Do people even LIKE movies anymore?! (rant)

I agree with pretty much everyone who has posted. People do go into movies with too high expectations, as with TPM the hype leading up to the release was phenomenal. However don't forget George Lucas is in the money making business too and in order to be successful he has to make trailers and the like that make the movie look amazing. If everyone had gone into TPM thinking 'this movie is going to be mediocre', the film wouldn't have been anywhere near as successful. And if people go into movies with preconceptions what the movie will suck... then it will...in their eyes. Don't get me wrong I totally agree that people spend too much time bagging movies and complaining that they weren't good because they wern't such a thing, when they weren't even mean to be... But with that said I think even this thread seems to be getting close to trashing movies, so why not focus on good points in movies, and things Directors and the like have done right....

 

And, with that, the inconsistencies of the Oscars comes into play. Sometimes an actor can act absolutely wonderfully in a movie, and the very next movie thry're in act horribly. Yet, the Oscars always seem to award the, for lack of a better word, crappier movie. Two examples.

Who saw John Q? That was the greatest acting I've seen in a very long time. But, forget that, let's award Denzel for Training Day, 'cause it has drugs in it!

Or A Beautiful mind? Russel Crowe couldn't have performed that role more spectaculary, of this I'm convinced. But he won for Gladiator, and lost for ABM. Who not-cool is that? In my humble opinion, Gladiator was the single dumbest movie of it's season. An excuse to let Russel walk around in tight, metal underwear.

Fig

 

Why exactly aren't people allowed to dislike a trailer?

Edit: I ask because I think "I hope it's not as bad as the trailer makes it look" is a perfectly legitimate comment. I thought the same thing. If you take the time to fire up Quicktime and check out the original Matrix trailer, it's (in my opinion) one of the best trailers ever made. Conversely, I didn't think Reloaded's trailers would even classify as "good." Does this mean I hate movies? I didn't think so, but apparently it does.

 

What void in the lives of movie goers need filling that they feel the urge to hate a movie before it even comes out? What gives the SWfan the right to question the writing and quality of Episode I?

For every movie there's an audience, and for every person, there's a way a movie is supposed to be like. My mother-in-law hated the Matrix, saying it was stupid. My mother's ex-boyfriend thought the Lost Boys was corny. And I absolutely hate Romeo+Juliet (except for John Leguizamo and Paul Sorvino). How can this be? Matter of opinion, taste, sensibilities and free will.

I'm one of those that question what Uncle George has done to Star Wars. Unlike ANH, ESB or ROTJ, I fast forward scenes in AOTC, and cringe during parts of TPM partly because I'm a budding filmmaker myself. Hindsight is 20/20; looking back and not being there, I can say "Yeah, I could have made it better."

That doesn't make my right or correct in my views.

For a lot of us film makers, movie makers and Hollywood Player wannabe's, we know the tricks to visual effects, stunts, cinematography and editing. Does that mean we can judge a movie just by it's trailer? Yeah. But any other movie-making ignorant shmuck can. I think that for some, knowing movies kind of gives them the "knowledge" to make that kind of judgement call.

If they put that much energy into belittling a movie based on it's trailer, then they can put that energy into making their own quality movie. Proof is in the pudding. Can these trailer/movie/SW critics make their own quality movie, or is it just a lot of barking?

I listen to what they say, don't try to change their minds, and make my own opinions. It's not worth my time and energy to stop and change someone's opinion, especially if it's not coming from a good place. I like movies. I enjoy the process of making them. I like picking them apart.

And I like buying them on DVD.

So, learn from what they have to say. Use what sounds logical, throwout what's not, and ultimately follow your own path. No one can choose if for you, no matter how much they you tell the movie's gonna suck.


















I liked Lost in Space. But that's just me.

 

Personally I think Darth_Gehenna has the best view.

I love movies. I have never seen a film I didn't like. I never question acting ability or dialogue because it's real. It's there on the screen. This may because I'm young and haven't learn't how to hate like you film experts.

I hope I never learn.

 

DorkmanScott,
I think your question can be answered very simply by blaming the trailer itself. It's the preconcieved notions that we get from the trailers that screw it all up.
Here are the biggest problems with trailers in general:

1. They are misleading. They rarely tell what the story is really about. They usually lead you to the wrong conclusions - good or bad about how good the movie may be.
2. They spoil parts of the movie that should remain hidden until you see it, etc...

For just these reasons I avoid watching trailers at all whenever possible.
I won't even watch "stay tuned for scene's from next weeks 'Enterprise'".

I would rather go see a movie having absolutely no clue what the movie is about. Just let me know if it's comedy, horror, scifi, etc... Don't even tell me who's in it. I always enjoy a movie more that way.

 

Yes, I like movies. I love movies. But I also like good trailers.

If film makers want to give a good impression of their film, they need to make the trailer tell a small story. It needs to catch you. If I see a crappy trailer, I can only assume the movie will be subpar.


BTW, I am one of the few who didn't think 'Gladiator' was 'all that'.

 

I have to agree some with durbnpoisn. I hate spoilers. I had to put several friends on ignore on ICQ simply because they wouldn't stop feeding me AOTC spoilers cuz they'd gone out and read the script already.

What's the bloody point of that? Why watch a movie at all if you're just going to find out what happens before you even go? Where's the drama or suspense? It's like reading the last page of a mystery first.

And, yes, a lot of trailers are misleading. Very misleading.

My favorite example: Falling Down. You watch the previews for that movie and it looks like an all-out laff riot. You've got an ordinary guy who goes just a little bit nuts and goes around pointing out what's wrong with today's world with a machine gun and rocket launcher in hand. That sounds pretty silly, neh?
Heck, they have this one scene where he's holding up a McDonald's equivalent with a machine gun. He points to the menu and says, "Look at that nice, juicy, yummy looking burger in the picture...and look at what you actually get," and holds up this squashy, dilapidated little burger that looks nothing like the photo. Then he says, "Does anyone else think that's just wrong?" and some little kid cautiously raises his hand. Funny, right? I laughed.
But is the whole movie like that? Noooo. The rest of the movie is a really dark, dismal, depressing story about a guy who gets fired, goes nuts, and wreaks havoc on his way home to kill his family, eventually committing suicude. This is not a funny movie at all.
But I went to see it based on the bloody hilarious trailer. GRAAGH!

 

That's simply because a lot of movies don't have the "huge audience" appeal that marketers feel is necessary for a hit. So they splice in all the action/all the comedy scenes in order to put the movie into a big-hit genre like "action" or "comedy" and therefore make the movie more generally appealing. It's annoying but I understand why it's done and it doesn't bother me.

 

ok, didn't read the thread totally, but i can understand what Dorkmann is saying.

Personally, I like to watch trailers adn my general rule (though not always the case) is:

The more the trailer shows, the crapper the film. For Example: If there's loads of "money shots" in the trailer (i.e. explosions, sex scenes, guns firing ,cars crashing etc), then there's obviously nothing else to sell the movie on, those are it.

Now, that being said, I never listen to critics, I'll make up my own mind. Sometimes it works out that I agree with them, sometimes it works out that I don't (though I don't think I've ever agreed with Barry Norman).

I'll watch films based on who's in them. John Cusack is probably one of my favourite stars - he's done bad and good films, I'll still watch a film with him in it. Samual L. Jackson doens't seem to ever be in bad films.

One thing you do have to remember though is that movie audiences are very fickle. They're also full of cynicism based on the current trends.

Terminator 3 was mentioned: There is a current trend to do trilogies of films (Scream, Robocop, Terminator, Matrix, Back to The Future, Beverly Hills Cop, LOTR). Ok so some of those aren't recent examples, but people are still searching for a series of films that can beat Star Wars/Indiana Jones.

I don't think I've seen a number 3 movie that has been GOOD. Robocop 3=bad, BTTF 3=Ok, Beverly Hills Cop 3=OMG!!

It's very hard to tame a skeptic!

anyway,

Nick "Shorty" Long

 

I like the tale about 'Falling Down'. Fortunately I never saw that trailer. That's probably why I enjoyed the movie.

AI is a really good example of a trailer that was terribly misleading. From the trailer it looked like an awesome vehicle for a glimpse into the future. But, the movie was nothing like that. There was very little story at all except for the main character. I liked the movie despite that, but I was dissappointed by the lack of 'rest of the story' that the trailer promissed.

Speaking of LOTR. I think they are the best example so far of trailers that fit the story and didn't spoil a thing. Filmmakers could learn something from that!

I look at it this way: A story is intended to be told in a particular linear fashion. That timeline is determined by the author and is played out in the full length movie. All too often, the trailer mixes up and convalutes the timeline to a point where it tells an entirely different story. There is something fundamentally wrong with that.

If it's possible to enjoy the trailer for what it is - snippets of the story in no particular order, then you can easily remove yourself from the annoyances I spoke of in my last post. But most people can't do that. And, that is why so many people freak out about how much they dislike a movie.

 

I feel the same way Dorkman!

I love movies. I go to the movies about every week.
I can't wait to see Episode 3, Terminator 3, X-Men 2, Daredevil, the Hulk, and the Matrix movies.

I take movies as entertainment. Simply put,it needs to entertain me for 2 hours.
Star Wars is not shakespeare. It never claimed to be.

Now, there's A LOT of prequel bashing. I'm sick of the "raped childhood" comments. This is George's view of his universe, we're just invited for the ride.

I hate the "too much CG" comments. Let's be honest. Most of the time Rubber masks look like............rubber masks!
In Star Trek, all the aliens look like humans with fancy makeup. I for one, love that in Computer graphics you can do ANYTHING. And, its reasonable quality.

I really liked Episode 2. It had scenes I always wanted to see. (That Fett armor in action, the clone wars, Yoda fighting)
Sure there were lines that made me cringe a little. But so did Star Wars.

Episode 1 was a little dissapointing to me. Sure expectations were high. But, then expectations were also high for Empire.
There were pacing, plot, and acting issues that didn't make the film as good as I would have liked. But, I love to get a chance to see more into the Star Wars universe.
Coruscant and Naboo were awesome.

Now, Terminator 3 is coming out. Okay. Arnie is a bit old. I can overlook that. Terminator was a great film. Terminator 2 was one of those rare sequels where it was
actually better than the first. Terminator 3 must have a great story, great special effects.

And, of course, I think that if you think you could do something better, then try it. That's what is great about these talented fan film makers. They're at least trying and not complaining "I could do better!".
Kudos to you all.

 

"They usually lead you to the wrong conclusions - good or bad about how good the movie may be."

This was the biggest problem with Reign of Fire for me. I went in expecting some nice big fights between Dragons and tanks and helicopters because that's what it looked like they were showing in the trailer. I really got nothing even closely resembling that, and I was sadly dissapointed.

 

I hear ya Darth_Gehenna. A lot of movies that came out this past summer were like that. Reign of Fire really t'd me off. The trailer looked like it would be this fast paced human vs dragon action bonanza. Even the poster had apache helicopters taking on a dragon. Nope, all we got was a boring and pointless Mad Max remake with dragons in it.

Lots of recent movies looked good in the trailers: K-19, Clockstoppers, Insomnia... hell, even Jason X looked kinda cool in a cheesy way. That's what trailers are supposed to do... make you think that they're showing you the tamest of the stuff to be found in the actual movie assuming you'll figure that the stuff in the film is WAY better, and most of the time what's shown in the trialer is the coolest stuff in the movie. Case in point... Goldmember. The trailer made the film look really funny, but upon seeing it, the only funny stuff was the first five minutes, the rest of the jokes were either from the other two Austin Powers films or were ruined in the trailer.

Lately I haven't been taking the trailers I've seen seriously. I just read a plot synopsis on a website and if that gets me, then I'll see the movie.

Trailers are nothing but LIES!

But that's just my opinion.

 

I agree with Dorkman. Things are just becoming ridiculous now. You have posters who have been here since 1999 and they do absolutely nothing but bash George Lucas and claim he raped their childhood. Honestly, people, is your life really that empty? Is it really that pathetic that you have to spend 4 years of your life on a message board bashing something you claim to love? I understand people have the right to criticize, but usually it's not constructive and usually it's the same people. It bugs me when people can't restrain themselves from making some back handed comment about a movie. The worst thing to happen to Episode 1 was not Jar Jar himself, but the talk about Jar Jar before the movie was released. It sickened me how people were bashing Jar Jar before they even saw the film. Like Qui-Gon said "Your focus determines your reality." Granted, I did find Jar Jar a bit annoying but the little bugger has grown on me and I actually find him kinda funny at times.

 

Russel Crowe got the oscar for Gladiator because he was owed from The Insider. A beautiful mind was after Glandiator.

Denzel Washington won for Training Day because he played so well against type.
-Lokmer

 

'Star Wars is not shakespeare. It never claimed to be.' I agree but personally I always found Star Wars more entertaining, and thats what its all about . Everyone seems to be forgetting that movies are there mainly earn money, if the trailers arn't spectacular the movie wont make as much money...its annoying I know, but what can we do...

Well thats what I think anyway...

 

Shakespeare was trying to earn a quid too was he not?

 

"I hate the "too much CG" comments. "

But the same people who make these comments will surely be missing large numbers of effects shots because they are the subtle ones.

Seeing as we are griping about trailers, I am still smarting over Die Another Day. What looked good in the trailer? The spy car showdown. And what sequence in the film had I seen in its ENTIRETY through trailers and 'previews'.

Yep..

Best trailers ever

Episode One (Every generation has a legend)
The Two Towers 2 minute trailer with the Requiem remix.

The first Matrix trailer, in contrast, did not do too much for me. I wanted to see the film (if only to find out what the Matrix was, I had to see it for myself) But when I saw the film it was in the US, before all the hype had really started in the UK, and boy, was that a nice surprise.

I find the films I enjoy least in the cinema tend to be the ones I have fewer preconceived notions about. Jackie Chan for example has in his last few films come nowhere near his best work, but for The Tuxedo I went in expecting less, and got more out of it.

To answer the title of the thread, I do like movies (movies as opposed to 'film'), but I am finding it harder to get the wow factor I used to get as a kid. Partly because I am more cynical, but partly because I think some films are pushing effects just a little too far to work.

Good example - LOTR, and the battle scenes
Good example - Jurasic Park, believeable dinosaurs
Bad Example - Spiderman, the movements show themselves false at times.
Bad Example - Tow Towers - Legolas mounting the horse. Yeah it was cool, but the mass of the character seemed wrong to me.

Best Effort - Golum. He seemed spot on 90% of the time. Best digital character yet.

I just noticed the common thread. Character animation. Buildings, backgrounds, monsters we can do well, but I think we are too used to humanoid movement.

On the other hand FInal Fantasy had perfect movement (still missing the mass at times) but that movie could have been better.

So, yeah, I like movies, and Peter Jackson has made me feel like a kid again, but I will still be watching Goonies, The Neverending Story and 80's Jackie Chan for that magic I can't quite find in the cinema.

Long live fanfilms! That's where I get it these days.

I'll go now....

Pete

 

*sigh* This is not a new phenomenon boys. People in the film industry have been taking much more harsh flak for their jobs for many more years before 13 year olds learned how to use message boards. Did you know that there is a whole industry dedicated to ripping apart movies and pissing on their makers? Yes, they are called film critics! People come to expect these kind of things from people now, but even I was annoyed when I read a review of 'Windtalkers' by Mr. Ebert that said something to the effect of "John Woo and the Navajo people should be ashamed for making a movie that is nothing more than a mockery of the heroism the Navajo codetalkers exhibited". I didn't like the film, but saying something like that, and printing it for people all over the world to see is much worse than anything any of us can say.

As to why people get so up in arms about movies, I have a theory. I believe that it is a mixture of people wanting to look superior to others, and people liking thier money. Shall I explain? Well you don't have a choice now do you...

When you buy a hamburger, you eat it and it is good. You derive a deal of satisfaction from that $2! Now what happens if you recieve a burnt meat with a soggy bun hamburger? Most people would run right up and yell at the manager, demand a new hamburger and want a refund to boot! And no, this is not metaphorically speaking, I work part-time at 'Whataburger'. When people pay with both eight dollars of their money and two hours of their time, they want to be entertained. When they come out after spending the costs of both their money and time and recieve no satisfaction, I think they have a right to be angry. So then they vent their anger on messageboards and talking to others.

The second part is that people who like every film from 'Kung Pow' to '2001: A Space Odyssey' are considered, basically, uncultured. Our culture of moviewatching emphasizes criticism as part of the experience. We all look down upon the opinions of kids because they like every movie that comes along! So people are critical of films because, also, because they want to apear cool and part of the group.

I believe that people have the right to say whatever they want about films. There are many of you on this forum who think 'Eyes Wide Shut' is a travesty whereas I think it is one of the most interestinly artistic films created. I love watching movies, and I love discussing them almost as much.

 

I've said this many times in the last few years but I always like to discuss it so here goes:

Movies used to be magical experiences. They used to be events. They used to travel from theater to theater and stay around for a year on the big screen. There was no video. There was no pay per view. There was no bootlegging. You saw it when it came out, when everyone started talking about it, or you didn't see it until years later late at night on tv. With these other avenues opening up in the last couple of decades you see a complete shift in not only the kinds of films that are made but definitely in the ways they are marketed.

It's hard for a lot of people to get excited about seeing a film in the theater when, if they wait a bit, they can see the same movie in the comfort of their own home for less than the price of a night out for the family. They can control the noise level, they can pause it to go to the bathroom, they can choose their own food and beverages, and they can do it without having to interact with anyone else if they choose. They can also do this within four to six months after the film is released theatrically. Many, many people are starting to prefer this. My father is one of them.

As a film lover it saddens me. How can you choose to see something in a format that, while extremely good, is nowhere near as grandiose as the theatrical experience provides? How can you choose to see it in an inferior way? Easy. They don't care that much. The general public has no real need to see a movie on opening weekend, if at all. These are the same people that really have no need of extras on a DVD or that could care less whether the product is in Dolby, DTS, THX, or regular stereo. It doesn't consume them like it does some of us.

Along with this apathy you have what can only be described as a serious glut of information available today. There is more behind the scenes footage today for one film than there was for all films in 1942. There are websites, articles, magazines, books, videos and DVDs, and television programs dedicated to doing nothing but letting the public know about films that are being pitched, sold, scripted, developed, greenlit, shelved, delayed, and spec'ed. Dedicated to letting us know who is making them, how they are doing it, who is financing it, who is getting points and who is taking salary up front, and who just got a three-picture first look deal.

You've got an industry level right now that says if a film doesn't do well on its opening weekend then its dead in the water. So they do everything they can to get you into the theater that first weekend. They don't work up elaborate campaigns to try and build word of mouth, opting instead for quick and flashy showpieces that can be easily categorized. You have a marketing mentality of "if it doesn't fit into a category on Blockbuster's shelves then we haven't nailed it". You have a public that is bombarded by information at an alarming speed and only has so much time and energy to devote to their recreational pursuits. They have to be hooked in these trailers.

In the last few years the trailers that have really stuck with me are the ones that are cut specifically by the filmmaker, not the marketing department or the studio. They are trailers that make you ask "What did I just see?" instead of giving you a pat answer. Instead of feeding you an idea it makes you seek it out. That grabs me. It's a rare thing.

I think people like movies, and I know for sure that we all love movies or we wouldn't be here, but I think most of the public takes movies for granted. Every once in a while something comes along that just kicks them in the pants and says, "This is what it's all about. Remember this feeling?" and the public responds. They just have a really short memory.

 

How can you choose to see it in an inferior way? Easy. They don't care that much.

Rubbish.

I love movies, and in the last 2 years I've seen both LOTR films once each, AOTC twice, The Others and Amelie at the cinema. That's it. Before that I went to the flicks quite a bit.

Why? Time and money. I have a wife who's studying and a child under two. I work full time and study part time. If we had time to go and had money to spare on movie tickets AND baby-sitter we'd go more often. The fact is we can't. So DVD is the next best thing.

It has nothing whatsoever to do with not "caring".

 

I have to object to the person who cited the LotR trailers as not showing too much. Three words: Gandalf the White! I've read the books, but it really sucked for all my friends who hadn't.

-Paul

 

Scott, I wasn't singling out that as the only possible reason. I'm saying that it's a fairly common one amongst the general public. The fact that you are here takes you out of that classification.

The general public, not just in this country but in most of the world, could care less about movies as an art form. I guess I should have made that distinction. We are not the general moviegoing public.

 

I stopped reading at "George Lucas raped their childhood." That's an image that cannot be ignored.

I started again tho, and I feel much the same way.