› ›

Where is the new stuff?

patbpatb
in General Movies & TV Posts: 4,617
Interesting experience re visit to cinema tonight. Posters for latest Alen movie, trailers for next in the series of Star Wars and Blade Runner and Batman.

You have to remind yourself that these series did start from scratch and I was lucky enough to live in this era when so many new classic movies came out. Why are we so short of new "game changers"? or is it rose tinted specs?

Comments

  • RobertsonRobertson
    edited June 2017 Posts: 170
    delete
  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    edited May 2017 Posts: 6,432
    I am sure potential game changers exist it's just Hollywood won't take many risks, and rebooting old franchises in theory has a ready made audience because of a recognised IP.

    This is how many prequel/sequels/reboots that are out this year alone its crazy...


    Expletives... they list upcoming prequel/sequels/reboots...
  • MilovyMilovy
    Posts: 676
    I've found it really strange to see Harrison Ford dusting off icons like Indy, Han Solo and Deckard in the past 10 years, and I wasn't even alive in the '80s. Like Hollywood is all out of ideas and all we get now is nostalgia trips.

    But it's all about the brand now. Studios exploiting existing properties so they can be guaranteed a ready-built audience. Baywatch. Pirates of the Caribbean. Captain Underpants. Beauty and the Beast. And those are just movies currently in cinemas. It's cynical as hell and gives the feeling of a culture in stasis.

    I wonder if the market will ever get burnt out on this stuff. Is Disney really going to release a new Star Wars movie and 3 Marvel movies every year? Is that going to last until the world ends, then? And I'm sick of seeing Star Wars everywhere. Oh, it's the 40th anniversary of A New Hope? It's C3P0's birthday? Who gives a shit. These movies have only been back in pop culture for a couple years now and already I've stopped caring.
  • 007ClassicBondFan007ClassicBondFan
    Posts: 2,270
    Milovy wrote: »

    I wonder if the market will ever get burnt out on this stuff. Is Disney really going to release a new Star Wars movie and 3 Marvel movies every year? Is that going to last until the world ends, then? And I'm sick of seeing Star Wars everywhere. Oh, it's the 40th anniversary of A New Hope? It's C3P0's birthday? Who gives a shit. These movies have only been back in pop culture for a couple years now and already I've stopped caring.

    I agree, Disney pumps these movies out as if they're some sort of factory. Seeing all these Star Wars movies coming out, to me at least, loses the novelity of the series, which by the time Force Awakens came out, was already long gone after the prequels.
  • Some_Kind_Of_HeroSome_Kind_Of_Hero
    Posts: 6,844
    True, much of what comes out today is rebooted, remade, reheated, rehashed, but there are occasional "original" properties emerging. If using Batman as an example and allowing works based on literary material, you have the LOTR films as recently as the early 00s and the great wave of Avengers films (Iron Man, Captain America, Thor, etc.) plus Guardians of the Galaxy, which was huge and born franchise-ready.
  • MilovyMilovy
    Posts: 676
    Franchise. Makes movies sound like a fast food chain.
  • Major_BoothroydMajor_Boothroyd Republic of Isthmus
    edited June 2017 Posts: 2,722
    Robertson wrote: »
    Deadpool was the best film of 2016.

    Which says a lot for 2016 - seeing as Deadpool was just another superhero origin story with a clever first half structure.

    2016 was awful for marquee films 'event' films.

    What is on the increase is the quality of independent, art house horror films particularly 'The Witch', 'A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night', 'It Follows' all of which include strong female characters and contain interesting thematic commentary on suppression of female sexuality.

  • Some_Kind_Of_HeroSome_Kind_Of_Hero
    Posts: 6,844
    Milovy wrote: »
    Franchise. Makes movies sound like a fast food chain.

    Have it your way.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,804
    Some_Kind_Of_Hero wrote: »
    Milovy wrote: »
    Franchise. Makes movies sound like a fast food chain.

    Have it your way.

    Hahahahahahaha! Well played!
  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    edited June 2017 Posts: 6,432
    Television on streaming services is where creativity flourishes as apposed to the majority of film, I am watching Twins Peaks: The Return and its far more interesting than any film I have watched in years due to Lynch being able to work with hardly any restriction.

    Main stream franchise films have adopted the formula that Bond started, The Force Awakens is a prime example of hitting certain beats to create that familiarity of far superior earlier films.The difference with Bond is most of the formula was fun, and Bond has arguably four or five variations of its formula which allows Eon to freshen things up when needed. I fear in a few years many will be disinterested in for example Star Wars diluted product, Disney will bleed it dry for money in the mean time. George Lucas got stick at times though he worked outside the system and had a vision, the prequels were problematic though there is an abundance of creativity in them.
  • Major_BoothroydMajor_Boothroyd Republic of Isthmus
    edited June 2017 Posts: 2,722
    fire_and_ice wrote: »
    Television on streaming services is where creativity flourishes as apposed to the majority of film, I am watching Twins Peaks: The Return and its far more interesting than any film I have watched in years due to Lynch being able to work with hardly any restriction.

    Main stream franchise films have adopted the formula that Bond started, The Force Awakens is a prime example of hitting certain beats to create that familiarity of far superior earlier films.The difference with Bond is most of the formula was fun, and Bond has arguably four or five variations of its formula which allows Eon to freshen things up when needed. I fear in a few years many will be disinterested in for example Star Wars diluted product, Disney will bleed it dry for money in the mean time. George Lucas got stick at times though he worked outside the system and had a vision, the prequels were problematic though there is an abundance of creativity in them.

    I think Rogue One has planted the seeds of the future possibilities of the Star Wars universe; allowing different story tones and cinematography styles to seep into the series and expand the scope of 'what is' a star wars film.

    'Franchises' in the 70s/80s were born of two things - either it was among the top grossing film of its year (Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Ghostbusters, Back To The Future, Rocky, Jaws) or they were horror films that were relatively cheap to produce (Friday the 13th, Halloween, Nightmare on Elm Street). These were more 'sequels' than 'franchises' and they weren't particularly interested in dense world building the way the current superhero films are (and for that matter Star Wars films.) Where the importance of forced continuity and canonical story elements is near paramount.

    I agree that Bond has been fortunate to adapt style, tone and even the central character and along with it expectations of what constitutes a Bond film. Sure, us fans will always debate over what the vital ingredients are - but the series has survived and even thrived with those changes.

    One thing I'm thankful for is the inconsistency of Bond releases - from every year - to every two years to every three or four now. In the mind of the regular moviegoer the Bond character's ability to recede from the forefront of the consciousness means that there is a chance that they still see the Bond films as an 'event'. Rather than superhero films now which means that Tony Stark or Captain America has barely been off the screen for longer than 12 months in nearly a decade. Not to mention all the publicity, marketing and merchandise that goes along with that. Star Wars is similar being released every year but this brings me back to my opening comment - that there is a chance for more thematic, stylistic and character diversity in the Star Wars universe - if they should take the admittedly small kernels of encouragement that exist in Rogue One and decide to truly expand beyond the 'episode' series (1-VII) style.
  • fire_and_icefire_and_ice
    edited June 2017 Posts: 6,432
    Indeed less is more I remember back in 1996/97 hearing about three new Star Wars films proceeding the reissue of the Original trilogy it was an event the whole build up. Even The Force Awakens was an event after a decade break, 'practical effects' and 'TFA will make up for the prequels' was Disneys selling point everyone bought it based on the box office.

    Rogue One I preferred though that had a third of the film reshot due to a tone being even more far removed from Star Wars, and it would appear Disney played it safe(r). The Last Jedi is out this Christmas and I am fatigued on Star Wars already after only just seeing and purchasing Rogue One, at this time my interest in another Star Wars film is very low.

    Back in the 70's directors had greater freedom and many now regarded great movies came out of nowhere, regarding sequels I have heard many a great director/writer say we will only come back if the story is right in decades past. Now getting story right plays no part films will get made no matter what, Marvel make fun movies though they are pretty basic for the most part. DC try to be more ambitious though fall short, I have loved DC comics all my life though I am getting bored of superhero overload.

    Eon keep Bond fans dangling on a thread drip feeding information or giving us nothing at all, it keeps us all on tender hooks based on the Bond 25 production thread. I have learnt to switch of from Bond during periods of none activity, then when production starts I am refreshed and up for a new film. Heaven forbid if we got a Bond film every year
  • DennisonDennison
    Posts: 1,031
    Major_Boothroyd wrote: »
    Robertson wrote: »
    Deadpool was the best film of 2016.

    Which says a lot for 2016 - seeing as Deadpool was just another superhero origin story with a clever first half structure.

    2016 was awful for marquee films 'event' films.

    What is on the increase is the quality of independent, art house horror films particularly 'The Witch', 'A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night', 'It Follows' all of which include strong female characters and contain interesting thematic commentary on suppression of female sexuality.

    Film companies need the tent-pole movies so that they can finance the other films that they make.
  • patbpatb
    edited June 2017 Posts: 4,617
    No problem with a serries or a franchise but, by definition, there has to be a first movie to kick it off. Just seems to be a lack of originality in this decade compared to others. They can have Bladerunner, Alien and Star Wars movies in 40 years time. We need new, original movies to get excited about. When I first went to see Bladerunner, Alien etc at the movies, I had no idea we would still be discussing them in 2017. Surely there must be some good scripts out there?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Any standalone pictures from the last two or three years you think might end up as franchises?
  • zebrafishzebrafish <°)))< in Octopussy's garden in the shade
    Posts: 4,341
    Who are we to complain about successful, long-running movie franchises? If the people like it and it makes money, why not continue to make sequels as long as they fill the cinemas? Bond is exactly about this, but does it very cleverly by reinventing itself constantly and not putting too much emphasis on continuity.

    The question nowadays is really, how many more superheros can we stomach? And why do we need them in the first place?
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    Last year was a great year for movies I thought. Off the top of my head there Deepwater Horizon, The Shallows, Hell or High Water and The Conjuring 2. And even this year we've had T2 Trainspotting, Free Fire, John Wick 2 and Jawbone. A couple of those are sequels I know but none are massive franchises like Marvel and Star Wars.

    I think there are still very good original films being made, it's just the blockbusters that seem dead creatively. I'm as sick of the ongoing CGI filled superheroathon as the rest of you.

    There are some good blockbusters every now and again though. I think the best of the last few years are the new Planet Of The Apes films. They seem to be getting better and better. The first one was very good, the second was amazing and I really can't wait for the new one. It feels like a proper epic trilogy too, I love how things have escalated and progressed in a satisfying way.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited July 2017 Posts: 4,521
    There are to much movies (and now also to much tv series).

    Also to much are canceld/give up after one season, whyle it need 2 or 3 seasons. Also i think there are series where can let us wait 1 year or 1,5 year between a season. But no insteed there canceld it. With some series series we must wait 2 or 3 years or canceld for my country. Or there canceld it in the original Country (Vs/UK) it is not fames enough any more, but world wide it is.

    There are enough not sequels i am intrest in, shame that some of them not be released on BD or not released at all. It also be almoost impossible to watch movie on comercial tv who is longer riginal screentime of 116 minutes. Stil i like to see Die Hard 5 on tv, who is not been on Dutch tv yet weird enough.
Sign In or Register to comment.