Nobody will remember you well

[blknge89]

It seems to this man that lately movies aren't being made with any lasting appeal or effect anymore. Many seem forgettable and filmmakers aren't looking ahead, only concerned with trying to please for a brief moment of time instead of giving people a quality film they can take home one day and continue to enjoy (that would mean more hard work and who wants to do that?). The country's well known problem with money has changed people and movies and it isn't all great. I've picked this up more now that I work at a movie theater and perhaps it's been going on a lot longer than I first thought. (probably has)

Shorts, whiteout, the collector, 2012 and the list painfully continues, the trailers in these movies tell very little about the story and we witness just a whole load of "eyecatching" stuff, big effects, goofy stuff, and I can't enjoy what's on the screen if I don't know why it's exactly happening or if I don't have a brief glimpse into the characters on the screen.

Where's substance these days, maybe it's a typical year with great movies (and there are) and with equally bad ones, there will always be bad movies but are there more being made now? Thoughts on this matter.

decline in movies with longer lifespans.

[The Postmaster General]

I know a lot of people are going to agree with you so, but I don't think this is the case. Look at how many movies were made during the heyday of Hollywood when studios were turning out dozens of movies a week (think Ed Wood) --- Yet, how many of memorable films do we have from those times? Citizen Kane is considered tops. It was overlooked, according to many, at the Oscars -- Let's look at the other nominees for best picture that year ---

Winner: How Green Was My Valley
Blossoms in the Dust
Citizen Kane
Here Comes Mr. Jordan
Hold Back the Dawn
One Foot in Heaven
Sergeant York
Suspicion
The Little Foxes
The Maltese Falcon


Do you see where I'm going here. Those are considered, at the time, the best movies from that year. Think of all the movies that were average or below.

I think people look at movies now and say there's more this and there's more that, but really, there's just more movies. To me, There Will Be Blood was an amazing film that's going to be remembered over time, possibly garnering a larger interest over time through discovery. There really is a lot of tops stuff. I know it's not totally recent, but look at the Lord of the Rings trilogy. That was only... Oh, okay that was longer than I realized. Bad example.

You know, yeah, a lot of shit comes out of Hollywood nowadays, but I hardly see how it's any less memorable than stuff like The Monster That Ate Mars or whatever nonsense... I just think also it's a very relative perspective because we are living in the now, so of course we are seeing the movies that won't be memorable -- but the movie from the past, well he only know of them because they are remembered. There's a whole load of films that no one remembers, and we don't hear about them because well, no one remembers them.

[Tony_Montana]

There was loads of shit films made in the past. We just don't remember them cos they're shit.

[Badbird]

People will always remember the good movies.

You just think there are more shitty movies now because you are exposed to them. You probably don't remember all the shitty movies that came out in 1982 - you just know the good ones: Blade Runner, Star Trek II, The Thing, etc.

That's why whenever some one makes a list of "The Worst Movies of All Time" they are generally recent movies. That's because over time your forget the bad, but still remember the good.

Twenty years from now, we'll still talk about Iron Man, but no one will remember The Collector.

[John Galt]

Yeah, but those "shitty movies of the past" didn't have an over-reliance on CGI and actually had to tell a story.
There's a reason why many actors today are packing it in early and have stopped working.
The only movie I am remotely looking forward to coming soon is The Road.
And after that, by all indications, I think Viggo is calling it quits.

In the 70's and 80's, there was always a film worth seeing, every week. Now they are too few and far between.
Seemingly, even art house flicks, are waning in quality these days. But ultimately, that is where you can find any semblence of a worthy consistency.

[LordSimen]

Didn't everyone trash two recent trailers- The Lovely Bones and Legion, for telling them the story? Now someone's complainin' that some trailers DON'T tell 'em the stories?

Damn internet. Just proof no one can ever win.

[Heisenberg]

Wel no. Some trailer show TOO much footage, while others like...JUST for the example, The 'New Moon' trailer showed JACK SHIT, I'm not a fan (though I watched Twilight, and it Wasn't TOO bad) But people who are interested, or have read the books, want to see a bit more footage, and after waiting so long for something. They get that pile of shite.

It's like Them bringing out a Wolfman trailer and all you see is his fingernail.

Some trailers show far too much, like 'The Lovely Bones' trailer did. While some show FAR too little.

[LordSimen]

Given that that the people who seem to have read Lovely Bones say the trailer didn't give away the whole movie- I'd say it's arrogant of the viewer himself to assume before seeing a movie that the trailer to him everything.

[Abbie Normal]

I do not agree with post for two reasons:

1. Great or memorable films that last through out the ages do not come out every week. They come out if we are lucky once a year.

2. In general the best films of a year do not come out until Nov.

[labialover]

And after that, by all indications, I think Viggo is calling it quits.



What makes you think this? Viggo is the shit, I would certainly hope this wouldn't be the case.

I think there's 1-2 great/memorable movies a year. I haven't seen one yet, I haven't had the chance to go to the movies that much this summer.

[Heisenberg]

Given that that the people who seem to have read Lovely Bones say the trailer didn't give away the whole movie- I'd say it's arrogant of the viewer himself to assume before seeing a movie that the trailer to him everything.


The trailer is a short representation of what the film will be like. It's not comforting to see a trailer which shows so much. Maybe there is more to the story, I can't comment on that. But I can comment on the trailer, and in my opinion it seemed to show alot of story, it was like watching an actual movie cut down to 2 minutes.

[blknge89]

I'll get right back round to these posts when I've thought about it a tad more even I found myself in writing confused with myself.

I might just be mad about computer imagery, or too focused on recent activity, too many brainless movies have been out too soon of each other. I'm not too sure but I hope I'm getting a gist out there.

[John Galt]

What makes you think this? Viggo is the shit, I would certainly hope this wouldn't be the case.
.

Yes he is the shit. But I've heard this from a few sources. I think there's a thread about it somewhere.

[echo_bravo]

Totally agree with the rant.

Studios are mainly looking to make a quick buck.

Throw together a shitty crowd pleaser, make a decent/sizeable profit, rinse and repeat.

Thank goodness there are still a number of directors and producers that arent like that though.

[LordSimen]

The whole throw together a shitty crowd pleaser and make a decent profit thing has been around since Cinema began. It's nothing new. Even some of your favorite movies were probably meant to be a shitty crowd pleasure that got lucky with a director who saw more to it than that. Godfather, for example, was meant to be a cheesy gangster film and Coppola didn't even really want to do it because of that. It wasn't until he started lookin' at the film as a movie about a king and his son's that it began to take an artistic shape, and even when he presented it to the studio they were pissed at him. It's always been that way.

[RustyRazor]

It seems to this man that lately movies aren't being made with any lasting appeal or effect anymore. Many seem forgettable and filmmakers aren't looking ahead, only concerned with trying to please for a brief moment of time instead of giving people a quality film they can take home one day and continue to enjoy (that would mean more hard work and who wants to do that?). The country's well known problem with money has changed people and movies and it isn't all great. I've picked this up more now that I work at a movie theater and perhaps it's been going on a lot longer than I first thought. (probably has)

Shorts, whiteout, the collector, 2012 and the list painfully continues, the trailers in these movies tell very little about the story and we witness just a whole load of "eyecatching" stuff, big effects, goofy stuff, and I can't enjoy what's on the screen if I don't know why it's exactly happening or if I don't have a brief glimpse into the characters on the screen.

Where's substance these days, maybe it's a typical year with great movies (and there are) and with equally bad ones, there will always be bad movies but are there more being made now? Thoughts on this matter.

decline in movies with longer lifespans.


You've touched something I've been rallying about for a while now. SO many movies (not all) made nowadays are getting that "pre-processed" treatment, write it, film it, SHIP IT!
There are more of those "jiffy quick" films than a bevy of great movies that we saw only about 10 years ago.
The studios don't care. They'd prefer to put out an adaptation of the boardgame "Parcheesi" starring Gerard Butler and Megan Fox than attempt to take a chance with scripts with, as you said, more substance to them.
They make their money on the opening day (or lack thereof) and toss it to BluRay and hope for the best.

GI Joe, I am SO looking in your direction.
Bad reviews up the yang on a movie that has ZERO to do with the damned cartoon I grew up and loved BUT it made bank and the execs pat themselves on the ass.

Good job, jerkoffs. Enjoy the profits.
The cinema goer's paying for it.

[SAI]

The chaff always seems worst when we're wading through it. Give it five years though, then nobody will remember 2009's shitty movies, instead we'll be bitching about how 2014 is the worst year in movie history, and saying 'why don't they make movies like they did five years ago?'

Honestly, if you think there aren't GREAT movies out there then you're seeing the wrong movies. This year has been a little slow for me, and I've seen fewer great movies than I had by this time last year, but I can't get that pissed off about it, not in a year that's given me... Martyrs, The Heart is a Dark Forest, The First Day of the Rest of Your Life, Rumba, Antichrist, and Maria Larsson's Everlasting Moments, to name just a few.