The Criterion Collection

[malakaheso]

There are plenty of good films made today, just less genuinely great ones. There will always be interesting films. It is never a complete desert.

[mja345]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

This is a great observation.

Inherent Vice is a good effort, because Sportello (Joaquin Phoenix) is so out of place in the world, but even it pales in comparison to the classic-era detective films.

Michael Fassbender could probably pull of such a film these days, but that's about it.

I really enjoyed The Nice Guys, but, yeah, the daughter reminded me of Penny from the Inspector Gadget cartoons.

I found "The Nice Guys" entertaining, but just wanted it to be better. The daughter was a huge problem with the film for me. Just have the baseline be two really down and out PIs team up to solve a case. There's no need for any cutesy bullshit. I can just see the studio execs going, "The daughter is a cute character, right? Audiences will love her." I can see some people loving the daughter character, just not my bag.

[mja345]

Originally Posted by llj

It's that blue collar factor too. These were guys who looked like they've *lived* hard before becoming an actor. There's a self assuredness here that doesn't exist with many actors today, who are more protected and calculated about how they live now. Also, Hollywood has gone more and more with "pretty boys" of late, so guys with not-exactly-handsome mugs don't get as much of a chance to star in big vehicles anymore.

Absolutely. Right on the money.

[llj]

Good and bad quality are obviously relative, but I think modern films--at least Hollywood ones--tend to care more about delivering a very generalized experience and appeasing the broadest possible audience.

I think there are plenty of interesting, exciting and daring independent and foreign films today--I could probably think of 10 or so great ones I've seen in the past 2 years, but big studio Hollywood movies tend to be worked over by focus groups and executives so that they never get truly bad, but can also be scrubbed of quirks that can make a movie truly great. So you get a lot of very good and average films that entertain but may not necessarily exist in the consciousness after the movie ends.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by mja345

I found "The Nice Guys" entertaining, but just wanted it to be better. The daughter was a huge problem with the film for me. Just have the baseline be two really down and out PIs team up to solve a case. There's no need for any cutesy bullshit. I can just see the studio execs going, "The daughter is a cute character, right? Audiences will love her." I can see some people loving the daughter character, just not my bag.

Speaking of which, the actress who played the daughter will also be appearing in Sophia Coppola's remake of The Beguiled.

I love the original version of The Beguiled, and I cannot imagine it ever being bested, but I might go see the remake just because I'm curious to see how they will handle the turtle scene. With all of the animal rights people and such in this day and age, I cannot imagine it being done the same way.

[belcherman]

Originally Posted by llj

Good and bad quality are obviously relative, but I think modern films--at least Hollywood ones--tend to care more about delivering a very generalized experience and appeasing the broadest possible audience.

I think there are plenty of interesting, exciting and daring independent and foreign films today--I could probably think of 10 or so great ones I've seen in the past 2 years, but big studio Hollywood movies tend to be worked over by focus groups and executives so that they never get truly bad, but can also be scrubbed of quirks that can make a movie truly great. So you get a lot of very good and average films that entertain but may not necessarily exist in the consciousness after the movie ends.

I'm usually the old fart starting sentences with "back in the day ...", but in fairness, there were a lot of crap movies "back in the day." It's just that we tend to only remember the good ones (and rightly so), which skews our perspective a bit.

Having said that, I think the writing just isn't as strong as it used to be. With few exceptions, most movies are tilted on the side of visuals over dialog. How many memorable lines can you remember from movies made in the last 20 years?

I could make an old-farty statement like filmmakers once grew up reading books and listening to the radio, and now they grow up watching videos and playing video games. I could, but I won't.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by belcherman

Having said that, I think the writing just isn't as strong as it used to be. With few exceptions, most movies are tilted on the side of visuals over dialog. How many memorable lines can you remember from movies made in the last 20 years?

Hmm...

"I'm Marry Poppins, y'all!"

"Blah blah blah...all that chit-chat's gonna get you hurt."

"The thing about street fights...the street always wins!"

"What a day! WHAT A LOVELY DAY!!!"

"That's not how the Force works!"

"Today we're cancelling the apocalypse!"

"I got worms as big as my arm!"

--------------------

...you're right, writing has gone downhill.

Seriously though, as I look at the past few years' worth of movies I realize I don't remember the lines or dialogue all that well for most movies. That really isn't the thing that stands out anymore.

Although, these days I find myself marveling at movies that succeed at something with less or no dialogue, and I can think of various examples of that. Show don't tell is still pretty strong writing in the sense that everything you need remains unstated and implicit to the scene and story, but it works on film only when the visuals and performances work. A movie like Moebius works with zero dialogue precisely because of that--wouldn't say it's badly-written, just different.

EDIT:
Got around to thinking about The Dark Knight. It has some of the most memorable dialogue if the last 20 years, and I quote it all the time. But it can be problematic (as critics often cite) because it states the obvious too much (telling instead of showing). Lines like "I'm like a dog that chases cars" sounds cool, but it really never needed to be stated, ever. The story and film did the job of showing those aspects. Same for lines like "we're indecent men in an indecent time," or "this is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an unmovable object." Nice ideas buried beneath these lines, but it's quite on-the-nose and it's a little hard to believe the characters would say these lines in a creditable situation. Sadly, most of Nolan's movies fall into this trap--Inception is always getting pinged as a "two hour slideshow" because of its exposition, and even Memento strikes me as doing a lot of telling to the audience.

It goes to show that memorable dialogue is not always an indicator of a quality script. Then again, maybe a quality script is not always the requisite for a quality movie (after all, Nolan succeeds because of style and talent). So many nuances...

[The Great Owl]

With regard to recent films, I am at least happy that we're finally in an era where computer-generated visuals don't suck if they're done right.

Years ago, even the best high-caliber CGI visuals (The Lord of the Rings trilogy, etc.) would take my mind out of the movie.

These days, I see occasional effects-heavy high budget films and I do not even think about the fact that I'm watching CGI.
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 looks pretty amazing. (The plot is a blatant clone of Forbidden Planet, but the computer visuals are incredibly seamless with the practical effects.)

The world still has a long way to go in this regard, of course. While Wonder Woman was an otherwise good movie, the confrontation during the last half hour looked like a late 1990s video game film adaptation.

[Keymaster]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

I think the fact there are fewer limitations is a big factor. When filmmakers had to worry about the Hays Code and the Legion of Decency they did some creative things to subvert the system.

There's also the rampant use of CGI. It's much easier to add something in post-production. I fear the days of watching films with incredible set and art design like Black Narcissus and Rear Window are long gone.

Most popular films don't interest me. Too many films aim to be awesome in the theaters then are boring on a second watch on home video. I get more from a recent slow-paced Kore-eda or Kiarostami film in addition to the classics.

Yes. Absolutely.

Your statement about too many films aiming to be awesome and flopping upon second viewing echoes my own views. CGI could be a powerful tool if used judiciously and carefully, but it rarely is. More often than not, CGI is applied as a cost and time saving measure.

I long for the days when stuntmen rolled real cars, when the Mos Eisley Cantina was populated by animatronic aliens, and when guys like Tom Savini were a household name.

You guys are a breath of fresh air compared to general movie-going audiences.

[ShellOilJunior]

Originally Posted by belcherman

How many memorable lines can you remember from movies made in the last 20 years?

There's plenty from the work of T.P. Wiseau.

[mja345]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

There's plenty from the work of T.P. Wiseau.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPBPa2BQFRM

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by belcherman

How many memorable lines can you remember from movies made in the last 20 years?

I quote Ghost World frequently.

"I have no desire to talk to anyone who might be calling me."

Nobody realizes that I'm quoting it, though.

...and this drives home the point that I'm a real-life version of Steve Buscemi's Seymour.


(I'm really looking forward to giving my Criterion Blu-ray of Ghost World a spin this weekend. I've been watching a ton of horror movies lately, so I think that I'm going to have a purposeful non-horror weekend. Ghost World, Vision Quest, etc.)

[MassiveMovieBuff]

I think there are quite a bit of good/great films made these days but they just aren't the same as the Golden age of Hollywood along with the 70s-90s IMHO. The 90s were truly the most underrated decade for films. So many great films came out of that decade.

[llj]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

With regard to recent films, I am at least happy that we're finally in an era where computer-generated visuals don't suck if they're done right.

Years ago, even the best high-caliber CGI visuals (The Lord of the Rings trilogy, etc.) would take my mind out of the movie.

These days, I see occasional effects-heavy high budget films and I do not even think about the fact that I'm watching CGI.
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 looks pretty amazing. (The plot is a blatant clone of Forbidden Planet, but the computer visuals are incredibly seamless with the practical effects.)

The world still has a long way to go in this regard, of course. While Wonder Woman was an otherwise good movie, the confrontation during the last half hour looked like a late 1990s video game film adaptation.

In terms of CG spectacle movies, I obviously really liked Mad Max Fury Road. In terms of "check your brain" genre pleasures, I like the John Wick movies.

In general, I don't watch superhero movies unless I'm forced to, or I watch them just to keep up with pop culture. I still like comic books and I was a big Marvel/DC fan when I was a kid, but as a movie genre, superheroes hold zero appeal for me. I also find superhero movie fan culture increasingly off putting.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by llj

In general, I don't watch superhero movies unless I'm forced to, or I watch them just to keep up with pop culture. I still like comic books and I was a big Marvel/DC fan when I was a kid, but as a movie genre, superheroes hold zero appeal for me. I also find superhero movie fan culture increasingly off putting.

I'm still enjoying the Marvel films and such.

I think that the current popularity of superhero movies stems from the fact that, for the first time, the powers-that-be in the studios are people who grew up loving comic books, and that, for the first time in cinema history, we're actually seeing comic book movies, meaning that the movies look exactly like the comic books and that they follow continuity storylines over long spans of time in the same way that actual comic book stories have a continuity from one issue to another. People are looking forward to the next "issue" of The Avengers or X-Men.

[Hoke Moseley]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

Michael Fassbender could probably pull of such a film these days, but that's about it.

You're in luck.

[llj]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

I'm still enjoying the Marvel films and such.

I think that the current popularity of superhero movies stems from the fact that, for the first time, the powers-that-be in the studios are people who grew up loving comic books, and that, for the first time in cinema history, we're actually seeing comic book movies, meaning that the movies look exactly like the comic books and that they follow continuity storylines over long spans of time in the same way that actual comic book stories have a continuity from one issue to another. People are looking forward to the next "issue" of The Avengers or X-Men.

Well, it's actually been almost 20 years now of superheroes ruling Hollywood, so it's not really a new thing anymore, at least to me it doesn't feel like it. (Also--wow, time flies fast. I'd really better get a cracking on those life goals...)

[Keymaster]

Originally Posted by belcherman
How many memorable lines can you remember from movies made in the last 20 years?

[QUOTE=ShellOilJunior;13701765]There's plenty from the work of Tommy Wiseau.[/QUOTE]

Yes ShellOilJunior, you're onto something here.

The Room is the portrait of a tortured soul.

I'm not referring to the central character of the film itself, Johnny, but to the gifted artist behind the lens, filmmaker Tommy Wiseau. For years, he labored in obscurity to pen what The New Yorker calls "...one of the most insightful screenplays of our time."

Now, as Wiseau's legend grows, so do various interpretations of the meaning behind his masterpiece, The Room.

"Clearly, Wiseau's screenplay peels back the layers of his own insecurity. It deconstructs the man to the microscopic. That's why he chose to produce, star in, and direct the picture. It was too deeply personal." -Peter Travers, Rolling Stone Magazine.

"The film's a metaphor for modern times. Football’s become America’s new pastime, divorce rates are skyrocketing, and other social stigmas are paralyzing society. Wiseau's brave. He doesn't shy away from the stench." -Aintitcoolnews

I think... I think, Wiseau must’ve been betrayed. By someone in his past. And having worked with some of the actors that played the crew of the Enterprise, I can empathize with him.” -William Shatner

“I am Groot.” -Groot

[oildude]

Originally Posted by mja345

The thing about detective films back in the day is they were great vehicles for "cool" actors. McQueen, Newman, Nicholson, Bogart, Eastwood, etc. Pacino and Gould in the early 70s exuded that as well. Coburn, Marvin, and Bronson could have also done these type of films. You could put some cool motherf**ker in a detective movie and it would be inherently watchable. They smoke some cigs, have a few drinks, and remain above the fray with some quips as they solve the case and it becomes a great baseline for a film. Hackman wasn't necessarily cool, but made for a good star of these kind of vehicles because he seems like a guy who wakes up with a massive hangover every day.

There aren't many actors who have that cool factor anymore. There are still many great actors, but not many you would say, "Let's just put him in a film and let his cool factor be the baseline we're starting out with." It's not part of the zeitgeist of film any longer. You don't want to watch a detective movie about some a-hole who wakes up, gets his workout in, eats his granola, checks his social media, and then goes out and earnestly solves a case. That's why Shane Black had to set "The Nice Guys" in the 70s, which would have been a much better film had it been made in the 70s and hadn't had the horribly annoying daughter.

Great list and post, like ticking off my favorite actors, detective movie or otherwise. As for the "etc", I would have to include Frank Sinatra and perennially world-weary and rumpled but always great Walter Matthau. Those two had some really awesome performances in the 60s and 70s as detectives.

[javy]

Originally Posted by the great owl

years ago, even the best high-caliber cgi visuals (the lord of the rings trilogy, etc.) would take my mind out of the movie.

Seinfeld_zpsdbce3a3b.jpg