Have Movies Lost Their Way

D

Darren J

New member
As someone who wasn't really into films, I have recently found a love for them. Although not the newer ones being released, gotta be the classics, My particular favourite genre is the Western, esp the John Wayne Years. What I like about movies is their ability to take you into another world. The older movies do that for me. Films like The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance are just superb. The acting might be a little dodgy in places and theres not all these effects used alot now, just dialogue and actors doing what they are supposed to.

So my question is this, have movies lost their way, I personally look at the cinema releases and doesn't look exciting. Theres not really big stars anymore to contend with the old stars of Wayne, Lee Marvin, Clint Eastwood, Jimmy Stewart, Cary Grant, Clark Gable. All imo of course
 
For me they have.

I used to like about 10 films per year, now I'm lucky if one comes out that I enjoy.

When I posted in the 'Your favourite films of the decade' thread I struggled to think of five.

Every so often a movie comes out that captures my imagination but they are becoming few and far between.
 
two recent films i have loved are two sci-fi ones.

the first was "Moon", a neat and tidy bit of sci-fi greatness, and the other, well you may have heard about it "Avatar" which made me fall in love with going to the cinema again
 
For me Hollywood has, but the rest of the world is still doing really good movies.

I can answer why Hollywood has 'lost its way'. in the beginning of last decade all the studios did a huge survey amongst cinemagoers to try and do a profile of the most avid cinemagoer. What they found was that the most frequent cinemagoer was

Male
19 years old
single
had lots of disposable income.

BUT what they found is that this demographic wouldn't just see a film they liked, they were also the most likely to buy the tie-in videogame, the DVD, pressure their frienRAB to go. go to the IMAX version etc etc.

Essentially the studios found out that it was key to appeal to these hyper consumer most. Which is why last decade was essentially dominated by Hollywood versions of what were nerd staples. Spiderman, Batman, transformers, LOTR, X-men etc etc.

And on top of that they started to fill movies with stuff young men like. This is why Megan Fox, Jessica Alba, Jessica Biel etc. got so much work....they can't act, but hey look good straddling a motorbike in hotpants, so the young guys like it.

The best evidence that the nerRAB have become kings of Hollywood is the San Diego Comic Con. 15 years ago it would have been a geeks paradise which no studio cared about. Now the studios and A-list stars scramble over themselves to get press conferences there and often treat the audience (who are their key 'youn male with disposable income demographic) to sneak peaks and exclusives.

Hollywood is a commercial enterprise and fair play to them they're making good money, but I personally am sick of seeing the same movies (How many superhero movies are there now???) being targeted to the same narrow hyper consuming demographic.

The nerdy teenage boy is king, and there's nothing we can do about it
 
I agree with previous posts. Mainstream cinema has become boring and too many quick-buck sequels or remakes are favoured. However, there are still plenty of gems from independent and world cinema releases, where plot and dialogue take the rightful centre stage from the "sod the plot, let's dazzle them with CGI or 3D, and good looking actors who can't act out of a paper bag" attitude of the big studios..

The only thing that annoys me really, is that the limited releases these decent films get over the other major releases. I know this will always be the case, but since many cinema's are now 10+ screen multiplexes, there is room to cater for all. However, a lot of films just don't get shown, not even for a few showings..
 
For every one great movie that gets made there'll be one hundred really bad ones made. That has always been the case. It was the case in the days of Wayne, Lee Marvin, Clint Eastwood, Jimmy Stewart, Cary Grant, Clark - and it's still the case now.

With the passing of time the bad movies are generally forgotten and what remains are the memories of the good ones, creating a false illusion of a "golden era" of cimea which in reality never was.
 
I have to disagree.

These are some of the movies released in 1974

The Godfather II
Blazing Saddles
Young Frankenstein
Chinatown
The Conversation
The taking of Pelham one, two, three
The Texas Chaisaw Massacre
Emanuelle
The man with the golden gun
The Great Gatsby
Zardoz
Death Wish
The Towering Inferno
Darkstar
The Mean Machine
Alice doesn't live here anymore
The Front Page
The Night Porter
Earthquake
Bring me the head of Alfredo Garcia
The Parallax View
The Odessa File
Lenny
Dirty Mary Crazy Larry
Freebie and the Bean
Mr Majestyk

Thats just picking a year at random. I'm sure with more investigation I could have done better.

There's a lot of big movies in that list that are still very popular today. I'm not so sure the same will be said about todays films in 35 years.
 
Let's take a more recent year at random - 2006 (modern cinema):

Devil Wears Prada
Pursuit of Happyness
Volver
Dead man's Chest
The Good Shepherd
Infamous
Cars
The Ground Truth
Notes on a Scandal
The Queen
Catch a Fire
Why We Fight
Babel
Inside Man
Apocalypto
United 93
Thank you for Smoking
Children of Men
Little Miss Sunshine
Casino Royale
Pan's Labyrinth
The Departed

There are some good movies there. I bet a decent number of those films will still be very popular in 35 years. In fact anybody looking at that list in 35 years will no doubt think "gosh didnt they make sone great films back then", yet they will forget the terrible movies. Same thing is happening here with your 1974 list.

But anyway, it's only a fraction of the hundreRAB of movies that were made in 2006. Some were great - most were average at best. Same with your 1974 list. There are some great movies in that list (and some not so great). But how many movies were made in 1974 in total? HundreRAB, how many were great? A very small percentage. But we forget the crap ones.

Of course, some years are more vintage than others but overall nothing really changes.
 
Rebel scum is right, it is a myth that once upon a time Hollywood churned out nothing but great classics. In the history of cinema poor to average movies have always easily outnumbered great movies. Its just that only the great ones are remembered so it gives the past an impression of being a golden age.

But the 'movies ain't as good as they were in the old days' argument isn't completely without merit. The old tycoons (Selznick, Hughes, walt disney etc.) did want to make great movies as testament to themselves, and as a legacy. They wanted great pictures and great profits. Studios these days don't care how good it is, just how much profit it makes.
 
I totally agree. The business has changed.
Prior to VHS and DVD, movies had to be good in order to make a profit.
Now in most cases they only need to be mediocre.
 
For me, they definitely have. I used to go to the cinema regularly, now I just wait till they're on Sky - and more often than not, end up switching off. It's rare for me to watch a movie right through now.

TV, on the other hand, is on the up. TV is the new cinema. :D
 
I think that in a literal sense, they aren't what they used to be - in the 90s, there was a shift towarRAB a type of film stock that resulted in an image of less saturation and depth, often resultantly looking over-lit... followed by the advent of the digital age, and the subsequent encroachment of CGI techniques into now practically every film being released irrespective of genre/plot, films have long since ceased to 'feel' like they used to and, for me, part of an intrinsic charm they used to have.
 
i'll second that. apart from Avatar, nothing has made me go to the cinema in ages. i used to buy DVRAB, but have even stopped doing that.

i just watch movies on Sky Box Office when i want to see something. they seem to reach Box Office really quickly now, within weeks of DVD release for some movies. so what's the point of buying, or traipsing down the rental shop?
 
nostalgia always whitewashes the past.
hollywood used to crank out films by the arse load. there was no tv originally. most were mediocre obviously. so you forget all those conveniently, it just works that way.

star power is less important now. avatar has what? weaver? but who cares about star power. now concept is more important than stars. who knew about crew of startrek before they broke out on that blockbuster? not many. pixar keeps cranking em out, and stars don't sell those stories really.



not true, they always had secondary markets of tv/cable unless you go ridiculously far back. and the farther back you go the longer the window they had to make their money back regardless.

ronald reagan made 61 films. can you name even one?
 
Well not even the lure of Pandora has dragged me to the cinema since I tried to pull my ex wife's twin sister (sad I know :D by taking her to see Drag Me To Hell (she jumped at every scene and buried her head in my chest...made a mental note to play her Raimi's Evil Dead trilogy.....like all things, that plan went to rat-shit....) but I digress. Nothing appeals, nothing.
 
Indeed, managed to wrest myself away from rather dangerous and Jeremy Kyle like situation of attempting to date my ex wife's twin sister (not identical I might add).

Still, nothing much, apart from the reunion of Scott and Crowe appeals to me much.

Trevelyan, I thank you for your recomendation, but as I have said earlier, eye candy does not a good film make. The plot of Avatar looks diabolical and I am not prepared to spend so much just to get a headache.
 
Back
Top