Why aren't new movies better?
- Thread starter Nate North
- Start date
OP said:
...and revived by Aquarion...
http://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s15e07-youre-getting-old
Really.
There will always be good movies, and there will always be bad movies.
Love the ones you love.
I think the movies you watch around the ages of 8-12 will always hold a very nostalgic spot in your heart and your perception will be bias towards them. Those younger years are critical in how you shape your world view and I think a lot of artists are heavily influenced by what they see and experience at those ages. For me personally, watching Robocop for the first time blew my mind, I remember watching it over and over again.
However, I think No Country For Old men is probably the Cohen Brothers best film, anything Pixar has done in the last ten years matches the best family movies of any time, and I feel the Bourne series ranks high on almost anyones list of action movies. The Superhero movies of the last ten years like Iron man, Spiderman 2, and the Dark Knight are arguably the best ones, haven't seen Thor and X-Men first class yet but critics seem to have loved them. I'm eagerly looking forward to the latest works of Darren Aronofsky, David Fincher, Paul Thomas Anderson, Christopher Nolen, Wes Anderson, Spike Jones, and Quentin Taratino who have made outstanding movies over the last decade.
Have hope, the future of film is very much alive.
However, I think No Country For Old men is probably the Cohen Brothers best film, anything Pixar has done in the last ten years matches the best family movies of any time, and I feel the Bourne series ranks high on almost anyones list of action movies. The Superhero movies of the last ten years like Iron man, Spiderman 2, and the Dark Knight are arguably the best ones, haven't seen Thor and X-Men first class yet but critics seem to have loved them. I'm eagerly looking forward to the latest works of Darren Aronofsky, David Fincher, Paul Thomas Anderson, Christopher Nolen, Wes Anderson, Spike Jones, and Quentin Taratino who have made outstanding movies over the last decade.
Have hope, the future of film is very much alive.
I'm pretty sure it was Seth MacFarlane who once said (I'm paraphrasing), "Yeah message boards used to be way better in the beginning. They totally suck now. They should just stop." 
For me it seems that modern films are, of course this is a subjective view, not as good as older films for a few reasons
- Lots of remakes - In the past few years, films like Halloween, Friday The 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street, Let The Right One In and countless others have been remade. To me remakes aren't as good because they aren't original ideas.
- Lots of sequels - Loads of sequels have been made, like the new Scream movie and such. Again, sequels aren't as original as they tend to be formulaic retellings of the same story.
- Very commercial - A lot of films seem to be quite commercial and stuff like that so it seems you're less likely to find films that are considered "art"
However, there are still good, original films coming out, I mean, for me, Mulholland Drive was great, Inglorious Basterds and plenty of other stuff was great too, so it's clearly not an entirely barren waste of production, although it can be argued that there are less high caliber films out there.
- Lots of remakes - In the past few years, films like Halloween, Friday The 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street, Let The Right One In and countless others have been remade. To me remakes aren't as good because they aren't original ideas.
- Lots of sequels - Loads of sequels have been made, like the new Scream movie and such. Again, sequels aren't as original as they tend to be formulaic retellings of the same story.
- Very commercial - A lot of films seem to be quite commercial and stuff like that so it seems you're less likely to find films that are considered "art"
However, there are still good, original films coming out, I mean, for me, Mulholland Drive was great, Inglorious Basterds and plenty of other stuff was great too, so it's clearly not an entirely barren waste of production, although it can be argued that there are less high caliber films out there.
Because a movie is art... It can't change easily
I don't think there are any less artistic films being made than there ever were. In fact, I think audiences are more open to intelligent films than they were. Let's take a relatively easy comparison: Blade Runner was a well made, intelligent sci-fi film. According to Box Office Mojo, it has a lifetime domestic gross of just shy of 33 million, counting two re-releases since 1982. Opening weekend of 6 million. Inception was also a well made, intelligent sci-fi film. With a domestic gross of 292 million. Since last year. Opening weekend of 62 million. Even factoring inflation and 3d tickets, it CRUSHED one of the classics of sci-fi film.
As others have said, there are plenty of art films being made these days. They take a little effort to find, but the local cinemas (in the US anyway) weren't exactly showing Bergman films in the 60s either. I am fortunate to live in a very indie/artfilm friendly town (which always surprises people who haven't actually been to Pittsburgh), but even in mainstream cinema there are some great films being made. It's even a great time for genre films; comic book films are being taken seriously, there is some GOOD horror being made alongside the endless remakes, hell, even fantasy movies (my personal favorite) are kinda trendy right now, thanks to Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter.
If there was ever an era where movies were, generally speaking, better and more artistic, we never would have had Mystery Science Theater.
Oh, and I'll second the Pan's Labyrinth, and add my usual two, Inland Empire and the Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, for brilliant films in recent years!
As others have said, there are plenty of art films being made these days. They take a little effort to find, but the local cinemas (in the US anyway) weren't exactly showing Bergman films in the 60s either. I am fortunate to live in a very indie/artfilm friendly town (which always surprises people who haven't actually been to Pittsburgh), but even in mainstream cinema there are some great films being made. It's even a great time for genre films; comic book films are being taken seriously, there is some GOOD horror being made alongside the endless remakes, hell, even fantasy movies (my personal favorite) are kinda trendy right now, thanks to Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter.
If there was ever an era where movies were, generally speaking, better and more artistic, we never would have had Mystery Science Theater.
Oh, and I'll second the Pan's Labyrinth, and add my usual two, Inland Empire and the Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, for brilliant films in recent years!
I have seen some awsome movies in the last ten years or so. How about Fight Club, The Departed, The Town, Avatar, The Aviator, Catch Me if You Can, Fast and Furious, The Social Network, Fast Five, The Other Guys, Fantastic 4, Scott Pilgrim, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, Dark Night, Inception, Gone in 60 Sec, Lord of War, Blow, Pirates of the Caribbean, Ghost Rider, Men In Black II, Bad Boys II, Kick Ass, The Punisher, X2, etc...
I prefer movies that use actual stunts and real cars and explosions versus fake cgi. I prefer movies that use good actors. If they use CGI it must be done well and have real acting talent to back it too. The story must be good too. Of course the story, the director, the actors, the stunt team, the editing, the music and sound effects all play a role.
I wonder if the loss of DVD sales if part of the reason more good films don't come out. I think the studios are playing it safe trying to put out as many sequels as possible because they are a safer investment.
I prefer movies that use actual stunts and real cars and explosions versus fake cgi. I prefer movies that use good actors. If they use CGI it must be done well and have real acting talent to back it too. The story must be good too. Of course the story, the director, the actors, the stunt team, the editing, the music and sound effects all play a role.
I wonder if the loss of DVD sales if part of the reason more good films don't come out. I think the studios are playing it safe trying to put out as many sequels as possible because they are a safer investment.
Last edited:
I think you have to define what a good film is. What's it's purpose? Lawrence Of Arabia was an amazing movie but many people today find the film too long and drawn out. Citizen Kane was an epic for filmmaking and subject matter, but again today's audiences won't/don't understand the revolutions of that film, so it appears "whatever" (as one girl I know said).
I'm working on a four picture deal and all of the films are syfy based with a lot of underlining intelligence and logic, but still plays to the wider audiences - simple and fun. However, most films that come out flash a bunch of action, mixed with a girl with nice tatas, tossing in a couple named actors and with a half decent marketing campaign, make a good deal of money. Some of those mindless films are decent (there bore me most of the time but hey, sometimes you need not to think) and the people will keep going back for more.
I think the problem isn't with the audience that goes to those movies but the lack of marketing, and awareness of smaller, indie films we like. You don't even know they exist and may not be making the effort to find them. It's like punk in the 80's.
I'm working on a four picture deal and all of the films are syfy based with a lot of underlining intelligence and logic, but still plays to the wider audiences - simple and fun. However, most films that come out flash a bunch of action, mixed with a girl with nice tatas, tossing in a couple named actors and with a half decent marketing campaign, make a good deal of money. Some of those mindless films are decent (there bore me most of the time but hey, sometimes you need not to think) and the people will keep going back for more.
I think the problem isn't with the audience that goes to those movies but the lack of marketing, and awareness of smaller, indie films we like. You don't even know they exist and may not be making the effort to find them. It's like punk in the 80's.
I think the people who complain about the state of movies .....don't see enough movies! Those statements always remind me of what my grandparents and parents used to say. Of course, the older they got, the less they watched, hence they didn't uncover the sometimes hard to find gems.
The reason I make movies, is that I love watching movies. Nothing pisses me off more than hearing an actor (recently Johnny Depp, Kevin Bacon) saying that they refuse to watch movies they have been in. What an ego some people have - they are too concerned with their own appearance/performance to actually watch what they were a small part off, or "It's just a job."
Back to the point, the state of the art is always advancing - cinematography, editing, acting, effects. Look at the pace of movies now, compared with the movies of the 40's, 50's 60's, many of which had long master shots and very few closeups, but a lot of that can be attributed to their small budgets and how quickly they were shot. Movies were shot in a couple of weeks, as opposed to 6 - 8 months. Still, that makes the movies with time and money look slicker. The acting is usually better, because there were many more takes to choose from.
Do you ever go back and look at your favorite STAR TREK or INCREDIBLE HULK episode - you see a guy in a goofy lizard suit and lots of styrofoam rocks. (I still watch them, lovingly.) Kirk pushes a crewman into huge boulder and even though it moves...., they don't do a retake, because they were shooting fast.
I show my kids the current BATMAN series and then put a Tim Burton version in, which is nowhere near as serious. My kids say, "that looks goofy, this is old." Forget getting them to watch the early movies that thrilled me, like IT! THE TERROR FROM BEYOND SPACE, THEM!, FORBIDDEN PLANET, etc.
Obviously, I'm into more horror/sci-fi oriented stuff, but those are hard genres to pull off. Immediately, they put you (as a filmmaker) behind the 8 ball, because the concepts or situations can be outlandish and require more suspension of disbelief than any drama. It's interesting to see which ones still hold up - EXORCIST, ALIEN(S), BLADERUNNER, etc.
The last 3 movies I've seen at the theater have been pretty darn good - SOURCE CODE ( by Duncan Jones who made the fabulously simple but effective, MOON), X-MEN: FIRST CLASS and SUPER 8. Really great character interaction in those last two. I'm looking forward to the future, especially Ridley Scott's ALIEN prequels - PROMETHEUS. Just the thought of it has me giddy as a 5 year old on Christmas!
The reason I make movies, is that I love watching movies. Nothing pisses me off more than hearing an actor (recently Johnny Depp, Kevin Bacon) saying that they refuse to watch movies they have been in. What an ego some people have - they are too concerned with their own appearance/performance to actually watch what they were a small part off, or "It's just a job."
Back to the point, the state of the art is always advancing - cinematography, editing, acting, effects. Look at the pace of movies now, compared with the movies of the 40's, 50's 60's, many of which had long master shots and very few closeups, but a lot of that can be attributed to their small budgets and how quickly they were shot. Movies were shot in a couple of weeks, as opposed to 6 - 8 months. Still, that makes the movies with time and money look slicker. The acting is usually better, because there were many more takes to choose from.
Do you ever go back and look at your favorite STAR TREK or INCREDIBLE HULK episode - you see a guy in a goofy lizard suit and lots of styrofoam rocks. (I still watch them, lovingly.) Kirk pushes a crewman into huge boulder and even though it moves...., they don't do a retake, because they were shooting fast.
I show my kids the current BATMAN series and then put a Tim Burton version in, which is nowhere near as serious. My kids say, "that looks goofy, this is old." Forget getting them to watch the early movies that thrilled me, like IT! THE TERROR FROM BEYOND SPACE, THEM!, FORBIDDEN PLANET, etc.
Obviously, I'm into more horror/sci-fi oriented stuff, but those are hard genres to pull off. Immediately, they put you (as a filmmaker) behind the 8 ball, because the concepts or situations can be outlandish and require more suspension of disbelief than any drama. It's interesting to see which ones still hold up - EXORCIST, ALIEN(S), BLADERUNNER, etc.
The last 3 movies I've seen at the theater have been pretty darn good - SOURCE CODE ( by Duncan Jones who made the fabulously simple but effective, MOON), X-MEN: FIRST CLASS and SUPER 8. Really great character interaction in those last two. I'm looking forward to the future, especially Ridley Scott's ALIEN prequels - PROMETHEUS. Just the thought of it has me giddy as a 5 year old on Christmas!
To paraphrase Jack Nicholson's character in As Good As It Gets, "Those people can shampoo my crotch."
Lawrence of Arabia is my favorite movie of all time. It's like a religious experience for me; just thinking about its beauty makes me weep. If I can make a movie one-tenth that good in my lifetime I will die fulfilled.
As you were.