My Thoughts on the Movies

JazzManJim

On the Downbeat
Joined
Sep 12, 2001
Posts
27,360
I've seen an awful lot of movies - both good and bad. I've spent three plus hours of my life, and good money, watching both "The Thin Red Line" and "Streetfighter: The Movie" (Yes. Pity me now.)

But I can't say that there have been many movies which have really excited me to any great extent and that's kind of sad to me. There used to be a time when at least once a month, there was a movie out there I really wanted to see. Now, I'm lucky if there are two a year.

So here are my own thoughts on ways to improve movies. Sure, no Hollywood types are going to show up, saving perhaps DCL (but I don't know that he's got the juice to get these to someone who'll listen). Your thoughts and additions are very welcome.

1) Stop making movies based on TV shows. They are inevitably horrible, with only very notable exceptions ("The Blues Brothers", and that was about the music). Put down the old TV Guides and write a real freaking script.

2) If you have to use the soundtrack to push the movie, you have a problem. The only exception to this is if you're making a musical. J Lo and KRS-1 will be just fine without their insipid music in your half-assed movie.

3) Write a good story. Don't worry about star power and flashy effects. They'll come if the story demands it. A strong plot, good setting, and interesting characters will always make for a good movie. If you have those, then your actors and director will make them live, and your audience will be plentiful. Watch "Gosford Park" sometime. You won't be able to walk away, I don't believe.

4) Enough with the sequels. Please? Yes, some movies are meant to be a series. Those are fairly obvious. But please, please, please, stop making sequels after sequel. They're almost never as good as the original (saving perhaps "The Wrath of Khan", and "Aliens"), and they get worse and worse after that.

5) Be daring. Step away from the tried and true and stake out your own ground. Nearly every time a filmmaker has done this, it's translated into, if not a good movie, at least a movie that gets buzz and attention. Be different from everyone else. Tell us somethign in a way that no one else is, or has, before. Show us something we've never seen before. If you don't believe me, ask M Night Shmalyan.

6) Remember that we are smarter than you think we are. Give up the glib turn of phrase. Show us the plot twist you don't think we'll understand. Plumb the depths of a topic you don't think we see enough and gie it to us in a way we don't expect. We can think very well if you give us reason to.

7) Edit a quality trailer. Don't give us too little or too much. If there's a major plot twist, for the love of God, don't give it away in the trailer! Trailers are there to whet our interest. Whet it, don't sate it! Oh, and along this topic, please stop using Verdi's Requiem, Mozart's Requiem, Orff's Carmina Burana, and that Click Click Boom song in your trailers?

8) If you're making an action movie, it's perfetly fine to write compelling characters and snappy dialogue. In fact, you should. This is what made "Die Hard" such a great movie. There were undercurrents of real humanity. There were good characters, and great dialogue. You can step head and sholders above the competition if you just expend a small amount of effort.

9) Revisit some of the old styles and give them a touch of the new. Make a noir movie, but set it in a new place (Hong Kong? Undersea?), give us a character study built into an action movie ("Starship Troopers - the book, not the movie!), do a Western, but set it elsewhere (Manhattan, The Arabian Desert). Do a hanuted house movie, but make it an elevator or an alley or something like that. Shake it up a bit and see what falls out.
 
I like to see more indie movies. Even the bad one that end up on ''OutThere''. They - at least to me - display efforts.
 
I subsist almost entirely on a cinematic diet of Independent and Foreign Films. However, being a child of the 1970's I still see each new "Star Wars" installment, even though I know going in that it will be utter crap.

Major release Hollywood movies aren't supposed to be good. They are purposely written as transparent formulaic crap, full of car chases and explosions and automatic weapons fire. Character development and plot would only alienate their targeted audience. They are the lowest common denominator in a society full of people who find fake wrestling and stock car racing entertaining. Just as with popular music, there is usually very little art in what appeals to the masses. I can't even imagine what goes through the mind of an adult when they sit down to watch "Triple X" or "Die Another Day."



Currently due back by Midnight:
  • "Being John Malkovich"
  • "Annie Hall"
  • "Princesa"
 
I like movies. I see a lot of them.

I have to take issue with how people push 'indie' movies as any better than Hollywood. Sure, there are some gems. Hollywood has some gems too. But like Hollywood, a lot of it is utter shit.


Remember kiddos, sometimes there's a reason it has to be independent, and it ain't always a good reason.
 
Cuckolded_BlK_Male said:
They are the lowest common denominator in a society full of people who find fake wrestling and stock car racing entertaining.
LOL

I love Diane Keaton. In which movie of her's was she murdered by sexually confused Tom Berenger?
 
My rule is that 90% of any kind of entertainment will always be crap. Lots of people will pay to absorb that crap, so that ratio probably won't ever change. And if they're entertained, it probably shouldn't change. Supply & demand, never go broke underestimating the public...that sort of thing.

Watching a good movie is way up there on the list of pleasing things to do - and all it requires is selectivity and a couple hours (and preferably a date).
 
1) Movies based on TV shows have a built-in audience and awareness factor which will more illey bring people in the first weekend. In an age when studios only release a dozen features each year, they all have to make money out of the gate. It's a business, and more of these crapolla fests have made money than lost.

2) Soundtracks make a tremendous amount of money and help finance pictures, so Madonna's got a career.

3) It all starts with a good story, but studios aren't neccessarily after a good story, they're after a good opening weekend, and stars will bring that in. So will FX. Spider-man made a lot more money than Gosford Park.

4) Re: the sequels -- see the rationale above for making things based on TV shows. Same thing.

5) Re being daring. Studios putting 50 milion into a pic are already being daring. They'd rather hedge their bets. Please don't misunderstand me to say that they actually know what they're doing when they hedge their bets. The point is that they're more often right thatn wrong about the crap people are willing to see. Otherwise they'd be out of business.

6) They don't care how smart you are. They care about getting you into the seats that first weekend. If that means giving you a smart script every once in a while, they'll try. But, remember, smart scripts don't fall off trees. No one sets out to write a stinker.

7)Re: trailers. Marketing departments will tell you right off that they don't care if they give away anything with a trailer. All they care about is getting you to buy a ticket.

8) Re: action movie dialogue -- again, no one sets out to write a stinker.

9) "Revisit some of the old styles and give them a touch of the new." This is actually something Hollywood does all the time, though you may not notice it.


Bottom line is that the films have to make money, and studios no longer trust auters and directors since "Heaven's Gate". Studio heads honeslty don't care all that much about quality, except to hire the best quality people they can find and hope for the best. The smartest studios hire smaller production companies, like Pixar, that actually do care and agree with every single thing you said up there. When they do that, they usually win.
 
ChilledVodka said:
LOL

I love Diane Keaton. In which movie of her's was she murdered by sexually confused Tom Berenger?

Why that would be the first movie that I ever saw on HBO way back in 1975, "Looking for Mr. Goodbar." Personally, even at nine years old, I thought that there was more chemistry between her and Levar Burton.

I absolutely love her in "Manhattan." For some reason that's the Diane Keaton performance that really does it for me.


Incidentally I saw my first music video that same night. It was "video killed the radio star," on HBO's video jukebox.

Actually, I think that was 1976
 
Last edited:
That was Richard Gere was in "Goodbar".

mg39.JPG
 
Jim, Look back at older movies. Tons of great work there instead of paying so much for new films. Ive been focused on older films for years and have yet to feel as though Im missing much at the box office.

Of course if soemthign catches my eye I throw my money down and go to the theatre, but its not my default movie choice.
 
From Filmbug.com
Tom Berenger
Tom Berenger was nominated for a 1987 Academy Award as Best Supporting Actor for his role as the sociopathic, battle-scarred Sergeant Barnes in Oliver Stone's Oscar-winning Platoon. He also won a Golden Globe for Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role for the film. He will next star with Sylvester Stallone in the police thriller Eye See You.
His first film assignments included the gritty role as Diane Keaton's murderer in Looking For Mr. Goodbar
 
modest mouse said:
Jim, Look back at older movies. Tons of great work there instead of paying so much for new films. Ive been focused on older films for years and have yet to feel as though Im missing much at the box office.

Of course if soemthign catches my eye I throw my money down and go to the theatre, but its not my default movie choice.



I agree.


I love older movies and if I'm in the mood to sit down and watch something I check out what's on AMC or TMC before I will HBO or whatnot.

They have the substance that a good many modern movies lack.
 
modest mouse said:
Jim, Look back at older movies. Tons of great work there instead of paying so much for new films. Ive been focused on older films for years and have yet to feel as though Im missing much at the box office.

Of course if soemthign catches my eye I throw my money down and go to the theatre, but its not my default movie choice.

There is a theatre near my home that shows old movies on the big screen. I love that place. No matter how many times that I've seen them , movies like "Spartacus" and "Casablanca" are magical on the big screen.

You can't swing a dead cat around here without hitting an arthouse theatre, which is kind of cool being that I'm in the post-industrial rust belt.
 
JazzManJim said:
Oh, and along this topic, please stop using Verdi's Requiem, Mozart's Requiem, Orff's Carmina Burana, and that Click Click Boom song in your trailers?


I'll second that and add:

Original scores from other recent movies. Gangs of New York used music from Gettysburg.
 
modest mouse said:
Jim, Look back at older movies. Tons of great work there instead of paying so much for new films. Ive been focused on older films for years and have yet to feel as though Im missing much at the box office.

Of course if soemthign catches my eye I throw my money down and go to the theatre, but its not my default movie choice.

or non american movies.
Der Tunnel from Germany
Almodovar's from Spain
Amore perros from Mexico
...
 
Re: Re: My Thoughts on the Movies

celiaKitten said:
I'll second that and add:

Original scores from other recent movies. Gangs of New York used music from Gettysburg.

Delibes "Flower Duet" from "Lakme" is also waaaayyyyy over-used.
 
Back
Top