Follow TV Tropes

Following

Discussion Main / BFM

Go To

You will be notified by PM when someone responds to your discussion
Type the word in the image. This goes away if you get known.
If you can't read this one, hit reload for the page.
The next one might be easier to see.
SeptimusHeap MOD (Edited uphill both ways)
Mar 23rd 2021 at 6:50:56 AM •••

Linking to a past Trope Repair Shop thread that dealt with this page: Incomprehensible Snowclone Title, started by BlackWolfe on Jan 20th 2011 at 2:20:49 PM

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Raso Cure Candy Since: Jul, 2009
YetAnotherTroper YetAnotherTroper Since: Apr, 2010
YetAnotherTroper
Dec 5th 2010 at 2:40:48 PM •••

Where is The Last Emperor, Bertolucci's other Magnum Opus?

And what about Once Upon A Time In America (although I'm not as certain about this one as I am about The Last Emperor)?

berr Since: Jan, 2001
Sep 11th 2010 at 3:18:28 PM •••

"Does this example count?" Thread:

Do any Mel Gibson films count?

Hide / Show Replies
suedenim Since: Oct, 2009
Nov 13th 2010 at 5:25:02 PM •••

I don't see how the 1954 Godzilla can qualify for this trope. Its budget was about a million dollars (equivalent), which while not low budget, I believe wasn't especially high even for Japan at the time. And in any case, I think BF Ms aren't supposed to get in on technicalities - they're Big Effin' Movies, and should be Big and F under any circumstance.

(Edit: Bah, not meant as a direct response to the above about Mel Gibson, obviously.)

Edited by suedenim Jet-a-Reeno!
YetAnotherTroper Since: Apr, 2010
Dec 5th 2010 at 2:28:19 PM •••

"Do any Mel Gibson films count?"

I don't think so. I wouldn't have expected any Mel Gibson film on this list.

Same goes for Independence Day. It's a summer blockbuster, a disaster movie and probably in some other categories, but a BFM???

Blau Court Jester Since: Jan, 2001
Court Jester
Sep 3rd 2010 at 9:58:00 AM •••

Star Wars is most definitely not a BFM, now is it? It is a cheap B-Movie with no big moviestars whatsoever. The only cast members who were no total unknowns at the time are two old British B-Movie veterans.

Now, don't get me wrong, those two guys are brilliant and the movie is terrific, but certainly not BFM-material.

Sheila is selling her shop at the seashore for shops at the seashore are so sure to lose. Now she's not so sure of what she should be selling, should Sheila sell seashells or should she sell shoes? Hide / Show Replies
berr Since: Jan, 2001
Sep 6th 2010 at 7:12:29 AM •••

Empire Strikes Back is a BFM...Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgement applies to deciding which of the other films in the series count, methinks. :-) (I thought of editing the entry to specify ESB, but decided to hold off on doing so.) But you could argue the epic backstory and the fact that there are over 5 protagonists, all of whom went on to stardom, and that it resurrected an industry makes the original Star Wars qualify even if it's more of a self-contained fairytale. I agree the original is a borderline example, due to its tone of a half-serious love letter to pulp fantasy. I guess it could qualify as the BFM of the pulp / sci-fantasy genre. Thank Gary Kurtz for its epic aspirations — he went on to do Dark Crystal. Plus, with B-movie production values like those, who needs A movies? See here for a defense: The 10 Tiny Details That Made Star Wars Matter

"The big deal for me was the world. And the world-building in Star Wars happens at the edges of the screen as much as in the middle. It was in the tiny details. What sold me on the whole production was the idea that if you turned the camera around at Uncle Owen's moisture farm on Tatooine, you wouldn't see George Lucas and a bunch of key grips standing around in Tunisia. You'd see ... more Tatooine."

Edited by berr
suedenim Since: Oct, 2009
Nov 13th 2010 at 5:29:34 PM •••

While Star Wars didn't have a huge budget, it did have a respectable one, and certainly wasn't a "B" movie. Its budget was about mid-range for a Hollywood studio movie of the time.

I think it's probably still borderline, though - if you have to argue about it, that almost per se means it's not a BFM, as I see it. BFM-ness should be absolutely self-evident.

Jet-a-Reeno!
JamesSlater Since: Dec, 1969
JurassicMosquito Since: Jan, 2001
Mar 19th 2010 at 12:16:47 PM •••

I'm wondering the same thing about Australia. I've also noticed that Casablanca and To Kill A Mockingbird are not on the list, but I'm sort of iffy in both cases. I feel like they should be listed, but I think it could be argued that they don't entirely fit, despite being excellent films.

*is very conflicted*

Edited by JurassicMosquito
DiscoGlacier Since: Apr, 2010
Sep 2nd 2010 at 9:56:07 PM •••

Oops, meant to start a new topic.

Edited by DiscoGlacier
berr Since: Jan, 2001
Sep 6th 2010 at 7:39:30 AM •••

Based on Disco Glacier's defense of Gandhi below, it could perhaps be argued that personal/historical character study/biopics (focused like a laser on a single person, or couple) don't qualify unless they are "epic in scope" somehow. Many critics feel that the cinematography and historical scope of Citizen Kane makes it a film with "epic" aspirations (sort of like The Godfather) in spite of being a biopic. By this logic, conversely, Glory and Empire of the Sun probably don't make the cut.

I agree with you about being conflicted on Casablanca. This might actually be useful for establishing that the concept of a BFM is somewhat objective: I think many people agree that Casablanca is actually a better film than Citizen Kane, but I don't think it can be called "epic". (can it?) Gone With The Wind is much cheesier than both those films, but definitely a BFM. :-)

One Hundred Years Of Solitude would make a great BFM (as the title suggests), too bad the movie sucked.

Edited by berr
DiscoGlacier Since: Apr, 2010
Sep 2nd 2010 at 9:56:52 PM •••

Why was Gandhi removed from the list?

It's not as well known as other films on the list, and its $22 mil. (today's equivalent of $48 mil.) budget is rather modest for a BFM, but its one of the largest, most ambitious biographical films I've known. It holds the world record for the most extras in a single scene (300,000), was in production for over 20 years, and is long enough that it actually has intermissions. Those facts alone already make it a BFM, but the film's subject, Gandhi, is a real life equivalent of an epic hero, whose actions peacefully liberated India and changed world history; the quote in the beginning of the film even mentions that its impossible to capture all of the weight of his events, but gave them the most justice they can in a single film. The performance by Ben Kingsley adds the final touch to make the movie larger than life.

It's not a Hollywood film (it's actually a co-production between British and Indian productions), but it is an epic film, which, IMO, makes it a BFM.

EDIT: In addition, many, if not most, of the critics on Rotten Tomatoes describe the film as "epic," "sprawling," and "soulful" (some negative reviewers call it "conventional," another trait of BF Ms), while the film ranked #34 in the BFI Top 100 British Films. It also has 11 Oscar nominations and 8 wins, so I'll put it back on the list unless given a reason otherwise.

Edited by DiscoGlacier Hide / Show Replies
berr Since: Jan, 2001
Sep 6th 2010 at 7:29:39 AM •••

Sounds good to me... It's been a while since I've seen it.

Edited by berr
Top