RX_Sith posted:Well they may be starting to do them right, but still it is a niche type of film. Besides the Star Wars films, none of the others including Star Trek, have really pulled in your "everyday" kind of audience.
The2ndQuest posted:I think social interest in the genre is another factor. In the late 70's/early 80's, sci-fi/fantasy had a more wider appeal, it was more in-style. That sort of faded away in recent decades (likely due to wider variety of content and media outlets people can get entertainment from).
Chancellor_Ewok posted:If anything, I think interest in sciece fiction, fantasy and comic books has gone up. Star Wars was shopped around to all the studios several times before it was picked up by Fox, and that's in addition the fact that Star Wars and Close Encounters were only high profile science fiction films to be released in 1977. Today is the polar opposite. A look at the summer film schedule reveals a summer of nothing BUT sci-fi and comic book movies.
Mastadge posted:So what you seem to be saying, Vortigern, is that quantity trumps quality, and that technical excellence (i.e., special effects and production values) trumps intelligence and heart.
Mastadge posted:You say that by and large genre films of old sucked, but your list of "this year's fine offering" by and large sucks, too -- the exceptions being not original films but those based on children's novels and comic books. You say that "studios are producing new classics and masterpieces with astonishing regularity," whereas it seems to me that Hollywood is defecating weekly on good taste and high standards. You look forward to two of the forthcoming spate of blockbusters being "near greatness," whereas I haven't seen any signs of greatness in SF cinema yet this year at all -- the closest we've come, sadly, is Iron Man.
Mastadge posted:...as I mentioned I'm optimistic about The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.
Mastadge posted:What does it say about the adult moviegoing population that, while sf movies aimed at children seem more often than not at least to have some substance, and those adapted from all-ages material offer at least some relatively inoffensive spectacle, most original sf movies geared toward adults or adapted from more adult subject matter are idiotic beyond belief? Maybe there's just a disconnect in expectations here. Looking over your list of the year's sf, and more importantly what's left off it, it seems that what you're looking for in a good sff film is not high concepts, or substance, or wonder, but, for the most part, spectacular adolescent power fantasies -- superheroes, superspies, Jedi Knights.
Vortigern99 posted: Mastadge posted:...as I mentioned I'm optimistic about The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. Me too! The full trailer blew me away, intrigued the beejeezus out of me, made me a fan of the film well before its release. I hope my high expectations are borne out.
Vortigern99 posted:Good heavens, I'm not saying that at all. Both the quantity AND quality of genre films has increased exponentially since the 90s, 80s, 70s and prior. Movies such as Iron Man, Casino Royale and Spider-Man 2 are a thousand times more intelligent, more heartfelt and better crafted than such tripe as Superman III (1983), A View to a Kill (1985), or the execrable Captain America (1989). Prince Caspian is a masterpiece of cinematography, pacing, characterization and performance compared to the fun-yet-flawed likes of Krull (1983) or the forgettablly awful Conan the Destroyer (1984).
Vortigern99 posted:I think your standards might be impossibly high, Mastadge, and that you're comparing every new SFF film against some 5-star ideal represented by, say, the original Star Wars or maybe FOTR. Whatever your icon of cinematic SF excellence, I would ask you to consider that not every movie can achieve the heights of those rare, flawless gems of yesteryear. We might say that the new Incredible Hulk is not as good as, for example, the original Superman (1978) -- but when we consider that every other superhero movie ever made until Spider-Man was an almost complete waste of celluloid, it becomes clear that maybe Hulk ain't so bad after all. It's certainly better than all the Burton/Schumacher Batman movies put together, better than the dumb Hulk CBS-TV series, better than Superman III & IV, better even than the recent Fantastic Four movies. I'm talking about a matter of degrees here. Today's SFF films are better made, with closer attention to characterization and dramatic power, and certainly superior filmmaking techniques, to 95% of what came before.
Vortigern99 posted:I just don't agree with any of that. For one thing, I don't find anything inherently childish about superhero movies or tales of Jedi Knights. Superhero tales, and STAR WARS, constitute the mythology of the modern age, as Jack Kirby and George Lucas have been wont to point out. The themes and conflicts at play in this genre are apt metaphors for our inner struggles as human beings, and the battles we face on a daily basis for survival, advancement, moral victory. There is nothing laughable or foolish about that material unless the authors/filmmakers fail to properly address it. In the past, most filmmakers failed to fully comprehend the mythic/msymbolic status of superheroes, or else ignored or neglected superheroes' grounding in the real world. This is no longer the case, as the new Marvel films, and Batman Begins, have shown us. You may dismiss them as children's films, but I take them quite seriously and give them credit where I believe it's due.