Yes. Especially the ones with big budgets. There's rarely a likable character in them and if there is they're blandly pc. Everything seems to reflect some awful world of a teenagers den - random porn, grating music, swearing over video game violence. I wouldn't say TV is much better. It's just returned to soap format ( with punchier dialogue. ) Anyone whose watched a soap understands that they're set up better than say a sitcom or shows that revolve around solving topical issues per episode because they allow the characters to evolve and become part of the problems instead of giving them to the guest stars.
Selbbin, I looked up a list of upcoming movies this year and I was very unimpressed. I wasn't trying to be negative or a snob, I'm not that old. Are you saying I just don't get our times?(it's a fair possibility)
Hmmmm No I don't really think but I haven't really paid much attention. I mean I love superheroes and always will, they were one of the two things that broke me into reading, but I do wish the trend would die down a bit sometimes when it comes to movies and I'm sure it will. But nonetheless there are several movies I've really enjoyed very much in the 2010s. Of course I love movies from all eras. Though tbh if I had to rank my story driven media books>comics>TV=Video games>movies. So yeah I actually prefer really good tv, books, comics and games over movies. I'm not sure if that's a sign of the current mindset but that's just how I feel. Also I tend to like movies that aren't based off books but some in my list are based off of course Some of my fav movies are Drive (2011), The Birds (1963), Vertigo (1958), Brick (2005), Sandlot (1993- mainly for nostalgic reasons), Evil Dead trilogy, Clerks 1-2, Toy Story (1-3), Pinnochio (from an animation stand point. I just love seeing how detailed it is), Frakenstein (1931), Young Frakenstein, several Coen Brother movies, Brazil (1985) and I could probably list some more. Though I'm not sure if movies are getting worse. Perhaps we aren't living in a decade where some GREAT film isn't coming out every month but eh that's alright. A lot of people seemed to really be into Fury Road and ranked it far above in most recent action movies in terms of substance and awesome moments. A lot of people really REALLY loved the Force Awakens from viewers to critics which is a good sign. Even horror seems to be trying more so with stuff like Babadook, It Follows and Witch which managed to be more psychological then actual gore mostly. Soooooooo I do think there are certainly still good stuff.
Actually 1990's are considered a golden age of movies. More critically acclaimed movies came out of that decade than any other (after 1960 of course). And the "golden" golden age movies really haven't stood the test of time with most critics.
I actually think the horror genre is picking up, in the indie department at least. I recently saw The Witch and it was the first time in years that I actually found myself leaving the theater shaking and scared. There's another one out called Darling that I haven't seen yet, but the trailer looks very promising. The cinematography is gorgeous. Very Hitchcock-esque
No, but first: there are shit movies. Blockbusters are generally garbage, absolute garbage. Even Deadpool was mediocre at best. The only reasonable comic film so far this decade has been Dredd. Anyway, many (most) films are not on the 'coming soon' lists as they are not slated in advance. They go through the festivals and are slotted in when it's deemed appropriate. These are the gems. These are the classics of old. I'm looking at the 2016 slate and only see the studio blockbusters. No wonder you're not excited. In the 70s people were lamenting at the fact that no one made films as good as the classics in the 40s and 50s. New films were different, edgy, gritty and real. Not the same. Not the 'classics'. How can that rough and ready Scorsese be half as good as Wilder? It takes time to adjust to the changing nature of both art and entertainment. Some films respected today were often critical and commercial failures in their time.But how many movies from the 50s do you still watch? Have you seen gems like Marty? Personally, some of the direction today is far better than most things in the past. It's breathtakingly amazing. To be different is so hard yet some new director's seem to impress the shit outta me. Lastly, we look at the past through the filter of time. By that I mean that all the shit movies are filtered out and forgotten about so only the best remain. They made a huge amount of shit movies in the 'good old days' that you won't be able to find. As per now, most of the movies will be relegated to the past and only the best will become classics used to show that all movies 20 years from now are still magically 'getting worse'.
In a way yes. I can't count how many unnecessary reboots, remakes, sequels, prequels and adaptations we get every year. Most movies today lack originality.
I find that weird. That's all I've heard about The Witch, that people were genuinely terrified. I'm not made of cast iron but I honestly had not a single moment of dread or fear. I liked The Witch. It was a fascinating portrait of fear and paranoia in colonial America mixed with cool supernatural elements, but I have no idea what was scary about it.
No. You guys just aren't watching the right movies. There are still TONS of great movies every year and many many talented filmmakers. Movies aren't getting any worse than books are.
I recently watched such films as The Big Short and Room just yesterday. Fantastic films. You don't have to only watch the blockbusters. Though they have a handful of good ones each year out of the stinkers, go to the indie scene to find the great pictures. And coming up this year we have The Green Room, The Nice Guy, Kubo and the Two Strings, Snowden, Moana, Birth of a Nation, The Founder, and many many more indie screened films that will come out in the festivals that haven't even been announced yet.
I think it's a combination of things. First, as mentioned somewhere above, there are hundreds to thousands of movies that you (I) know nothing about because they in no way stood the test of time. This really hit me not from movies, but from music. I was familiar with a couple songs by Donovan (Mellow Yellow, Hurdy Gurdy Man), but when I went digging into YouTube, I found that (sorry Donovan fans) he has a lot of songs not worth being remembered. Hollywood's the same way, they've got to throw hundreds of films against the wall to get two or three to stick. However, I do think there are a lot of bad movies being made these days. I am not, and even as a child, never was a fan of comic books, and these Marvel superhero movies are just.... not to my taste. Very not to my taste. Deadpool was mentioned above, and with apologies to fans, it was just riddled with holes. Spoilers follow: Ajax's superpower is heightened reflexes and immunity to pain, not superstrength (which he exhibits in his establishing shot) or superhealing. Immunity to pain + normal healing = bleeding out in the first day without realizing it. Deadpool: Ditto on the superstrength. Oxygen is not, by itself, flammable dammit. I could go on all day, and I don't know if the problems are in the source material (the comics) or in the adaptations, but I just cannot stomach the comic book movies, and unfortunately, the studios are in an arms race with them right now. Sooner or later, we'll reach "peak superhero", but that may be a ways off. <edit> copy/paste error
No. There have always been a lot of crap movies and only a few good ones in any given year. When we look back at the memorable movies of previous decades, though, we only see the good ones because nobody bothers to replay, re-release, reboot or generally remember the bad ones. There might be a lot of crap lately, but there's also been some incredible works of film. If we judge a decade by the number of bad films, we might not be doing well lately, but that's only because the volume of movies coming out has been increasing steadily. We've got just as many great films as any other time period.
I love people who denigrate Deadpool, and then go on to show that they don't know anything about 1) Deadpool 2) Comics 3) Comic book movies 4) Movies 5) Comedy Please refrain from having opinions about any of these things, or at least trying to talk about them.
Well, I thought I was being very diplomatic in my post about Deadpool, but apparently that's not enough for you. However, since Deadpool is a mass-market blockbuster movie, and there was no entrance exam given to qualify me to watch it, I feel just as qualified as any other viewer to have my opinion on it, and since I am a member of this forum, and the thread is opinion based, I feel quite secure in expressing it.
Yeah lol I can understand about reaching peak superhero someday but that's to happen anyway or well the trend will slow eventually but I LOVE comics in general . I mean I read a crap ton a superhero ones but I have a great respect for the more varied comics that DC's imprint Vertigo puts out as well as Image comics. If you don't like superheroes you may have more luck with comics from the indie scene or Image or Vertigo and all that. I like to think anyone can be a fan or at least find one comic they enjoy even if they dislike superheroes. Now I haven't seen the Deadpool movie but I can assure you Ajax does have a level of super strength far above normal humans. I've never much like Ajax as a villian myself but whatever he did in the physical department I'm sure it was not to outlandish.... As for outlandish things, that's simply something one has to accept in superhero universes. I mean of course there are superheroes who are more grounded and or more realistic but Deadpool while what one would call a 'street level' hero in terms of physical attributes he is a comedic character. He's crazy, he makes his situations crazier, he has multiple voices and its a lot of good fun. Now there is a deeper character there that comes through in the comics but Deadpool's biggest draw is his crazy humor and wild adventures as a mercenary. That's how he got to be one of the most recognized characters in Marvel in recent years. But yeah superhero universes (Marvel and DC) are filled with crazy fantasy that doesn't realistically make any sense within the context of our real world and all sorts of story inconsistencies within certain stories....usually when its a big company crossover. That's just part of being a fan with that genre (when it comes to Marvel universe or DC universe set stories mostly) As I said above there are plenty of self contained superhero comics, horror stuff, sci-fi, autobiographies in comic form, romance, historical and just everything that is TOTALLY different from DC or Marvel superheroes. It is a medium just like movies or books and so every genre or type of story can be found in it. And for the record your opinion was perfectly welcomed. It can't be helped if superheroes just aren't your taste we all have our own thing we like! but I do hope I was able to clear up some things regarding them and comics overall.
I don't go to movies a lot because I dislike the Scottish cinema experience (the volume is turned up to deafening levels, probably to drown out the yakking on phones and running up and down the aisles that happens. Last time I came out of the movie with rock concert ears—it was the movie called Victoria, about the young queen Victoria, which I got dragged to against my will—I vowed no more.) However, if a movie grabs my attention via reviews, etc, I often order the DVD version and watch it in the peace and quiet of my own home, without distractions. DVDs are now not much more expensive than going to the cinema! Certainly less expensive than going to see the same movie twice—which I used to do all the time, back when I was still in the States and went to movies more or less every week. However, I'm trying to remember when the last time was that I re-watched any of these newer mainstream films on DVD. I usually just give the DVD away. They haven't been awful, but they also have been slightly or very disappointing. Just not what I'd hoped they'd be, and not good enough to make me want to watch them again. I do re-watch lots of my older movies, though. I buy new TV series on DVD all the time, and watch them several times all the way through. (So does my husband, as we have different tastes.) So it's not as if I'm living in the past. It's just how mainstream movies hit me now. Just ...not really worth a second look. I am going to try Revenant next. It's a period of history that interests me, and it sounds as if it received a good treatment. I'll let you guys know if I think it's the best thing since sliced bread after I've watched it.
They go out of the way in the movie to point out that Ajax has super strength. Even if they didn't the idea that a movie has to sketch out every character's super power instead of just showing you what they can do is asinine. We don't need anyone to tell us that Superman has laser vision. All we need to see is Superman shoot lasers out of his eyes. Even if this was a regular movie, all we would need to understand that a person was strong was see him lift something heavy. But it's not a regular movie, it's a comic book movie. So everyone is super strong, everyone has super defined muscles, and everyone is super. You don't go see a comic book movie for it's subtle nuance and character. You see it to experience a male power fantasy. If you're looking for more you're going to be disappointed And comic book movies are going to keep getting made for a very long time, because comics make great movies. The stories are simple, the characters have a single motivation, and in the end everything is resolved. Every time. Even when a comic movie (or just a comic book) attempts to tackle a deep issue, it does so in a way that reduces it to its most base elements, and constructs a story around that. Civil War (the comic not the movie) for example, was written during the time that the PATRIOT act was being debated. But instead of addressing the nuance of the definition of war and enemy action, Civil War was about the debate over the Mutant Registration Act. And we know that mutants are good, so registering mutants must be bad, and we don't have to think about how we can violate the civil rights of foreign combatants without any oversight. Comic books are a caricature of real life. Every movie is, they have to be. But a comic book movie embraces this concept. It doesn't try and tell us that it takes place in the real world with a twist. It doesn't try and tell us that it's going to teach a profound lesson. It just says, "Here's what life would be like in a different world. Also the world is a male power fantasy, nothing is real, and all of the issues can be resolved by good people being good." I was trying to keep you from embarrassing yourself. When you talk about why a movie was "bad" and then point out the specific elements of the movie that were build around the subject matter, you make it clear that your opinion comes from simple ignorance. Deadpool is a comedy. He's always been a comedy. He isn't an anti-hero so much as he is an unrepentant killer. And he's an unrepentant killer because that's funny. Did you go to Ghostbusters constantly disappointed with the physics of the story? What about the breaking of the fourth wall in Space Balls. I for one was very disappointed in the plot hoes in Red Dwarf. They totally ruin the series for me. But you also didn't pay attention to the movie. The point out specifically that Francis has super strenght. Wade is being poisoned by a nitrogen/oxygen mix. And Deadpool is strong because his body is constantly healing his muscle fatigue. He can lift weights that would tear your muscles in half because his muscles don't tear. But all of this begs a more important question as a whole: why were you even in the theater? And why would you complain about a genre you clearly don't have an educated opinion on, and do not understand? I don't like romantic comedies, so I don't watch them. And I don't complain to people that do like them, because (having not watched them) I don't understand anything about romantic comedies.
That. It was a great film, but not something I found scary at all. It didn't even feel like 'scary' was what it was going for.
"Horror" is now no longer seen as a necessary component of the horror genre, since the 9th Friday the 13th movie*. *Hyperbole. It arguably start with Shamylan and The Sixth Sense, which was billed as a horror movie at the time. Psych horror has become a genre in and of itself, while "classic" horror has diverged into a parody of itself.
@Jack Asher You're able to word things much better then I and yes I did fail to mention the real life connections and yes they do make for great movies but I was more so just pointing out the general complaints or things people may find confusing. Like the very confusing histories that plague DC and Marvel that people might not understand (Mostly DC...cause of their Crisis, Flashpoint etc). Also just trying to show that there are more comics then superheroes that are more realistic or just a different genre if that was his or anyone elses speed. But personally I was never to big on the Civil Arc regardless of the connection to the patriot act. I love the concept though and the real world tie in but it left me feeling...disappointed for some reason. I prefer some of their older and more recent big events I found to be better written or more to my taste. But not everything does get resolved....does it? I mean technically it does but Civil War (the comic) had a pretty big aftermath for the next four -five years. I forget the order but it was something like Civil War>Secret Invasion>Dark Reign and then it finally ended with Siege? Sorry if I missed any there but there was a lot of Marvel heroes fighting during that period. (still is actually....AvX happened not to long ago lol). I've always found a more preference for the comics then the movies. I like the movies but in the comics things don't always work out for the better. They do a a lot of the time but there have been a big chunk of stories and characters arc that have of course stuck so to speak. But I've always viewed the superheroes at Marvel and DC like a family you can leave and always come back to for an adventure cause it never ends. At the core anyway that's one of the big appeals for me when I first got into them as a younger kid. Nonetheless your post was very well worded and a good analysis!
But they do always end the same. Parker unmasked himself in Civil War and it was ret-conned with some alternate history/fate bullshit. And then Mary Jane and Parker were estranged, and then they got back together. Captain America died in War. Now he's pretty not dead. He's just been de-serumed and then re-serumed again (I think, I haven't been paying close attention). Superman was dead, Flash was dead, Wonder Woman was dead. Batman was paralyzed, Azreal was Batman, Batman was Batman again. Ben Grim was fixed, then he was The Thing again. Yes things move on. Jason Todd died. Dick Grayson became Nightwing. Peter Parker and Mary Jane never got back together. But these things were never part of the core of the story. Parker and Mary Jane always had a tragic story, nothing has changed there. Robin was always ready to transcend Batman (again no different) and...something something something. People don't read comics to see change, they read comics to see how everything is going to end up exactly the same again after then end.[/user]
