Movies that should never have been made and why?

[krazeyeyez]

So i am guessing that books wrote a century ago were not influenced by other authors of both the time and those that came before?

Media influencing Media is nothing new, and i just don't see what is so different about the movie industry NOW as opposed to THEN Except there is far more potential through internet, word of mouth etc.. for those smaller quality films you speak of to both find an audience and YOU. Ahh its fun to remember, but rarely do people remember reality and rather the colored picture of what they choose to remember.

[Marcus Wright]

Originally Posted by Diesel

That makes no sense whatsoever. Just because a movie can be appreciated/liked by many it automatically can't be "special" to anyone?

Yes, it makes perfect sense. Its really hard to please everyone at the same time, by playing on their deepest feelings.
Let me explain it this way, I love Avatar, Up, and other mass market movies a lot, but, they will never be as special or as good for me as Ratatouille or Ip man (ratatouille because I love cooking and France myself, and Ip Man because I like martial arts movies and do martial arts myself)

Cant explain any more simpler.

And as for the Pixar sequels, 2nd sequel is still fine, but doing 3rd one, 4th one, sorry, its just too much on most cases (with some exceptions)

[jadedeath]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

IMO, almost every movie made in the last 30 years probably shouldn't have been made.

And almost every book published in the last 30 years probably shouldn't have been made.

And almost every song recorded in the last 30 years probably shouldn't have been recorded.
.

Funny story time, you're on a website that has media put on little discs that right now {for the most part} where the media is mostly from the last 30 years.

Logan

[surfdude12]

Most recent remakes/sequels/prequels/etc. Hollywood needs "remake rehab," and is chronically addicted to unoriginality like a crack addict is addicted to a fix.

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by Marcus Wright

Yes, it makes perfect sense. Its really hard to please everyone at the same time, by playing on their deepest feelings.
Let me explain it this way, I love Avatar, Up, and other mass market movies a lot, but, they will never be as special or as good for me as Ratatouille or Ip man (ratatouille because I love cooking and France myself, and Ip Man because I like martial arts movies and do martial arts myself)

Cant explain any more simpler.

That's fine, that's how it is for you and I can't say/judge how something is for you personally...but that isn't what I'm talking about.

To say they can't/won't be special to anyone? That is completely and utterly absurd.

[Marcus Wright]

Originally Posted by Diesel

That's fine, that's how it is for you and I can't say/judge how something is for you personally...but to say they can't/won't be special to anyone? That is completely and utterly absurd.

I agree with you.
I said my words wrong.
I wanted to mean they will never be special to everyone at the same time, and if they are special to someone, they will not be as special movies for them as some more narrow-audience oriented specific genre movies in which they fall into.

P.S. There should be some kind of genre of movie you like more than others, for me its zombies, horror, martial arts movies, and so on..

[jhiggy23]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

IMO, almost every movie made in the last 30 years probably shouldn't have been made.

And almost every book published in the last 30 years probably shouldn't have been made.

And almost every song recorded in the last 30 years probably shouldn't have been recorded.

But that's normal. This is commercial media. And almost by definition, most of it is going to be crap.

The reason I say "in the last 30 years" is not because I think that movies were better 30 years ago. It's because in the last 30 years (and especially in the last 10) there's vastly MORE media than ever before and because there's more, a smaller percentage will be of quality.

Now lately, in the current economy, the film studio "majors" are actually producing fewer films. But since big budget films must appeal to the masses, almost by definition, most will not be too good. I actually think we were better off in the days when many film budgets were quite small because a film wouldn't have to appeal to everyone in order to make money.

On the one hand, I've traditionally loved movies. But on the other, I'm afraid of being bored to death and there simply isn't much out there these days that seems to be worth my time. I think one of the problems with movies today is that the writers grew up only watching media, not actually doing something interesting in their lives. As a result, almost all media is derivative or self-referential to other media. And of course, due to branding, the desire by execs to create franchises, and a desire for easy marketing, we have absurd remakes and bad sequels.

I think the question that needs to be asked (and one I constantly ask myself) is what movies are there that I would like to see a 3rd time? What movies are there that I could even stand seeing a 2nd time? At the top of this screen is "Most Popular Blu-ray Deals at Amazon" and 15 titles are shown. With the possible exception of Entourage (because I haven't seen all the episodes), there's not one title that I would buy on Blu-ray. Either I'm not interested at all or I saw the film in a theatre and even if I liked it, I have no desire to see it again.

Your logic makes absolutely no sense whatsoever and yes, I read your post all the way through. Yeah, the greater number of films and books being produced means that there are more and more that are of a low quality. That being said, there are indisputably great books and films that come out each and every year. Maybe you should take a look at some of the books that have come out in the past 30 years before making such a ridiculous claim and using the words "almost every." Then, once you realize how wrong you are (and no, this is not subjective at all), you can move on to movies and realize even more how wrong you are, opinion or not. It's true that there are a lot of low quality books and movies that come out every year, but implying that there are very few if any important works is embarassingly inaccurate on an objective level.

[Diesel]

Wait wait wait...Higgy and Logan sound like they are on the same side of an opinion!


Well slap me thrice and hand me to me mama.

[jhiggy23]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Wait wait wait...Higgy and Logan sound like they are on the same side of an opinion!


Well slap me thrice and hand me to me mama.

haha I've agree with him before, although very rarely. This one is way too obvious though and I don't see how anyone can disagree. I think the post made is borderline offensive. I mean really, "almost every" book and movie of the past 30 years shouldn't have been written or made???? I'm baffled at that statement and saying it's his opinion doesn't rectify what's so blatantly wrong about it, I'm sorry.

[Bateman,Patrick]

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

Your logic makes absolutely no sense whatsoever and yes, I read your post all the way through. Yeah, the greater number of films and books being produced means that there are more and more that are of a low quality. That being said, there are indisputably great books and films that come out each and every year. Maybe you should take a look at some of the books that have come out in the past 30 years before making such a ridiculous claim and using the words "almost every." Then, once you realize how wrong you are (and no, this is not subjective at all), you can move on to movies and realize even more how wrong you are, opinion or not. It's true that there are a lot of low quality books and movies that come out every year, but implying that there are very few if any important works is embarassingly inaccurate on an objective level.

Amen!

[jadedeath]

Originally Posted by Diesel

Wait wait wait...Higgy and Logan sound like they are on the same side of an opinion!

Well slap me thrice and hand me to me mama.

Can't have that...

Jhiggy is WRONG!

[Show spoiler]

Logan

[Marcus Wright]

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

Your logic makes absolutely no sense whatsoever and yes, I read your post all the way through. Yeah, the greater number of films and books being produced means that there are more and more that are of a low quality. That being said, there are indisputably great books and films that come out each and every year. Maybe you should take a look at some of the books that have come out in the past 30 years before making such a ridiculous claim and using the words "almost every." Then, once you realize how wrong you are (and no, this is not subjective at all), you can move on to movies and realize even more how wrong you are, opinion or not. It's true that there are a lot of low quality books and movies that come out every year, but implying that there are very few if any important works is embarassingly inaccurate on an objective level.

You didn't understand what he meant. The fact that there were some very good movies released in the last 30 years is too obvious to even argue about, and I am sure he knows and understands that as well.

He was just trying to be excessive in his comments to make them more clear, and that is a right think to do.

You should concentrate more on what he really wanted to mean, your focus of analyzes in his comment is in the wrong direction.

[Diesel]

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

haha I've agree with him before, although very rarely. This one is way too obvious though and I don't see how anyone can disagree. I think the post made is borderline offensive. I mean really, "almost every" book and movie of the past 30 years shouldn't have been written or made???? I'm baffled at that statement and saying it's his opinion doesn't rectify what's so blatantly wrong about it, I'm sorry.

I hate when people make generalizations like that. People who say stuff like that usually base their statements on just the big summer movies that critics pan but which make a lot of money. Those movies are a small portion of what is actually made in the course of a year.

Originally Posted by jadedeath

Can't have that...

Jhiggy is WRONG!

[Show spoiler]

Logan

[jhiggy23]

Originally Posted by Marcus Wright

You didnt understand what he meant. The fact that there were some very good movies released in the last 30 years is too obvious to even argue about, and I am sure he knows and understands that as well.

He was just trying to be excessive in his comments to make them more clear, and that is a right think to do.

You should concentrate more on what he really wanted to mean, your focus of analyzes in his comment is in the wrong direction.

"Trying to be excessive" and making something "more clear" do not go hand in hand. I was once given a great piece of advice from a professor who stated that extreme words should never be used when giving an opinion. Why? Because no matter what, the opinion will be wrong in some way. It also creates vagueness, another means by which to attack a given opinion.

I didn't misunderstand his point. As you state, his use of excess in regards to his word choice made his points more clear. As such, I take them for what they "clearly" state, and that's that very few if any movies and books in the past 30 years have value. If he wanted his words to be taken a different way, which there is no indication that he did, then he should have used different words. My harshness is due to the offense with which his words convey.

[jhiggy23]

Originally Posted by jadedeath

Can't have that...

Jhiggy is WRONG!

[Show spoiler]

Logan

haha

[jhiggy23]

Originally Posted by Diesel

I hate when people make generalizations like that. People who say stuff like that usually base there statements on just the big summer movies that critics pan but which make a lot of money. Those movies are a small portion of what is actually made in the course of a year.

exactly!

[Moviefan2k4]

Well, I'm almost 30 years old myself (I'll hit the "triple-decade" mark on August 15th), and most of the films I grew up watching were those that were made during my lifetime, not before it. In fact, I think the oldest film I've ever seen is probably "The Wizard of Oz", which was definitely played regularly during my childhood. Second to that, the next in line would likely be the original "Psycho", which I saw once and that was enough. Generally speaking, most of the movies I watched growing up (with the exception of a "horror phase" I went through later on) had one thing in common: they were family-friendly (at least, for the most part). Stories like Disney animated films and PG-rated comedies were the norm in my formative years; I never even saw an R-rated film until I was about 15, and it was "My Cousin Vinny".

Nowadays, I barely even go to the movies anymore, because so much of what's made now is about as far from friendly (family or otherwise) as you can get. Call me whatever you will, but I don't see the virtue in packing a 2-hour timeslot with tons of sex, blood, language, or demonic elements. I'd go so far as to say that in 99.9% of situations, those things are not needed to tell a worthwhile story. They're just used as ratings fodder, and rarely anything more. I'll give you an example of what I'm talking about; the following list is of the films from the 2009 calendar year which I saw in theaters; the titles in bold currently sit on my video shelf...

Madea Goes to Jail
Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li
Race to Witch Mountain
X-Men Origins: Wolverine
Terminator Salvation
Up
Michael Jackson's "This Is It"
A Christmas Carol

This year, I've seen exactly two films in theaters...two. So far, it looks like my next theatrical experience will be for "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader", unless I change my mind about "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" (still not sure about it yet). I'm also excited to see "Tron Legacy", but both it and "Dawn Treader" are still about 6 months away...which means I'll likely be a no-show at theaters until then. It's a real shame, too, because as cliche as it sounds, movies really aren't made the same ways anymore. There's far too much political correctness and outright sleaze being placed on the silver screen...and if it keeps escalating, I may wind up abandoning films completely someday. I'd really hate to see that happen.

[Marcus Wright]

Originally Posted by Diesel

I hate when people make generalizations like that. People who say stuff like that usually base there statements on just the big summer movies that critics pan but which make a lot of money. Those movies are a small portion of what is actually made in the course of a year.

Thats what I mean as well.
If you are saying that there are some for specific topic, genre oriented movies out there and they succseed in appealing to their niche public, than I absolutely agree with you.

[surfdude12]

Originally Posted by ZoetMB

IMO, almost every movie made in the last 30 years probably shouldn't have been made.

I think you make some good points, and your overall message is well received, but I don't agree with the strict 30 year rule. One of my friends who produces small films shares the same view. His rule? he refuses to watch any films made after 1976 Do I share his view? hell no. Do I see where he is coming from? yes. Most great films were made before 1980. However, I love many films made after 1980, so can't share his view.

I also agree that many filmmakers today are creativity-starved and the power of marketing has enabled them to stay lazy. Hancock pulled in 9 times what There Will Be Blood did. I rest my case. Seriously, if I'm a screenwriter, why would I bother to think up a Taxi Driver or a There Will Be Blood script, when all I need to do is envision the next super-duper character that Will Smith will play, with the same one-liners? Quality filmmaking is not rewarded in today's market.

[Marcus Wright]

Originally Posted by jhiggy23

"Trying to be excessive" and making something "more clear" do not go hand in hand. I was once given a great piece of advice from a professor who stated that extreme words should never be used when giving an opinion. Why? Because no matter what, the opinion will be wrong in some way. It also creates vagueness, another means by which to attack a given opinion.

I didn't misunderstand his point. As you state, his use of excess in regards to his word choice made his points more clear. As such, I take them for what they "clearly" state, and that's that very few if any movies and books in the past 30 years have value. If he wanted his words to be taken a different way, which there is no indication that he did, then he should have used different words. My harshness is due to the offense with which his words convey.

You are not trying to be cosntructive in your conversations.
Follow your own advice and be better than him, let some thinks just pass and dont give extreme negative opinions about someones elses comment
By overcritisizing him too hard you might make some mistakes in your arguments and e expose them to contraarguments.

P.S. And I was given an advice from my philosophy professor that extreme words should never be replied back with other extreme words, otherwise, its dead end.