The last movie you saw Thread

[axordil]

are rather patronizing and tend to look down on their audience, like if we're simple-minded kids who need to be spoon-fed everything

The formula V-man alluded to is, in fact, from Gerber.

[Alatar]

I know I've shared this before, but it bears reposting.

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2003/se ... resreviews

In my memoir, Adventures of a Suburban Boy, I describe how Deliverance was made. Warners hired me to write a script. I submitted it. They said, OK, if you can cast it and make it for a price, go ahead. How naive that sounds by today's standards.

Today, I would have received pages of detailed notes from a number of studio executives. I would have been obliged to hone the script down to a simple direct storyline that is clear and undemanding, and eradicate any eccentricity or quirkiness.

When the script satisfied their requirements, the studio would send it out to a star. If the star passed, the studio's response would be to hire a new writer. Further rejections by two or three stars and the project would be dropped.

If they found a star who was interested, the title, cast and storyline would then be test-marketed, asking people in the street if they would go to see such a film - four men canoeing a river and one gets buggered. Only with positive results would the studio go forward. Clearly, there is no place for originality in this method. In fact originality is anathema. How can you ask people if they want to see a film that they cannot relate to another film?

[yovargas]

Ugh, that's depressing to hear. Deliverance was another great movie that had a particular "by adults, for adults" vibe that older movies had and that today feels rare. If that quote is at all accurate, perhaps it's just a simple case of making movies for the lowest common denominator.

(Which is not to say I don't think we don't still make great movies. But I do feel like there's a certain kind of greatness that has been almost entirely lost in time.)

are rather patronizing and tend to look down on their audience, like if we're simple-minded kids who need to be spoon-fed everything

The formula V-man alluded to is, in fact, from Gerber.

Gerber?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I assume he is referring to the baby food maker.

[axordil]

As opposed to the knife maker. Although for a formulaic fight scene both might work.

[WampusCat]

My daughter-in-law talked me into sitting with her and watching what is probably her favorite movie of all time, "Transformers." (She even has an Optimist Prime tattoo.) I'd never seen any of the series and had no real yearning to catch up, but for the sake of family bonding and avoiding yardwork I watched.

It was entertaining enough but surely not a classic.

The funny thing was this: That night she went to see the latest Transformers sequel in the cinema. Her verdict? "It was too long and had too many things blow up."

Which was exactly what I thought about the original.

[yovargas]

When even Michael Bay fans think you had too many things blow up - - you may have had too many things blow up!

[Primula Baggins]

Wil Wheaton (Wesley Crusher on Star Trek: The Next Generation) has a geeky half-hour show with all sorts of news about SF etc. shows and films, and he had a 30-second "Everything you need to know about The Last Ship" segment (TLS being a new Bay-produced SF TV series) that consisted of nothing but stuff blowing up. I plan to take The Boy at his word.

[kzer_za]

It may well be--I always like to wait a few years to make the "great" call, just to let things settle down. But it was the movie equivalent of high-brow commercial or middle-brow literary fiction...and Alien was a SF horror flick.

What I'm saying is that there was a time when even meh-budget genre movies could end up being great, not merely movies with a higher purpose in mind. And it's still possible...but I fear it's less likely.

Good discussion. I think there are still truly great movies - I've watched a lot of movies from different eras this year, and The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford is at least in the top 5 (and the best one that was new to me), and that's only a few years old. And there are still directors who have artistic integrity, don't fit the Hollywood mold, and are at least semi-mainstream like the Coen Brothers and Malick.

But it's true that the really big movies and Hollywood in general have gotten more formulaic. The Godfather was a big-name mainstream movie at the time - stuff like that doesn't get made anymore. Even Jaws or Raiders of the Lost Ark are just way better than contemporary action/adventure movies. The LotR trilogy are the only live-action blockbusters from this millennium I care much about. Maybe Nolan's Batman in a generous mood, though I'm not sure if they quite make the jump from good to great - I prefer The Prestige over anything else he's made.

On the other hand, we should keep in mind that most of the old bad stuff just gets forgotten.

I just watched the first Alien movie which I'd never seen before. I'm not typically one for "back in the good ol' days" type thinking but, man, sometimes I see a movie like this and wonder, did we forget how to make truly great movies at some point in my lifetime??

By the way, Aliens is worth seeing too if you haven't already. It is far more of an action movie than the first, but it's a good one.

[Primula Baggins]

And as for the third and fourth movies in the series: This series has only two movies in it. Trust me.

[Frelga]

I'd take Serenity over any Indiana Jones movie, but I may be in the minority.

[kzer_za]

Serenity wasn't a blockbuster like Indy, which is what I mainly had in mind. And it bombed financially. It is good, although I prefer the show.

[axordil]

I was opining elsewhere today that now that the obligatory mediocre first movie is out of the way, they can go ahead and make the Serenity version of Wrath of Khan.

[Primula Baggins]

I'd love that. Firefly is a little gem of a series. I want the whole tiara.

[Alatar]

This looks awesome. Fan movies are just getting better and better. Maybe thats where the future "classics" will come from?

J.J. Abrams may have done interesting things with his reboot of the Star Trek franchise but there's little to really set the new movies apart from any summer franchise flick. They're big, loud and glossy and make little attempt to really replicate the specific elements which made the original movies and TV shows so long lasting.

Which is fine - new Trek was invented with the understandable aim of making money and they've managed to introduce these characters to a whole new generation, while also toying with the time line to leave the legacy story alone for fans. But if you're into something a little closer to the original Star Trek, then this is a project you'll want to watch.

Star Trek: Axanar is one of the most ambitious fan project ever. In fact, with its recognisable stars, budget and scale its really much more than a fan film - apart from the fact that Paramount own the Trek license.

The story is set more than 2 decades before the original series, and focusses on Garth of Izar, a legendary Starfleet captain who Kirk idolised. He charted the cosmos like no other and came to prominence during the Battle of Axanar - a decisive moment in a long standing war against the Klingon Empire.

That's the tale creator Alec Peters (who also plays Garth) wants to tell and he's already raised $100,000 via Kickstarter to do it. Now, to get the budget up to the necessary $250,000 he's heading to Comic-Con with a very special treat. Prelude to Axanar.

- See more at: http://www.clickonline.com/movies/incre ... sLd1O.dpuf

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zh4JbLhH_8w

[Smaug's voice]

On the discussion about great movies...

I just watched Gravity twice after getting the DVD. Still think it is an extraordinary film, limited not only to the visuals.

[Passdagas the Brown]

Couldn't agree more, SV. But I didn't need to say that.

[Primula Baggins]

At my daughter's urging the family watched Pacific Rim last night. I had been mildly interested when it came out because of GdT and some surprisingly positive reviews, but it fell off the radar. We enjoyed it. There were an awful lot of night or underwater (or both) battles between giant monsters and giant robotlike fighting machines, but there was enough mortar of story with people in it to hold it together, and the people were interesting enough that I did like it overall. My daughter particularly wanted us to see it because there is a female character who is powerful without being robotic, who bonds with the lead male as a strong friendship rather than anything else, and who is not ever sexualized.

Hidden text.

They never so much as kiss (though I think it might be headed that way at the end). And there is a happy ending.

[yovargas]

I really wanted to like Pacific Rim as it was visually amongst the most stunning movies I've ever seen (how it didn't get an FX award I don't know) but for me to story and people were too flat and dull and I ultimately couldn't get involved in the goings ons.

[Primula Baggins]

Clearly you don't have my lifelong SF geek's tolerance for (secret enjoyment of) pulp.