Sign in to follow this  
NickAndNora34

Hollywood Running Out of Ideas?

89 posts in this topic

4 hours ago, NickAndNora34 said:

Personally, I think this rant has been coming on for a while now. Yes, I am a huge fan of Disney and the Star Wars franchise, but from watching all the new movie previews, I'm not sure if 2018 will be a better year for movies than 2017. None of the movies I saw previews for yesterday, seemed like they are going to pan out to be interesting or even worth seeing, but that could be my opinion. Also, the dystopian genre has been becoming significantly more popular within the past couple years. What is that oft-repeated phrase, "art reflects life?" Perhaps these films do serve a greater purpose: an attempt to warn people about the possible, potential outcomes of their actions? 

I think Disney is definitely guilty of just churning out movies some of the time these days. BFG? That movie bombed. There just wasn't a demand for it. Same with their upcoming A Wrinkle in Time. Is anyone writing to Disney and asking for these particular movies to be made? If so, I'd like to speak with them. I guess the bottom line is, Disney has money and they're going to do what they want. 

It seems to me that Disney is jumping on the trend of taking all the 80s kids nostalgia (mainly the generation who has children now) and turning it into movies, probably hoping that they'll take their kids to see it.  I'm not sure about their new thing now of taking animated films and making them live action.  The films starring mainly human characters like Maleficent, Cinderella and Beauty and the Beast, I can somewhat understand and I liked each of those films.  But I am confused how they are going to do a "live action" Dumbo or The Lion King.  

I remember BFG from elementary school in the early 90s.  By then, the book had already been out for a decade or so, but it was the book to read.  I remember reading it myself and I believe a teacher read it to the class too.  A Wrinkle in Time is one of those books that has always been loved by multiple generations.  I haven't read it, but I know what it is. 

Disney also remade another childhood favorite cartoon of mine, Ducktales, which I used to watch as part of the Disney Afternoon in elementary school in the early 90s.  Disney re-tooled Ducktales for a new generation.  I don't like the style of animation that they chose.  I'm just waiting for new versions of the other cartoons from the Disney Afternoon block: Chip N Dale's Rescue Rangers, Tale Spin, Darkwing Duck, Goof Troop and Gargoyles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, NickAndNora34 said:

It is my personal opinion that Hollywood has been churning out remakes and sequels/prequels a lot lately... Do you think there will ever come a time when Hollywood ceases to exist? For me, I don't entirely think so; people (including me) are more than willing to pay to go see remakes and sequels. I think movie studios are banking on the strength and driving force of nostalgia. E.g. Jurassic World 1-2, Star Wars 1-75, among others. What's next? A CGI version of E.T. in which the kids deliver the lovable alien to his ship via Uber instead of bikes? I may be talking cynically at this point... 

People really don't like to hear it but, the people who like to watch dramas, suspense, great script writing etc.. don't go to theaters anymore. They don't have to. 

We live in the world of the home theater. With  surround sound, big flat screen, no waiting, no concession stand, drink or smoke what you want ... there no longer is a need to go out of the home to watch a film. Most films go to DVD fairly soon. And older people tend to be quite patient.

Hollywood has to produce what will bring people out of their homes, to the theaters. Big CGI blockbusters are making that happen. One thing time has taught us, The movies will adjust to whatever will sell tickets.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, speedracer5 said:

  I remember BFG from elementary school in the early 90s.  By then, the book had already been out for a decade or so, but it was the book to read.  I remember reading it myself and I believe a teacher read it to the class too.  A Wrinkle in Time is one of those books that has always been loved by multiple generations.  I haven't read it, but I know what it is. 

Disney also remade another childhood favorite cartoon of mine, Ducktales, which I used to watch as part of the Disney Afternoon in elementary school in the early 90s.  Disney re-tooled Ducktales for a new generation.  I don't like the style of animation that they chose.  I'm just waiting for new versions of the other cartoons from the Disney Afternoon block: Chip N Dale's Rescue Rangers, Tale Spin, Darkwing Duck, Goof Troop and Gargoyles. 

I remember reading BFG for school as well. I also read A Wrinkle in Time in grade school of my own accord. 

Duck Tales was one of my favorite shows as a kid. I believe the channel was called Toon Disney. I also feel like they should have stuck with the original type of animation as in the original. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, speedracer5 said:

Pokémon is a Japanese game originally. Then it was released on Nintendo Game Boy in the early to mid 90s and became a phenomenon. Pokémon means “pocket monster.” It’s basically a bunch of creatures who are trained by humans who through battling other trainers, can help their Pokémon gain experience which in turn helps the Pokémon evolve into stronger forms of their type of Pokémon. Pikachu is probably the most popular of the Pokémon.

Im not sure how making pikachu a human detective makes any sense, but I guess we’ll see. 

There are some good Pokemon movies, all taken from the afternoon kids-anime series when the game first came out--
This one, OTOH, is more of a goof-off slacker-comic script, hoping to follow the Lego Movies' lead.  And we'll probably get posters blaming "the entire industry" on this one, too.

Back on some of the current movie boards, where you get the angry kids upset that Last Jedi wasn't what they "expected" it to be, us older folks kid them about "Arthur J. Hollywood"--You've heard of him, HE'S the one giving us all those bad movies that "Hollywood inflicts on us!"  You knew it had to be somebody's fault!  :P

Meaning, that with no studio-system since the early 60's, movies are made by producers, and bad book, game and trend adaptations are made by producers who thought they could license a hit property that audiences had heard of, whether they themselves had heard of it or not.  In the case of videogame movies--specifically Warcraft, Ratchet and the aforementioned Assassin's Creed that nobody saw--it's usually the game company itself that wants to get into self-promotion onscreen and create audience identification.  If you can pay, you got yourself a movie, as Hasbro was up until recently trying to prove when it thought it could create a "universe" out of its Transformers movies, and thought it could turn "Battleship" into an alien invasion.

Wanna blame somebody for bothering you with movies?  Dive into the pond, there are a lot of fish swimming about...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NickAndNora34 said:

I remember reading BFG for school as well. I also read A Wrinkle in Time in grade school of my own accord. 

Duck Tales was one of my favorite shows as a kid. I believe the channel was called Toon Disney. I also feel like they should have stuck with the original type of animation as in the original. 

When I watched DuckTales, it wasn't on a Disney-owned channel. I believe it was the afternoon programming on our local Fox affiliate or it could have been the WB (now CW) affiliate. Toon Disney came out after I watched these shows. Looking at Wikipedia, it says Toon Disney started in 1998.  I was in high school in 1998. Disney Afternoon started in 1990 and ran to 1997. Looking at the programming, 1994 looks like when I think I would have stopped watching it. "The Animaniacs" and "Batman: The Animated Series" started around this time (maybe earlier like 1992/1993) on a rival channel and I switched loyalties.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, speedracer5 said:

When I watched DuckTales, it wasn't on a Disney-owned channel. I believe it was the afternoon programming on our local Fox affiliate or it could have been the WB (now CW) affiliate. Toon Disney came out after I watched these shows. Looking at Wikipedia, it says Toon Disney started in 1998.  I was in high school in 1998. Disney Afternoon started in 1990 and ran to 1997. Looking at the programming, 1994 looks like when I think I would have stopped watching it. "The Animaniacs" and "Batman: The Animated Series" started around this time (maybe earlier like 1992/1993) on a rival channel and I switched loyalties.  

Hey, I used to catch Animaniacs.  A Hanna-Barbera cartoon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the movie industry is so bad now. There are still some good ones being made. I saw Louis CK's "I Love You, Daddy" and enjoyed it very much. Seemed very Woody Allen-esque.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, speedracer5 said:

But I am confused how they are going to do a "live action" Dumbo or The Lion King.  

Not sure what they're going to do with Lion King, but the Dumbo is reportedly going to be more in the tradition of their Pete's Dragon, where they take a generationally identified title, and make up original screenwriter crap that doesn't even TRY to bear the slightest resemblance to it...Hey, you didn't pay ten bucks for the story, you paid for the title, admit it.

Quote

I remember BFG from elementary school in the early 90s.  By then, the book had already been out for a decade or so, but it was the book to read.  I remember reading it myself and I believe a teacher read it to the class too.  A Wrinkle in Time is one of those books that has always been loved by multiple generations.  I haven't read it, but I know what it is. 

BFG was a pretty darn good Spielberg (and Melissa Mathison!) film released at the absolute wrong week of the year--Check it out on Netflix, if you dare disbelieve me.  Reportedly, JK Rowling, on her wish-list, wanted Spielberg to do the first Harry Potter movie, and, fifteen years later...this would be it.  Spielberg's little indulgent stylized fun-fling with British Keeping Calm and Carrying On.  ("But the old guy looks weird!"--Well, that's because he's designed to look like Quentin Blake's book-iconic kid-lit illustrations, as the movie helpfully hints at in one scene.)

But, like N&N, it got retroactively pasted with Monday-morning "musta had it coming!"  attempts to explain the bad box office, because it's never, ever the studio's fault.

A Wrinkle in Time was pretty much unfilmable classic kid-lit, period, before the days of CGI FX, and now we have better ones than the ones in Disney's TV-movie version from the early 00's.  A better and more visually stylized director too, seeing as L'Engle's prose is a bit overdone to begin with, and you really couldn't plausibly explain angelic centaurs without going full-on Jodorowsky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, EricJ said:

Not sure what they're going to do with Lion King...

BFG was a pretty darn good Spielberg (and Melissa Mathison!) film released at the absolute wrong week of the year--Check it out on Netflix, if you dare disbelieve me. i

The Lion King film is going to resemble the recent Jungle Book, with CGI, photo-realistic animals voiced by the celebrities. I'm not sure who asked for it, but there it is.

And I thought The BFG was terrible. If it's not Spielberg's worst film, it's close. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, LawrenceA said:

The Lion King film is going to resemble the recent Jungle Book, with CGI, photo-realistic animals voiced by the celebrities. I'm not sure who asked for it, but there it is.

Honestly, Disney has so much money they can do whatever they want. It might have something to do with keeping the younger generations interested in some of the older films (that were released before they were born or old enough to appreciate them). Or maybe it's an attempt to keep up with all the other remakes or CGI-filled films of this decade. Either way, "Beauty and the Beast" (2017) accrued massive success, so why wouldn't they keep doing the same thing? If it ain't broke, don't fix it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also David Lynch's Twin Peaks Season 3 was really good. There's lots of crap but there's also good stuff if you know where to find it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MovieCollectorOH said:

Hey, I used to catch Animaniacs.  A Hanna-Barbera cartoon.

Animaniacs is a Warner Brothers cartoon produced by Steven Spielberg.  He also produced another show that was in the same vein, Tiny Toon Adventures that depicted the old Looney Tunes stars teaching a younger generation how to be a "toon." 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, NickAndNora34 said:

Honestly, Disney has so much money they can do whatever they want. It might have something to do with keeping the younger generations interested in some of the older films (that were released before they were born or old enough to appreciate them). Or maybe it's an attempt to keep up with all the other remakes or CGI-filled films of this decade. Either way, "Beauty and the Beast" (2017) accrued massive success, so why wouldn't they keep doing the same thing? If it ain't broke, don't fix it. 

It's a weird thing to see films that you saw in the theater on its first release (The Lion King, Beauty & the Beast, Aladdin, to name a few) now being re-tooled for younger generations that weren't born yet.  Lol. 

I'm waiting for a new version of The Great Mouse Detective.  Now that was a fun movie! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, speedracer5 said:

Animaniacs is a Warner Brothers cartoon produced by Steven Spielberg.  He also produced another show that was in the same vein, Tiny Toon Adventures that depicted the old Looney Tunes stars teaching a younger generation how to be a "toon." 

Oops.  I was thinking of 2 Stupid Dogs.  But I watched that too, if I came across it.

 

2 stupid dogs 1x10 a A Quarter
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WY1Vi8O8kQ0

2 stupid dogs 2x05 c Vegas Buffet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMJch4BZPdA

 

P.S. the big dog is voiced by Brad Garrett (of Everybody Loves Raymond fame)

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, speedracer5 said:

It's a weird thing to see films that you saw in the theater on its first release (The Lion King, Beauty & the Beast, Aladdin, to name a few) now being re-tooled for younger generations that weren't born yet.  Lol. 

I'm waiting for a new version of The Great Mouse Detective.  Now that was a fun movie! 

The Great Mouse Detective is one of my favorite Disney movies of all time. Who can forget Vincent Price as the evil rat villain, Rattigan? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LawrenceA said:

And I thought The BFG was terrible. If it's not Spielberg's worst film, it's close. 

Go back and watch 1941, A.I., Indiana Jones & the Temple of Doom, and Lost World: Jurassic Park, and then come back and write us a three-page essay on the subject, "Hyperbole".  -_-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, EricJ said:

Go back and watch 1941, A.I., Indiana Jones & the Temple of Doom, and Lost World: Jurassic Park, and then come back and write us a three-page essay on the subject, "Hyperbole".  -_-

:lol: I always liked 1941 and Temple of Doom. Never got the hate for them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Gershwin fan said:

:lol: I always liked 1941 and Temple of Doom. Never got the hate for them.

The only part of Temple of Doom that I didn't like was the monkey brain part. 

I can deal with the original Indiana Jones trilogy.

'Crystal Skull' however... ugh.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NickAndNora34 said:

The Great Mouse Detective is one of my favorite Disney movies of all time. Who can forget Vincent Price as the evil rat villain, Rattigan? 

Vincent Price should always play a villain--he has the greatest villainous voice.  Did you know that Vincent Price was also a gourmet cook? He wrote and published a series of cookbooks back in the 1960s-1970s. 

The Great Mouse Detective came out a little bit before Disney's renaissance period.  I think many consider the 1970s-1980s (until The Little Mermaid comes along in '89) to be the low point in Disney animation--though I do enjoy many of them.  My favorites being Robin Hood, The Rescuers, The Great Mouse Detective and Oliver & Company.  The Black Cauldron (1985) I believe is considered Disney's worst film.  However, I think in recent years, the film has developed somewhat of a cult following.  I personally haven't seen it, but my best friend (who is also a Disney fanatic) loves The Black Cauldron

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, speedracer5 said:

The only part of Temple of Doom that I didn't like was the monkey brain part. 

I can deal with the original Indiana Jones trilogy.

'Crystal Skull' however... ugh.

I don't think Crystal Skull is too bad either. Where the originals were homages to 1930s pulp films I think Crystal Skull is good as an homage to 50s cold war sci-fi films.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EricJ said:

Go back and watch 1941, A.I., Indiana Jones & the Temple of Doom, and Lost World: Jurassic Park, and then come back and write us a three-page essay on the subject, "Hyperbole".  -_-

I don't like 1941Temple of Doom is often silly but it's enjoyable. Lost World was pretty bad. A.I. was very good, and one of the best films of its year. 

I rank The Terminal and Hook as Spielberg's worst. And The BFG.

The BFG was not likable in the least, for me. I wasn't using hyperbole. It's okay that you liked it. Different people can like different things.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, speedracer5 said:

Vincent Price should always play a villain--he has the greatest villainous voice.  Did you know that Vincent Price was also a gourmet cook? He wrote and published a series of cookbooks back in the 1960s-1970s. 

The Great Mouse Detective came out a little bit before Disney's renaissance period.  I think many consider the 1970s-1980s (until The Little Mermaid comes along in '89) to be the low point in Disney animation--though I do enjoy many of them.  My favorites being Robin Hood, The Rescuers, The Great Mouse Detective and Oliver & Company.  The Black Cauldron (1985) I believe is considered Disney's worst film.  However, I think in recent years, the film has developed somewhat of a cult following.  I personally haven't seen it, but my best friend (who is also a Disney fanatic) loves The Black Cauldron

 

Ah, yes, The Black Cauldron. I can get why many Disney fans dislike it, unlike most Disney films, its episodic in nature and much darker that any other Disney film save Atlantis: The Lost Empire. Not to mention, its not that much like the book series it was based on, so Lloyd Alexander fans were very angry. But I feel it is wrongfully maligned. The jagged edges of forced prerelease editing are still noticeable, but what's left is stong, helped by a tremendous score by Elmer Bernstein. The characters are not as clear cut in their goodness here as they have realistic character flaws. The lead changes from a self-absorbed, often angry boy into a humbled, wiser, more compassionate individual. And the villian is terrifying. A villian with the skull of a deer as his face with glowing red eyes, who wants to create an army of living skeletons to annilate the world. And the skeletons do indeed move toward the end. And what happens to the villain is the most merciless scene in Disney animated history. In the spite of this darkness though this is a film with a surpringly large amount of humor and heart. The animation is very impressive too, with some early computer effects. Vocal work is really good too, although the lead's voice changes due to puberty halfway through and Lord of the Rings fans might be unneved by a character sounding like Gollum....16 years before that film series started. It may be given a bum rap, but I hold it to be Disney's most underrated film. Its an ambitious film and more often than not, it delivers on its promises. A live-action remake is supposedly under consideration, but I think that this will be hard to top.

 

I also hold that the 70s-80s dark period for Disney was actually quite fertile and the real dry spell for Disney animation came in the mid-2000s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's PAYBACK for WWII, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  The Japanese are probably splitting sides while watching how they convinced millions of gullible Americans that sitting on floors while shoeless and eating raw fish is "exotic" and cool, and now having us walk into each other and kids wrapping their bicycles around trees while hunting a cartoon character with their noses buried in a phone is "the thing to do".  Add all that with the convincing drunks to get up in a bar and butcher hundreds of our beloved "top 40" hits by singing them in every key but the right one, and you've got revenge served cold on a PLATTER.  :blink:

And I'm STILL convinced that GM, FORD and CHRYSLER  are major stockholders in HONDA, TOYOTA and NISSAN. ;) 

Sepiatone

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, speedracer5 said:

Vincent Price should always play a villain--he has the greatest villainous voice.  Did you know that Vincent Price was also a gourmet cook? He wrote and published a series of cookbooks back in the 1960s-1970s. 

And it wasn't until an episode of "This Is Your Life" that I found out Price was also an art enthusiast, who became an expert celebrity board-consultant to a government restoration program for Native art.  :blink:  We don't have horror actors that nice and aristocratic anymore, now with Christopher Lee gone, too.

Quote

The Great Mouse Detective came out a little bit before Disney's renaissance period.  I think many consider the 1970s-1980s (until The Little Mermaid comes along in '89) to be the low point in Disney animation--though I do enjoy many of them.  My favorites being Robin Hood, The Rescuers, The Great Mouse Detective and Oliver & Company.  The Black Cauldron (1985) I believe is considered Disney's worst film. 

It was for twenty years, before it was beaten by a mile by Chicken Little, for entirely different studio-troubles reasons.

But yes, Detective is considered by fans to be the pre-Mermaid "Renaissance Zero" film, since it was the first time young directors John Musker & Ron Clements got their first big break, and were promoted to co-direct the old-school 80's directors work and get it up to schedule.  You could tell something was different already...  

6 hours ago, LawrenceA said:

The BFG was not likable in the least, for me. I wasn't using hyperbole. It's okay that you liked it. Different people can like different things.

I'd already blog-expounded in detail on the whole Variety-is-never-wrong "It musta been bad, 'cause it flopped!" dogpiling upon BFG the week it happened, so I'd refer there for further reading:  http://movieactivist.blogspot.com/2016/10/october-30-2016-flop-is-not.html

Basically, people's bafflement about the movie seems to be "Why would Spielberg do it??", and those are some of the best reasons for watching the movie:  Reason 1, obviously, is Melissa Mathison wanting to screenwrite every great unfilmed children's book; it'd been a long space between "Black Stallion" and "Indian in the Cupboard", and when there's a new one, her E.T. director was there for her--At the end, as it turned out.

The other, very obviously on display, is that yes, maybe Spielberg DID, deep down, want to do one of the Harry Potter movies, just for the self-indulgent fandom of it.  He'd read the BFG book since a long time back, he's certainly in love with the "London" of Roald Dahl books, and he seems to "get" the basic Roald Dahl appeal of angelic orphans, unwashed-slob villains, and verbal nonsense.  Not counting Dahl's own script for Chitty/Bang (which wasn't his book anyway), we've had only one other good adaptation of Dahl, and three others that range from well-intentioned to just plain rotten.  Just think back on Gene Wilder's boiling-calm heartfelt-deadpan Willy Wonka delivery on "I took the Oompa-Loompas away from all those Snozzwangers, and Hornswogglers, and rotten Vermicious Knids!"...And then look at Mark Rylance as the BFG turn Dahl's verbal squibblery into a perfectly natural North-country accent.  ("If folks found out about goyants, they'd put me in a zoo, with all them Gi-rafficals, and Hippocrumpuses!")

So, yeah, Steve and Melissa are having fun with British kid-lit...Until they get to Dahl's "whimsical" London book climax where Her Majesty helps save the day:  CLEAR. THE DANCE FLOOR.  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, EricJ said:

There are some good Pokemon movies, all taken from the afternoon kids-anime series when the game first came out--
This one, OTOH, is more of a goof-off slacker-comic script, hoping to follow the Lego Movies' lead.  And we'll probably get posters blaming "the entire industry" on this one, too.

Back on some of the current movie boards, where you get the angry kids upset that Last Jedi wasn't what they "expected" it to be, us older folks kid them about "Arthur J. Hollywood"--You've heard of him, HE'S the one giving us all those bad movies that "Hollywood inflicts on us!"  You knew it had to be somebody's fault!  :P

Meaning, that with no studio-system since the early 60's, movies are made by producers, and bad book, game and trend adaptations are made by producers who thought they could license a hit property that audiences had heard of, whether they themselves had heard of it or not.  In the case of videogame movies--specifically Warcraft, Ratchet and the aforementioned Assassin's Creed that nobody saw--it's usually the game company itself that wants to get into self-promotion onscreen and create audience identification.  If you can pay, you got yourself a movie, as Hasbro was up until recently trying to prove when it thought it could create a "universe" out of its Transformers movies, and thought it could turn "Battleship" into an alien invasion.

Wanna blame somebody for bothering you with movies?  Dive into the pond, there are a lot of fish swimming about...

The movie was reflecting Steven Hawking's objections / fears to us sending out signals in hoping to contact alien life or answering if THEY try to make contact.

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/if-aliens-call-do-not-answer-warns-stephen-hawking/articleshow/54501699.cms

As they say....If you're alone in the jungle, is it wise to call out.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us