaters. We're viewing everything through the lens of movie theaters, but that's too narrow.

Yes, but again, that doesn't account for the type of FX-driven films we're seeing. It doesn't have to be superheroes. It could be any number of different themes and characters and settings and genres, but it isn't. It's superheroes. It's Star Wars. It's nostalgia. Technology alone doesn't account for that.

Exactly! It's Transformers, it's Ninja Turtles, it's Ghostbusters, it's Point Break, it's Cinderella, it's James Bond, it's Mission Impossible. It goes on and one and on. It's bigger than capes.

[BurtReynolds]

People aren't watching Thor or Ant-man or even Ironman for nostalgia. Few know or care who these characters are. Same for Deadpool.

Sequels and name recognition are a problem, but its not much to do with nostalgia.

[epilogue]

Also, I think a lot of the superhero IP came with a hefty pricetag, and the studios that invested in that IP needs to show a solid ROI in a relatively short amount of time. So that's why they come up with a ten-year plan to release a Star Wars film every summer: not because we necessarily want one every summer, but because it was a fucking expensive purchase, and they need to make that money back ASAP, so they can then buy the next huge IP.

But people do want one, though. That's the point.

In 2011 (well before purchasing Lucasfilm) Disney held assets worth just over 72 billion dollars.

$4 billion was a STEAL and a drop in the bucket.

[epilogue]

Technological factors are more to blame than social ones I think, but that's not a sexy answer.

Came here to post a variation on this. I don't think the guaranteed ticket sales of nostalgia films has anything overtly to do with 9/11, Vietnam, etc. I think it's simply a matter of:

1. The streaming/torrent model, when combined with the current quality of home cinema viewing, makes going to the movies a useless endeavor for many fans, and

2. The technology behind these films makes replication of FX, score, and post-production in general incredibly easy, so much so that it stifles innovation;

3. The US creative class has become so marginalized that there are two types of workers: rich kids who can tinker on their pet project as much as they like, and grunts who go work for Disney and draw 800 views of Woody the cowboy during their 9-hour shift.

If the only films that are guaranteed to put butts in theater seats are ones with big FX, then that's what the studios are going to keep making. And if it's considerably easier to pay your employees to churn out the guaranteed product, rather than encourage them to innovate, then wouldn't that path make the most sense for a large studio?

This does not account for any kind of thematic or aesthetic content, though. The question isn't why big studios are pushing these movies (because that's obvious); the question is why "the only films that are guaranteed to put butts in theater seats are ones with big FX," and more specifically, why the type of FX-driven films that are filling seats are doing so.

because there is little reason for most of us to see other kinds of movies in theaters. We're viewing everything through the lens of movie theaters, but that's too narrow.

Yes, but again, that doesn't account for the type of FX-driven films we're seeing. It doesn't have to be superheroes. It could be any number of different themes and characters and settings and genres, but it isn't. It's superheroes. It's Star Wars. It's nostalgia. Technology alone doesn't account for that.

I don't think it has that much to do with nostalgia. I think people have always wanted it (generally speaking), and after decades of refining the blockbuster model, this is the natural result.

People have always wanted what? Blockbusters? Nostalgia?

[epilogue]

People aren't watching Thor or Ant-man or even Ironman for nostalgia. Few know or care who these characters are. Same for Deadpool.

Sequels and name recognition are a problem, but its not much to do with nostalgia.

People aren't watching movies based on characters/myths they grew up with and adored and desperately wanted to see movies made of (especially after Burton's Batman) for a long, long, long time?

[BurtReynolds]

People aren't watching Thor or Ant-man or even Ironman for nostalgia. Few know or care who these characters are. Same for Deadpool.

Sequels and name recognition are a problem, but its not much to do with nostalgia.

People aren't watching movies based on characters/myths they grew up with and adored and desperately wanted to see movies made of (especially after Burton's Batman) for a long, long, long time?

Did you know a lot of Ant-Man fans growing up? Guardians of the Galaxy?

Superheroes make great subjects for blockbusters.

[Self]

guys, donald fuck trump is gonna be our next president. you can't be surprised that this is what cinema has become.

brb, gotta hit the garden with brawndo.

[Self]

and then i'm watching civil war for free...in hd with chinese subtitles.

[dimejinky99]

Do any of you guys go see movies with the Rock in them??

I mean how is he even an actor? He makes Orlando Bloom look like a De Niro.

Just baffles me how he's even around.