Disappointing Trends in Movies

[Darth Shoju]

I didn't mind the erratic camera in Private Ryan as it seemed a technique used for a specific effect. I only find it annoying when it is used in movies to cover for actors who can't pull off a fight scene. I don't recall it being a large factor in any of the LoTR movies outside the fight at Amon-Hen (I think that is the right place...the part where Frodo talks to Aragorn and then runs while Aragorn holds off the Uruks until Gimli and Legolas get there) and some of the scenes in the siege of Helm's Deep. Even there it didn't seem too prevalent and I have a feeling it might have been to help compensate for the complexity of the fight scenes (what with all the extras in elaborate costumes).

I have to agree that the "kids that are wiser than adults" idea is really lame. When I was a kid/teenager I didn't have a hot clue, and whatever wisdom and common sense I have now was gained through experience and listening to my parents!

But one of my greatest peeves are people who go to a movie with either completely unrealistic expectations, who utterly miss the point or at some point misunderstood what the movie was about. I remember after the 3rd time watching Fellowship of the Ring in the theatre I overheard a couple of middle-aged ladies stand up and say "That movie was ridiculous. It wasn't what I was expecting at all. It was just nonsense about elves and such!" What the...? Then there was the time I saw Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon for the first time in the theatre, and I was just trying to digest and appreciate the solemn ending, when I heard some moron stand up and say "That movie was so stupid! People can't jump around and run up walls like that!" Did this guy even watch the trailers? Did he know what movie he was going to see?!? Does he go to see Star Wars and say "People can't make light swords!". If someone made him go to see this movie, then they should avoid taking him to anything with more than 10 mins of dialogue and featuring no less than one gratuitous sex scene and massive explosion. Ugh.

 

[Joker]

I guess I'm on the few here that actually likes the jerky camera, in movies where it works. I didn't like it in Gladiator or FotR or Kingdom of Heaven. I didn't like it in those movies because to me it wasn't so much jerky as frantically-all-over-the-place.

My pet peeve is people who answer when their cell-phone goes off. Luckily the whole crowd starts yelling when someone does this so the asses are still outnumbered. I hope.

As for Trailers that show the entire movie, here's one of the few that doesn't.

http://www.gorehoundinc.com/index2.html

 

[trancejeremy]

I don't see many movies in threaters these days because the closest one is probably 30 miles, and I'm generally broke, but the thing I really hate about a lot of DVDs these days is the volume. The sound effects are like 100x the volume of the dialogue. So I basically have to turn it to down to avoid freaking out the cats, rendering the dialogue unhearable. So I have to turn on subtitles. (This could be just by TV, but I dunno).

I like O Fortuna. I have like 6-7 different dance versions of it (mostly trance, but a couple techno, and one sort of rap).

 

[trancejeremy]

Anyway, I hate the use of CGI for no real apparent reason.

For instance, in the recent Exorcist: The Whatever, all the hyenas were CGI. Bad CGI, like the ones you'd see in a SF channel movie about giant animals. (Only they were normal sized, if evil).

I guess it's less trouble using CGI hyenas than real, trained hyenas. But you lose something.


Another - product placements. I don't mind so much when they are incidental - like people drinking coke, and they always put the can down so the logo is prominently shown (that goes back probably 25 years, since ET at least). But in say, Blade Trinity, it's like they wrote Apple and iPod into the storyline. (The bimbo vampire slayer listend to it while killing vampires. Which is stupid on other levels as well)

 

[Hand of Evil]

Another trend that is starting to concern me is the lack of up and coming actions stars. You have Vin and The Rock but I don't know if I see them on the level of Hanks, Cruse, Stallone, Smith, Arnie...

 

[S'mon]

My own pet hates--

Any fantasy film that has enemies who wear heavy armour....which is utterly useless in stopping any blow from the good guys. As I was watching the LotR trilogy, I was seriously starting to wonder why the evil powers didn't just send the orcs into battle naked rather than invest so much time and effort into making armour--at least then they might have a chance of dodging an attack.

I concur 100% - watching TTT & ROTK last weekend it was very noticeable that the less armour an orc had, the more damage resistant it was! While plate-armoured orcs were guaranteed to drop dead from a single blow, naked orcs could keep running with seveal arows in them... ?!?! This was very annoying.

 

[Desdichado]

Another pet peeve: Playing the music so loud, I can't hear the dialogue. I can't count the number of DVD's I play where I have to constantly adjust the sound so I can hear what the actors are saying. Soundtracks are supposed to enhance the experience, not overwhelm it.

I don't see many movies in threaters these days because the closest one is probably 30 miles, and I'm generally broke, but the thing I really hate about a lot of DVDs these days is the volume. The sound effects are like 100x the volume of the dialogue. So I basically have to turn it to down to avoid freaking out the cats, rendering the dialogue unhearable. So I have to turn on subtitles. (This could be just by TV, but I dunno).

Either switch the DVD to regular stereo, or invest in a 5.1 audio system. That's not a problem with the movie, it's a problem with you playing the wrong soundtrack and not getting the right balance between the various sound elements. Of course, many DVDs don't come with a 2.0 stereo option anymore, but 5.1 digital audio systems for DVD/TV systems have come way down; $100-150 will set you up nicely.

 

[VirgilCaine]

People being blown back several feet/through things/over things/etc when shot.

Waif-like heroines who are supercombatants beyond all reason in a fight.

The general trend of all male characters being complete and utter boobs while wise and caring women save them from themselves.

Same here.

 

[Desdichado]

I believe that the super-close-up, herky-jerky camera thing is intended, in part, to render fight choreography unnecessary. If you can't see the fight, what does it matter what it looks like?

I agree--I've long felt that the use of that technique usually says that the director isn't interested in fight scenes, and/or has no talent for them. But heck, that's what 2nd unit directors are for! And fight choreographers! And, if necessary, stuntmen!

I hate watching a movie that looks like it was filmed by a stoned cameraman who also happens to be in the process of being mauled by a bear while, hey, let's film this scene. With an all-consuming passion. It completely ruined The Bourne Supremacy for me, and it is my one big complaint with Batman Begins--both movies in which seeing the fight scenes would have enhanced the movie and been much more true to genre.

 

[Qlippoth]

But one of my greatest peeves are people who go to a movie with either completely unrealistic expectations, who utterly miss the point or at some point misunderstood what the movie was about.

A couple of years ago, some friends and I went to see Shall We Dance? (the Japanese original, not the pointless American remake) at the local second-run theater. The theater's lobby had several posters, almost entirely in Japanese (with a handful of obvious English translations). Not five minutes into the movie (Japanese with English subtitles), the two women in the row in front of me turned around and asked, "Is this whole thing not in English?"

I honestly thought they were kidding--but said, "No, it's a Japanese movie."

At which point they both harrumphed and left!