Quote:
Originally Posted by jadedeath
It's not even remotely a 'trailer trash form'
Once you get into the 4th installment of any movie, it's being made for the profit and not the art.
|
Perhaps if you were making the argument that film series with this many installments don't set precedents you might have an argument. By this, since you seem to be incapable of deciphering what I'm saying (amazingly), I mean to say that one might think that a film in a long standing series will not affect the way studios make films which are perhaps not in said type of series in the future, but I disagree with this idea. I think if Film Studios see a trend that makes money, they'll add it to whatever big movie they have coming out, even if the movie doesn't need it and suffers as a result of this. More often than not the result of following trends in the film industry has not been to MAKE money, but has actually resulted in studios LOSING RECORD AMOUNTS of money. Even from your own standpoint that studios will do whatever it takes to make money, you FAIL to comprehend the idea that following trends DOES NOT MAKE THEM MONEY. It only pisses off fans of the franchises, loses them money, and makes moviegoers disinterested in said films.
Of course, this is not at all what you were saying, but since nothing you said was really in response to anything I said since you failed to understand the point I was trying to make even after I laid it out as simply as possible....*catches breath*...I simply gave up and decided to add something to the argument myself.
Quote:
|
You might think you're a purist but it's coming off wrong IMO, there's a difference between purism and knowing what you're talking about, you're complaining about the 5th installment in a franchise that wasn't exactly art to begin with, if it were a movie like Lord of the Rings 5 you'd have a legitimate beef, but it's not, it's Fast and the Furious.
|
I get what you're saying, but it's still not exactly what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the historical precedent set that films like this have had an overall negative aspect on the film industry for years following its release. I'm not saying this is art, and I'm not saying it should be -- I'm saying that if hollywood gets the idea that all you want is action, that's exactly what you'll get, and sometimes it will end up in the most awkward of places. Every time I mention this you come back with "of course, hollywood will do what it takes to make money" -- refer to the argument I just made that hollywood actually LOSES money on this concept, as it results in films that are sometimes so bad that even the people that supported films like these hate them with a passion.
I recall one of my favorite scenes in the film "The Majestic" in which Jim Carrey's character is sitting in a board room watching and listening as his film script gets ripped apart by studio execs. "A Boy and his Dog, there's nothing more touching!"....
my argument is that pretty soon it will be "suddenly morgan freeman starts racing with little miss daisy in the back screaming her head off! IT'LL SELL MILLIONS!"
Do you really want to see that?
Quote:
|
The entire point behind a film is to make money for the studio, and that's exactly what you're complaining about.
|
Actually, I'm complaining about filmgoers giving hollywood the idea that this could make them money, because studio execs are dumb enough to follow any lead, even this one.
Quote:
|
Did you miss the part where I talked about escapism? Entirely?
|
Did you miss the part where I responded to that idea? I'm of the school of thought that Escapism works best when well crafted throughout a film using all aspects of storytelling that can be used in film. Choosing to use simply ACTION and nothing else....is to me a trailer park version of that, the bastard child of escapism.
Quote:
|
Are you even reading the conversation I'm typing out here?
|
Yep, you just don't seem to be able to comprehend the rather simple terms I am using to explain myself, which is....interesting, to say the least.
Quote:
|
People want to escape from reality, and as I said sometimes it's Pride and Prejudice, other times it's Fast and the Furious, quality is in the eye of the beholder.
|
Broken record?
Quality is in the eye of the beholder, but my argument is not against opinion, it's against the idea that not only do films like this affect future films negatively, but they also as a result produce Losses rather than Profits for film studios. Yet they continue to follow the same dead route.....I'm the crazy one, always remember that!
Quote:
Did you even watch Idiocracy? Apparently you missed the part where it wasn't about de-evolution of film, it was about de-evolution of man as a whole.
You obviously haven't had any electrolytes today.
|
Okay you get two points for cuteness this time. My argument was not that the entire film was about the de-evolution of film, and never once did I even say anything that would suggest that. However, what I did say was that one particular part of the film discussed the de-evolution of film as well as many other things. I chose that one scene to attempt to explain myself further, but apparently metaphors fall upon deaf ears here.
Quote:
Plot and story aren't exactly the staples of a good crowd pleaser, take a look at Watchmen, awesome movie, and after years and years of Comic fans *****ing and whining about staying true to the comic books origins, they got EXACTLY what they wanted, but I've heard from some comic fans that didn't like it and refuse to watch it again because it was plot heavy.
In short, you can't please ALL of the people ALL of the time, it's a scary reality.
|
Those are just picky bastards. More often than not, plot and story will produce a film that people will pay to see. The formula is more varied without the two than it is with the two. Good direction is also essential, and acting and music and all sorts of other little things can add enjoyment to a film and make it something that people will pay to see. I guess that's behind the entire reason I'm upset that the moneymaker this film turned out to be has already started influencing studios to make what could be horrible films. I mean, this is an action driven film. That's probably the one thing that sold this film so well, and that annoys me because that could easily suggest to the people in charge that in fact they don't need a plot, or a story, or acting, or anything like that to drive a movie...they just need ACTION and LOTS OF IT! Nothing against action films, I'd just rather see them with good acting, good story and plot than without. Like you said yourself, this is far from "high art", it's not meant for anything but action.
No doubt your response will be "sometimes pride and prejudice, sometimes fast and furious".....because no doubt you still don't get what I'm saying. Gah, I give up.
Quote:
|
When you say stuff like "over the last 20 years to follow" you're not making any sense, that might be part of the problem.
|
You didn't read what I wrote correctly, did you? "follow" was in reference to the film studios following the cycle I discussed. Pay attention, man!
Quote:
It depresses you that much?
I only have two words to respond to something like that...
"seek therapy"
|
I doubt I would use the word "depression". It just irks me.
Quote:
|
It's a business, Hollywood does what makes them money, it's that simple.
|
Hollywood does what they think will make them money, and fails more often than they succeed. Their few successes are what keep them alive. If they want to thrive, they need to stop following bad ideas and start following the paths which have lead to TRUE success in the past.
Quote:
|
As I tend to repeat myself over and over, sometimes there's Pride and Prejudice and sometimes Fast & Furious, not everyone is wanting to see a black and white art haus film ALL of the time, it's scary, but I hope we can all come to terms with that reality in the future.
|
Nobody has to want to see black and white art films, LOL. I'm not saying I want that, I'm simply saying this is a bad decision which could possibly lead to more negative outcomes than positive outcomes.
Quote:
|
It shows them that they can make money doing so.
|
Once in a blue moon, maybe. Last I checked on RT this movie had a 23%. big $ doesn't always spell success, but this time around the studios have decided it does. That could turn out to be a bad decision for them, and could result in an otherwise good film being ruined if they take the idea far enough. That's my whole point.
Quote:
Then we'd never have action movies again, and that would suck.
Logan
|
Apparently Sarcasm falls on deaf ears as well.
Oh well, I'll just take my spot as chicken little and sit in my little corner saying "the sky is falling" until Disney proves me right in an unlikely turn of events.
WHAT A TWIST!
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
Diesel and Walker Sign for Fast and Furious 5
Hybrid Mode
