› ›

2013: Has It Been A Good Year For Movies? Your Feedback

WillyGaloreWillyGalore
edited November 2013 in General Movies & TV Posts: 6,396
I admit I haven't seen as many films as I would have liked to this year (although I have my ticket booked for Gravity in a little under two weeks) but generally, from what I've seen, I wouldn't exactly call 2013 a classic year for film.

Only 3 films have so far made it into the "Top 50 Grossing Movies Of All Time" and only one of those hitting the $1 Billion mark (compared to 4 films in 2012).

Of the big blockbusters to be released this year, only Star Trek 2 & Iron Man 3 really impressed me (which was a big improvement over the abysmal IM2). Man of Steel was woefully disappointing. World War Z was average at best. The Lone Ranger and After Earth pretty much tanked. Pixar were below their usual best.

Given that there is not a huge amount for me to look forward to in 2014 (sequels to Transformers, The Amazing Spider-Man, Captain America among them). It looks as though I shall take a cinema bypass until 2015, when at least I can look forward to Bond 24 as well as many others.
«13

Comments

  • SandySandy Somewhere in Europe
    Posts: 4,012
    So far I watched only 2 films I really loved this year (I hope I'm not forgetting something), the latest Star Trek and Gravity. I hope I have a few more that will make it into the list. While I confess I haven't been to the movies that much this year, I expected to have more than two to talk about by now.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    Poor, poor, poor, poor. Probably the worst year for films in recent memory. Terrible film after terrible film, I really cannot wait for 2015. And to bring to an end this horrific year for movies, a Hunger Games sequel, to really make 2013 the worst year for film of the 2000s.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    The first four or five months weren't terribly special - I think I only saw a few films - but I lowered my expectations and saw a bunch that I really loved during the summer. I haven't seen much since, I've just been missing everything I've wanted to see, sadly.
  • SoundofthesinnersSoundofthesinners
    Posts: 3,236
    If there's one positive, it's that we might be starting to see the backlash against mega-blockbusters. There were a lot of big summer bombs, and a fair number of smaller-budget, less action-packed movies did quite well at the box office.

    I'm still looking forward to the superhero offerings in the next two years, though, and I really hope the possible backlash doesn't effect Bond 24.
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    Posts: 12,837
    I don't think it's been a great year, especially compared to 2012 (Skyfall, The Raid, Django, etc). The latest Texas Chainsaw film was stupid, Die Hard 5 was crap, At Worlds End wasn't as good as the other two (still funny though), and I didn't think the Evil Dead remake was anything special.

    I did enjoy Fast and Furious 6, Kick Ass 2, and Hangover 3 surprised me (really enjoyed it, can't believe some people prefer the second one).

    My film of the year though is the Alan Partridge movie. That was great fun.

    Next year I'm looking forward to Expendables 3 and I can't wait for Mad Max 4. Might go and see the Planet Of The Apes sequel too, and Chris Nolan's new film is out. Then in 2015 I'll be seeing Bond 24 and Assassin's Creed.
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    edited November 2013 Posts: 4,516
    There be enough movies from 2012 or 2013 who be released this year i have intrest too. But i haven't seen any movie from 2013 who be released this year.

    Whyle Iron Man 3 be Boxoffice hit of the year, i think Despicable Me 2 the number 2 be biggest winner. Despicable Me 2 ($906.4 million) be Shrek 2 ($919.8) of this year. The movie is promoted a lot and like Shrek 2 and Skyfall thanks to the fact it have title song who helps to promote the movie.

    If we look how some movies on BD be released like Iron Man 3 and Despicable Me 2 with not much extra's (or no extra's at all) then i think it be very bad or even bad year as last couple of years.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    It hasn't been the best of years but then, as we know, the best years are the ones with Bond in them. ;)
  • SoundofthesinnersSoundofthesinners
    Posts: 3,236
    Samuel001 wrote:
    It hasn't been the best of years but then, as we know, the best years are the ones with Bond in them. ;)

    Ain't that the truth. On a side note, the two highest-grossing Bond movies (Skyfall and Thunderball) aren't even the highest grossing movies of the year, since they had the misfortune to be released in the same year as The Avengers and The Sound of Music. A few of the less-high grossing Bond movies are, though. Funny how that works.
  • QBranchQBranch Always have an escape plan. Mine is watching James Bond films.
    Posts: 14,571
    Yeah, it has been a pretty mediocre year for films.

    Oblivion- I didn't expect it to be that good, but I really liked it. In fact, probably my favourite film for the year.

    Iron Man 3- Good fun. I think all 3 films are pretty consistent.

    Star Trek- Enjoyable. On par with the first IMO.

    R.I.P.D- I forget most of it as I was drinking at the time. Need to re-watch it.

    Fast & Furious 6- Pretty good for this kind of film. As good as any of the others.

    After Earth- I didn't expect much from this, but it turned out to be alright.

    Man of Steel- Just okay, a bit disappointed by it.

    World War Z- Nothing new or special here.

    The Lone Ranger- Exactly what I expected- cheese.

    I'm looking forward to seeing Gravity, Machete Kills, Pacific Rim, The World's End, Kick-Ass 2, Riddick, Justin Bieber: Believe ;)
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Pretty darn poor aside from the occasional Gem. It's sad to see movies just degrading into something that is now a masses business. Movies used to be made for certain audiences. Now 95% of them have to be these accessible, by the numbers, made for the masses, blockbusters. This is outright pathetic. If only the big named movie studios would realize that catering to specific audiences would bring in even more revenue. If they did that then movies today might not be so mediocre.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    2015 will be better, and not just because of Bond, but because of the amount of big films coming out that are anticipated by many.

    @thelivingroyale, I'm in the opposite boat, I thought 'The Hangover III' was one of the worst films of the year, and I prefer the first and second to it. It seemed to ditch comedy and just go with outlandishness for the entire running time.

    It's all about money anymore, though: remakes, reboots, or superhero films, that's just about all you see. Every time I check my wave of daily film sites, I see a new remake here, a new sequel there, here's a reboot being penned. If it isn't big with lots of explosions, nobody will want to see it, I guess.
  • WillyGaloreWillyGalore
    edited November 2013 Posts: 6,396
    @Creasy47 It's the one fear I have about Bond once DC hangs up his holster. I just hope to God we're not going to get another reboot/reimagining of the franchise. Let's face it, even Bond is more about making money for those concerned than making good films (although we have been fortunate in this regard in the last few films).
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    Creasy47 wrote:
    It's all about money anymore, though: remakes, reboots, or superhero films, that's just about all you see. Every time I check my wave of daily film sites, I see a new remake here, a new sequel there, here's a reboot being penned. If it isn't big with lots of explosions, nobody will want to see it, I guess.

    This. It's become a soulless machine, pumping out overhyped, garbage just to make money. Steven Spielberg predicts the Movie Industry is going to Implode. And honestly for some studios, I hope it does. So we have a new Renaissance of films. Stuff made with heart. Originality and made for target audiences. A new era of movies. I'm sick of seeing all this Made for everyone films.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,270
    I've not seen any in the cinema, but that's nothing new for me. I did mean to go and watch Alan Partridge in Alpha Papa though, but I guess it's not on any longer.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    @WillyGalore, you're right, sadly. I really, really hope they don't end up doing a reboot or anything come time for DC to leave. Just introduce a new actor and give us a new film: no reboot, no remakes, don't give him a new 007 status, nothing. Just continue with a mission.

    @Murdock, I heard about that interview with Spielberg and Lucas. Give it a while, it seems that that is all studios want to churn out anymore, garbage that makes money, and if it isn't a superhero film or some low budget horror film that they know will make 20x or so the budget, they don't want to do it. All of the films I love that I want sequels to, it won't happen, but it seems that once something comes out and achieves a newfound fame, no matter what their plans were for it, they'll do a sequel. Look at 'Anchorman': popular, successful, always talked about how they didn't need to do a sequel for it, and sure enough, because it makes money, they'll do another. Same with 'Star Wars' now.
  • SoundofthesinnersSoundofthesinners
    Posts: 3,236
    The Bond series has always been reinventing itself and the lack of continuity is legendary. I don't think officially declaring a new actor's role a reboot or just throwing a new actor in and giving him the role makes that much of a difference. I should clarify, though, that I do support all the Bond movies being in one continuity officially. It's just that it really makes no difference from an artistic or business standpoint.
  • Sammm04Sammm04
    Posts: 479
    Yes, it seems like the movie industry is once again starting to get better critically, after the terrible stretch in between 2007 and 2011, movies finally seem to have a meaning and intelligence that they did not have before, best we can hope for to truly end this crap movies being blockbusters is that Michael Bay decides to retire, or loses the power to direct. Measuring greatness by money is stupid. Transformers will never be a great film, not by any sense of the word, so yes it has been a great year for movies.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited November 2013 Posts: 13,355
    Regarding Bond, the reason there will be no 'reboot', as such is because Bond does not have an origin story to fall back on. They tried to with Casino Royale but you wouldn't be able to do that or adapt that novel again. It was a tale you could only tell once.

    As for films today going forwards, I wish them all the best but as long as Bond remains good, I'll always be partly satisfied.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    Posts: 18,270
    Samuel001 wrote:
    Soundofthesinners wrote:
    The Bond series has always been reinventing itself and the lack of continuity is legendary. I don't think officially declaring a new actor's role a reboot or just throwing a new actor in and giving him the role makes that much of a difference. I should clarify, though, that I do support all the Bond movies being in one continuity officially. It's just that it really makes no difference from an artistic or business standpoint.

    The reason there will be no Bond 'reboot', as such is because Bond does not have an origin story to fall back on. They tried to with Casino Royale but you wouldn't be able to do that or adapt that novel again. It was a tale you could only tell once.

    As for films today going forwards, I wish them all the best but as long as Bond remains good, I'll always be partly satisfied.

    That is of course true but wasn't Skyfall a continuation of the "origin story" idea, albeit a filmic version rather than a literary adaptation as Casino Royale was?
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited November 2013 Posts: 13,355
    Well, it just explored a different angle to Bond. You can't do much else with the idea now and It has no hard and fast Fleming rule to something he wrote about. It's very different to say, the story of Batman, Superman, et all and like I said, it's not something EON could or would do again.

    Regardless, this is now going further and further off-topic, so back to films in general. The second Hobbit film should make for a better end to the year.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    Posts: 16,351
    @Creasy47 I don't mind if a movie has sequels. As long as they continue the story arc and brings something new then that's good. However if a sequel is a more stylized remake of the original. (Escape from L.A. Hangover II) Then that isn't a good sequel.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
    I think Star Wars is justified in doing three more films. Lucas did say that he originally planned to do 9. And it makes sense (before the empire, the might of the empire, then after the empire). But the sheer amount of other sequels and such (Independence Day 2, really?) Is really not necessary. We have entered at stage in the film industry where they just churn out any old crap willy-nilly.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    Posts: 13,355
    The Star Wars spin-offs planned fo 2016 and 2018 for example, aren't needed. Why do them? Oh, right, money.
  • SoundofthesinnersSoundofthesinners
    Posts: 3,236
    Samuel001 wrote:
    The Star Wars spin-offs planned fo 2016 and 2018 for example, aren't needed. Why do them? Oh, right, money.

    Hardcore Star Wars fans will probably love them (well, okay, they'll love the idea of them but hate the execution, because Star Wars). There's no shortage of good stuff to pick from the Expanded Universe to film. It's not fair to call it pure money-grabbing.
  • Samuel001Samuel001 Moderator
    edited November 2013 Posts: 13,355
    I'd rather they got VII, VIII and IX out of the way first and then thought about them. This way, with spin-offs, they'll be Star Wars films forever and I just don't see them as necessary. My opinion, of course.
  • SoundofthesinnersSoundofthesinners
    Posts: 3,236
    Marvel seems to be managing well with the big films/little films approach; I don't think they've had a real misstep (critically or financially) since Iron Man. Star Wars has a similar wealth of material to work with, so I'm optimistic (rare words from a Star Wars fan).
  • thelivingroyalethelivingroyale
    edited November 2013 Posts: 12,837
    Creasy47 wrote:
    @thelivingroyale, I'm in the opposite boat, I thought 'The Hangover III' was one of the worst films of the year, and I prefer the first and second to it. It seemed to ditch comedy and just go with outlandishness for the entire running time.

    It's all about money anymore, though: remakes, reboots, or superhero films, that's just about all you see. Every time I check my wave of daily film sites, I see a new remake here, a new sequel there, here's a reboot being penned. If it isn't big with lots of explosions, nobody will want to see it, I guess.

    The first one was much better, that goes without saying, but I had fun watching the 3rd one (thought the 2nd one was just a carbon copy of the first but not as funny).

    I'm sick of the whole gritty reboot trend. Some of them have been good but it's like I said before; for every Casino Royale there's a Sweeney, a Robin Hood and a Man Of Steel (I haven't seen that one but I haven't heard good things about it).

    I'm sick of superhero films too to be honest. I really liked the Dark Knight films and Iron Man was fun but how many of these films are they churning out? Superman, Thor, Wolverine and Iron Man all had films this year and I noticed on Youtube trailers for new X-Man and Captain America films. They're overdoing it and I think eventually one (or more) of these films will bomb at the box office.
  • SoundofthesinnersSoundofthesinners
    Posts: 3,236
    I thought Man of Steel was okay; a lot of the reactions on both sides went overboard. It also only did okay at the box office. It made a lot of money of course, but it was very expensive to produce. It wasn't like The Avengers or Skyfall.

    Thor 2 comes out on Friday (at least in the States). We'll see how it does.
  • Creasy47Creasy47 In Cuba with Natalya.Moderator
    Posts: 40,968
    I wasn't a huge fan of Superman going in to the theater, so I didn't expect much and it really surprised me.
  • MurdockMurdock The minus world
    edited November 2013 Posts: 16,351
    Man Of Steel was the epitome of the Shlocky summer Blockbuster sadly.
Sign In or Register to comment.