Movie Talk (New Films, Old Films... doesn't matter) (56 Viewers)

[Völler]

My first point was that before everything was made by hand, the scenery, settings and everything. The first computer generated effects were horrible because technology is an ever improving thing. And the thing about older Sci-fi is that the ideas were there.

But it's not like miniatures were perfected in the 70's. The models only improved, and the bigatures in Lord of the Rings looks much more convincing compared to a lot of miniatures from the 70's.

It's like @PostIronic and I discussed once, there was something in the water then. Call it hallucinogenic drugs, the moon landing or whatever, in that time period and that time period alone people in art were open to ideas we've had never thought before and probably wont again. Even the somewhat bad-looking Sci-fi movies of the era had character and such unparalleled imagination. Nowadays there's nothing that even tries to think outside the box in the genre, it's action minded, explosions and CGI. Bear in mind i haven't watched Interstellar yet.

It's not that there was something in the water. A big part of it is the Hollywood studio system failing in the early 60's and as a result giving directors more creative freedom in the late 60's and 70's. Furthermore you get new tax laws making it more profitable to invest in films. Without those laws films like Taxi Driver and One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest probably never would have been made.

At the same Hollywood finally got the younger audience to go to the movies again with relatively cheap movies like Easy Rider and The Graduate. Likewise the hippies loved 2001: A Space Odyssey because of the visuals. And once you have a genre hit, other films in the genre are sure to follow. The directors of the 70's just had a lot more creative freedom compared to now. Unfortunately, films like Heaven's Gate proved that creative freedom could result in a catastrophe, and at the same time movies like Jaws and Star Wars proved to be recipes for box office hits. And gone is the creative freedom of the 70's. It's not that the filmmakers of today lack imagination, they just don't have the freedom to do what they want.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Hængebøffer]

It's also easier to use the creative freedom, when the technology isn't that developed. You make it sound like the directors are victims nowadays.

 

[Völler]

It's also easier to use the creative freedom, when the technology isn't that developed. You make it sound like the directors are victims nowadays.

Yes, it's easier nowadays due to digital being much cheaper than film and getting better and better every day. But one thing is making an indie film in your neighborhood, another thing is making a sci-fi film without having a studio backing you.

But you're right, it's easy to blame the studios. It's business for them, and if people don't buy tickets when they're taking chances, then it's hard to blame them for not trying again. You can't blame them for producing an endless number of superhero movies when they're all paying off. And piracy isn't exactly making it easier to justify risky investments.

 

[blondu]

This question would be the same as "I'm thirsty, should i drink water?"

i watched it..i should read the books for a better understanding..

 

[Völler]

i watched it..i should read the books for a better understanding..

Nah, this is a better help: http://www.kubrick2001.com/

 

[CrimsonianKing]

But it's not like miniatures were perfected in the 70's. The models only improved, and the bigatures in Lord of the Rings looks much more convincing compared to a lot of miniatures from the 70's.



It's not that there was something in the water. A big part of it is the Hollywood studio system failing in the early 60's and as a result giving directors more creative freedom in the late 60's and 70's. Furthermore you get new tax laws making it more profitable to invest in films. Without those laws films like Taxi Driver and One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest probably never would have been made.

At the same Hollywood finally got the younger audience to go to the movies again with relatively cheap movies like Easy Rider and The Graduate. Likewise the hippies loved 2001: A Space Odyssey because of the visuals. And once you have a genre hit, other films in the genre are sure to follow. The directors of the 70's just had a lot more creative freedom compared to now. Unfortunately, films like Heaven's Gate proved that creative freedom could result in a catastrophe, and at the same time movies like Jaws and Star Wars proved to be recipes for box office hits. And gone is the creative freedom of the 70's. It's not that the filmmakers of today lack imagination, they just don't have the freedom to do what they want.

I don't buy it for a minute. So we're in complete disagreement here. Directors nowadays don't have the freedom to do what they want? Bullshit.

Indie movies like Primer prove otherwise, that not only the good ideas are there to be discovered and thought of, but also that you can put it in a proper presentation with a little laughable budget. If it's good, it's good whether you have a big studio backing you up or not. Don't try to victimize them.

- - - Updated - - -

But of course they want to profit as does the big studios so they keep making what sells, and right now it's super hero movies.

 

[Ocelot]

I don't buy it for a minute. So we're in complete disagreement here. Directors nowadays don't have the freedom to do what they want? Bullshit.

Indie movies like Primer prove otherwise, that not only the good ideas are there to be discovered and thought of, but also that you can put it in a proper presentation with a little laughable budget. If it's good, it's good whether you have a big studio backing you up or not. Don't try to victimize them.

Primer is amazing.

And I don't think that the standard in filmmaking has necessarily declined as much as some suggest. The good ones just get way less attention than the forgetable ones.

 

[Maddy]

When is a human ever free?

 

[swag]

I don't buy it for a minute. So we're in complete disagreement here. Directors nowadays don't have the freedom to do what they want? Bullshit.

I kind of have to side with who's using Völler's account today. Steven Soderbergh, for example, has commented about how he can do things with character development on TV today that he would never be allowed to do -- and what audiences would tolerate -- with movies. It's one of the reasons he dropped out from making films.

 

[Maddy]

I kind of have to side with who's using Völler's account today. Steven Soderbergh, for example, has commented about how he can do things with character development on TV today that he would never be allowed to do -- and what audiences would tolerate -- with movies. It's one of the reasons he dropped out from making films.

 

[CrimsonianKing]

I kind of have to side with who's using Völler's account today. Steven Soderbergh, for example, has commented about how he can do things with character development on TV today that he would never be allowed to do -- and what audiences would tolerate -- with movies. It's one of the reasons he dropped out from making films.

Well, you only have so many hours in a movie. You can't really compare it with TV and it's series.

 

[Post Ironic]

Primer is amazing.

And I don't think that the standard in filmmaking has necessarily declined as much as some suggest. The good ones just get way less attention than the forgetable ones.

If one attends the big international North American film festivals like TIFF, Sundance, VIFF, etc. one sees an incredible number of good films, both foreign and domestic. I spend a bit of time each year checking out reviews and trailers of what showed at Cannes, Venice, Berlin, Moscow, Locarno, Karlovy Vary, each year, so as to get an idea of what's worth watching. Film, on a global scale, hasn't declined at all in my opinion. Only in terms of the Hollywood blockbuster. What has mass appeal today is absolutely awful compared to even 30-40 years ago.

 

[CrimsonianKing]

Primer is amazing.

And I don't think that the standard in filmmaking has necessarily declined as much as some suggest. The good ones just get way less attention than the forgetable ones.

Oh no, we were talking stricly sci-fi movies. There's plenty of good stuff in general out there, no doubt.

 

[swag]

Well, you only have so many hours in a movie. You can't really compare it with TV and it's series.

Well, for a direct quote:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/steven-soderbergh-retire-television-magic-mike-343652

"American movie audiences now just don’t seem to be very interested in any kind of ambiguity or any kind of real complexity of character or narrative — I’m talking in large numbers, there are always some, but enough to make hits out of movies that have those qualities,” he told the Associated Press. "I think those qualities are now being seen on television and that people who want to see stories that have those kinds of qualities are watching television.”

 

[Völler]

I don't buy it for a minute. So we're in complete disagreement here. Directors nowadays don't have the freedom to do what they want? Bullshit.

Indie movies like Primer prove otherwise, that not only the good ideas are there to be discovered and thought of, but also that you can put it in a proper presentation with a little laughable budget. If it's good, it's good whether you have a big studio backing you up or not. Don't try to victimize them.

- - - Updated - - -

But of course they want to profit as does the big studios so they keep making what sells, and right now it's super hero movies.

Sure, it's easier now than ever to come out of nowhere to make a cheap indie movie, but it's not all stories that can be made on a tiny budget. If you're trying to get a decent sized budget within Hollywood, funding is incredibly hard to get. Even an acclaimed director like Scorsese struggled to get funded during the 80's and 90's and ended up making movies to get funding for the ones he wanted to make himself. Silence, which he has tried to make for 20 years, is only looking to get made now. If you have a vision that requires a decent budget, it's probably harder than ever to get funding.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not saying that all sci-fi movies need a Gravity sized budget, but Primer's budget is way too low to use as a benchmark. Even Moon, a cheap sci-fi with one actor and limited locations, cost $5 million.

 

[Post Ironic]

My first point was that before everything was made by hand, the scenery, settings and everything. The first computer generated effects were horrible because technology is an ever improving thing. And the thing about older Sci-fi is that the ideas were there.

It's like @PostIronic and I discussed once, there was something in the water then. Call it hallucinogenic drugs, the moon landing or whatever, in that time period and that time period alone people in art were open to ideas we've had never thought before and probably wont again. Even the somewhat bad-looking Sci-fi movies of the era had character and such unparalleled imagination. Nowadays there's nothing that even tries to think outside the box in the genre, it's action minded, explosions and CGI. Bear in mind i haven't watched Interstellar yet.

And yes, for the reason, Alien is a sci-fi masterpiece.

I think I've said it in this thread before, but I'm not even a big Alien fan, but I do recognize the film is a Sci-fi masterpiece. There are quite a number of incredibly dated looking films from that 60s and 70s era in the sci-fi realm, but one things they do have is originality, imagination, fascinating characters, and ideas that are actually interesting if one strips away all else. Today, we're dazzled by CGI and FX and for the most part seem willing to overlook the shit that tries to pass for a storyline underneath, and the half-baked plots and ideas used. The less said about dialogue, the better.

That period was home to such fascinating movements in the arts. The New Wave/Nouvelle Vague movements in film in that era were fascinating. The French with Godard, Truffaut, Resnais, etc; the Japanese with Oshima, Imamura, Teshigahara, etc; the Czechs with Jires, Nemec, Svankmajer, etc; New Hollywood with its plethora of good directors.

I don't think Hollywood has ever seen such a innovative and progressive era as that late 1960s to early 1980s New Hollywood era. So many brilliant young directors. And mostly working within the studio system. The major studios gave them freedom and creative license in an effort to resonate with the young people of the day, they overlooked the censorship model, and heavily stripped down studio cuts/ censorship of films, they allowed the transgressive to enter the cinema again for the first time since basically German Expressionism. And it's magnificent to see what followed from it.

And then Heaven's Gate happened. The knee-jerk was ridiculous. The fact it almost drove a major studio out of business was considered justification. But if you watch the Director's Cut released in 2013, at 216 minutes, as opposed to the original 150 minute clipped together highlight version of the film that a retarded studio and nervous producers insisted upon, it's night and day. That studio deserved bankruptcy for destroying Cimino's vision of the film and butchering it with that heavily cut release. Even worse, in so doing they ended an entire era of progressive and innovative filmmaking in the Hollywood studio system, and destroyed Cimino's and Kristofferson's careers, and almost managed to do the same with Bridges.

The full director's cut is a brilliant film and a masterpiece of the Western Epic genre. Here's a good read on it. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/9a7d72e0-f8fd-11e2-86e1-00144feabdc0.html#slide0

 

[Bianconero81]

Exodus - Gods and Kings =

Amongst the constant arguments, bickering, and discussions this statement slipped by unnoticed.

 

[Ocelot]

Amongst the constant arguments, bickering, and discussions this statement slipped by unnoticed.

It seems that Nicholas' questionable taste reaches beyond football as well

 

[Maddy]

It seems that Nicholas' questionable taste reaches beyond football and "women" as well

Fixed

 

[Post Ironic]