TV Tropes Org

Forums

search forum titles
google site search
Total posts: [17]
1

Movie Bob talks about why Hollywood stinks!:

In his latest The Big Picture, Moviebob talks about why Hollywood sucks now. It kinda invokes the Milkman Conspiracy that Hollywood is essentially so screwed up and unoriginal due to crappy accounting. But, I'd like to ask tropers, how do you think the industry could get out of this hole, and more importantly, will they? I'd love to see what people who know how the industry works, like Buscemi, have to say on this topic.

edited 7th Feb '12 10:25:55 AM by Dreamer

 2 Buscemi, Tue, 7th Feb '12 10:38:58 AM from a log cabin
I Am The Walrus
It's not the accounting. It's the industry basically being run by teen boys.
20 seconds: YOU A SPLODE
"Independent film is NOT a nickname for 'good movies that don't cost a lot of money'. It actually means something, or at least it used to."

Let's show that to everybody.

edited 7th Feb '12 11:33:18 AM by Prowler

 4 Ekuran, Tue, 7th Feb '12 3:19:44 PM from somewhere. Relationship Status: watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ
Hi.
[up][up]More like "Old dudes who only cater to what (they think) young men want."

Not that it matters. We'll still get shit movies either way.
[Insert seemingly profound or amusing phrase here.]
 5 Buscemi, Tue, 7th Feb '12 4:18:54 PM from a log cabin
I Am The Walrus
[up][up] My definition of independent is "a movie that was made without the help of a major studio".

As a result, this makes movies like Red Tails, Hugo and Terminator 2 more indie than Juno, The Descendants and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.
I think the term "indie cinema" itself has moreorless gone the way of "art cinema" by now. The debates can be divided into "as mode of film practice" (what Buscemi said) and "as institution". On the most popular scale of things, the latter has taken the denotation. The "American originals" in the category like John Sayles and his less-mainstream minded partners strive in the practice of it, but their message needs to be taken up by new talent. It's totally possible now that the Miramax mirage has faded and that commentaries on the Hollywood mainstream seem to be as they are here.
 
Here's how they can get out of it. Produce good films without "predicting" how profitable they will become, because if they're good, people will pay. To. See. Them.

.... guy talks INCREDIBLY FAST, dude!

edited 15th Feb '12 8:56:47 AM by kyun

 8 absolclaw, Wed, 15th Feb '12 9:07:34 AM from Castelia City
Until Hype Backlash/Poor advertising/Whatever else usually dooms a movie not from within the production kicks in.
My movie made $28 billion. Where's my share.
[up][up] I'm confused. You're saying that if Hollywood makes good films, then people will go see them and they'll become huge hits, right? So you're saying box office and quality DO work together? I'm sorry, but that's definitely NOT what I hear when I ask film buffs why the Transformers films or the Star Wars prequels grossed so much. I hear then that a movie's quality has nothing to do with how much money it made. Seriously people, make up your minds.

I think people who think Hollywood is producing nothing but crap now need to seriously lighten up. Maybe if people like this acknowledged that what's "crap" and what's not depends solely on the viewer, and it's an opinion just like what kind of food or clothes someone likes is an opinion, then they wouldn't be so freakin' bitter. Hollywood is fine right now. There are films for everyone. There's summer blockbusters, Oscar-winners, indie films, comedies of all kinds, horror films, whatever. So can't we all just get along?
 
OTOH, there is such a thing as quality. A Blockbuster isn't automatically bad, nor is it automatically good. Its a genre/style of its own, with its own elements, that can be done well or poorly.

So, for example, lambasting the first Transformers movie as being "bad" because it has relatively poor acting and a simplistic plot is missing the point. Those facts, while true, are also irrelevant. It was a good movie, because it had great spectacle ( SFX and action scenes ), and the characters were likable enough.
Home of CBR Rumbles-in-Exile: rumbles.fr.yuku.com
 11 L Dragon 2, Wed, 15th Feb '12 3:23:35 PM from Pandora Relationship Status: Longing for my OTP
ZOMG TEH REI!!!!
[up] Moviebob just hates Michael Bay. That's why he can't see anything good in Transformers.
Proud fanboy of anime/video games/scifi. Oh and of Rei Ayanami XD
 12 Buscemi, Wed, 15th Feb '12 3:25:45 PM from a log cabin
I Am The Walrus
I've liked a few of Bay's films but Transformers is just irredeemable.
 13 L Dragon 2, Wed, 15th Feb '12 3:30:08 PM from Pandora Relationship Status: Longing for my OTP
ZOMG TEH REI!!!!
[up] Which one? Because if you are talking about the second, then I agree 100%. However, the first and third weren't THAT bad.
Proud fanboy of anime/video games/scifi. Oh and of Rei Ayanami XD
 14 Buscemi, Wed, 15th Feb '12 5:11:26 PM from a log cabin
I Am The Walrus
All of them. The series has had many flaws (overlength, lack of plot, slow pace, badly written and acted characters and visual effects that just aren't very good) but Bay did nothing to fix those problems.

If you had shaved an hour from each of the films, put the focus on the Transformers, did better effects (something like what Real Steel did, which combined traditional effects with CGI) and gotten good actors in the leads (my suggestions: Anton Yelchin and Kat Dennings with an Emile Hirsch type as the main adult), you could have had something. Instead, it's just dull and overblown.

edited 15th Feb '12 5:11:51 PM by Buscemi

 15 L Dragon 2, Wed, 15th Feb '12 11:06:17 PM from Pandora Relationship Status: Longing for my OTP
ZOMG TEH REI!!!!
[up] Really, because I found the effects to be one of the highlights. Yes they were mostly CG, but all the car stunts and even the wing suit scene were all mostly real.

Besides, it's based of a cartoon that was meant to sell toys. Not saying it couldn't be deeper, as Beast Wars and Prime proved, but I think the films, minus the second, did their job as action films competently.

Then again, I'm not as critical, so we probably think differently.
Proud fanboy of anime/video games/scifi. Oh and of Rei Ayanami XD
 16 Buscemi, Wed, 15th Feb '12 11:15:42 PM from a log cabin
I Am The Walrus
To me, most of the effects looked fake. In the last twenty years, visual effects costs have gone up (due to CGI) while the ability to make it seem real has gone down. Also, CGI ages badly. While you have movies that are heavy in practical effects like The Thing or Independence Day age well, other movies like Jurassic Park and Forrest Gump are starting to show their age. While their have been cases where CGI has been used well (the above mentioned Jurassic Park until recently, The Mask, Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and the recent Red Tails), most uses of CGI are done poorly and just look like a cartoon with a chrome finish.
 17 L Dragon 2, Wed, 15th Feb '12 11:35:37 PM from Pandora Relationship Status: Longing for my OTP
ZOMG TEH REI!!!!
[up] That I definitely agree on. While CG should be used for some parts, it just can't beat the authenticity of real effects with real sets and characters. Still though, I do give credit to Michael Bay for t least using real sets and effects whenever possible, ie the wing suit scene.
Proud fanboy of anime/video games/scifi. Oh and of Rei Ayanami XD
The system doesn't know you right now, so no post button for you.
You need to Get Known to get one of those.
Total posts: 17
1


TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy