Hollywood's creativity problem and a (ranty) stroll through endless remakes...

[payn]

It's almost as if some people find movies being enjoyable to watch an indicator of them being quality entertainment. How bizarre.

Oh...Oh... no be careful we do not want to start that quality is whatever you like argument again. Please...

 

[Guest 7034872]

1. America is predominantly a nation of people who no longer read books.
2. Weak readers are incompetent writers.

So from where are Hollywood's scripts to come?

That's the problem I've seen, anyway: skilled actors are right there and ready to go, as are cinematographers, set designers, and directors. But if there's no one around who knows how to tell a proper story (or at least those who do cannot get an audience with the media powers that be because their skills and ideas are not en vogue), then the resulting movie will stink. And if stinky movies still consistently make money and if most producers in town are of the cynical opinion that the general public is too stupid to want anything better anyway, then there'll be a lot of stinky movies. Throw in a few morally impatient ideologues who take offense at any story that does not pander to their political sentiments, and you've got a good picture of Hollywood today.

 

[Mercurius]

Not only have I seen every single movie by Nic Cage, I believe that his oeuvre should be required teaching at all levels of school.

I require a Snarf's Guide to Nic Cage post, including the Absolutely Correct and Only Way to Rank All Nic Cage movies (and I mean all of them).

On a serious note, I thought Pig was really good.

 

[MadPuppy]

Nice thread as an avid Sci-fi and Fantasy movie watcher I have some opinions.....

1. the preponderance of big save the world story lines is tired and uninteresting anymore
What I mean here is that fantasy in particular is usually save the world from big bad evil guy trying to bring about the end or darkness reign...yawn! better stories are smaller stories. character driven and set to non world changing events. (I actually enjoyed the 13th warrior which wouldn't change the world if they lost, just that corner of the world.) I think Ladyhawk hit the mark as did Dragon Slayer.

2. a need for cross-genre stories
Here I suggest movies that combine genera's. Drama-Fantasy, horror and sci-fi (Event horizon, Aliens) are much more interesting. would love to see a Horror-Fantasy movie that is a ghost story, non-earth changing but set in a small town.) A fantasy-buddy movie could be fun.... think low level in D&D terms....

Just a couple thoughts I suppose but my personal opinion.

 

[payn]

Nice thread as an avid Sci-fi and Fantasy movie watcher I have some opinions.....

1. the preponderance of big save the world story lines is tired and uninteresting anymore
What I mean here is that fantasy in particular is usually save the world from big bad evil guy trying to bring about the end or darkness reign...yawn! better stories are smaller stories. character driven and set to non world changing events. (I actually enjoyed the 13th warrior which wouldn't change the world if they lost, just that corner of the world.) I think Ladyhawk hit the mark as did Dragon Slayer.

2. a need for cross-genre stories
Here I suggest movies that combine genera's. Drama-Fantasy, horror and sci-fi (Event horizon, Aliens) are much more interesting. would love to see a Horror-Fantasy movie that is a ghost story, non-earth changing but set in a small town.) A fantasy-buddy movie could be fun.... think low level in D&D terms....

Just a couple thoughts I suppose but my personal opinion.

I really good note. Fantasy seems to have been shoehorned into the world saving implications of its stories. Be nicer to see some smaller slice of life stories in the genre.

 

[Ryujin]

Nice thread as an avid Sci-fi and Fantasy movie watcher I have some opinions.....

1. the preponderance of big save the world story lines is tired and uninteresting anymore
What I mean here is that fantasy in particular is usually save the world from big bad evil guy trying to bring about the end or darkness reign...yawn! better stories are smaller stories. character driven and set to non world changing events. (I actually enjoyed the 13th warrior which wouldn't change the world if they lost, just that corner of the world.) I think Ladyhawk hit the mark as did Dragon Slayer.

2. a need for cross-genre stories
Here I suggest movies that combine genera's. Drama-Fantasy, horror and sci-fi (Event horizon, Aliens) are much more interesting. would love to see a Horror-Fantasy movie that is a ghost story, non-earth changing but set in a small town.) A fantasy-buddy movie could be fun.... think low level in D&D terms....

Just a couple thoughts I suppose but my personal opinion.

I don't mind a "save the world" storyline as the culmination of a movie series but yes, everything being world ending stakes can get tired.

On the other hand I think that the streaming series "The Umbrella Academy" explicitly had fun with that concept, over the course of 4 seasons.

 

[Hussar]

It's almost as if some people find movies being enjoyable to watch an indicator of them being quality entertainment. How bizarre.

It's far closer to the tendency people have to conflate their personal preferences with quality. "I like it, therefore it's good."

Not a trekkie and I think TNG is kinda meh and DS9 is best trek.

It's not just 80's action flicks it's the comedies, fantasy, things like goonies etc.

Again, DS9 couldn't have existed under Roddenberry. He never would have allowed it.

Of course there are great 80's movies. The Princess Bride is my all time favorite movie that I've watched and rewatched a thousand times. But, that doesn't mean that the 80's were full of great movies and had more great movies than you get today. Which is the point I was responding to. The 80's is, just like any other time, chock a block with terrible movies. Sturgeon's Law always applies.

I mean, if we're comparing TV - I'll stand up The Expanse against anything produced for TV in the SF genre. Most movies too.

 

[Mercurius]

It's far closer to the tendency people have to conflate their personal preferences with quality. "I like it, therefore it's good."

The corollary--which I find to be at least as common, if not more so--is, "I like it, therefore it can't be bad, and all criticisms are nutty and/or haterism."

Nothing wrong with liking things that aren't deemed of high quality, but quality is a real thing - it probably just needs to be contextualized and defined (that is, what do you mean by "quality" in this context? In what way is something bad?). But recognizing the subjective element, and that "what I like doesn't automatically equate with "good quality," doesn't negate the reality of quality.

EDIT: added bold.

 

[billd91]

The corollary--which I find to be at least as common, if not more so--is, "I like it, therefore it can't be bad, and all criticisms are nutty and/or haterism."

Nothing wrong with liking things that are deemed of high quality, but quality is a real thing - it probably just needs to be contextualized and defined (that is, what do you mean by "quality" in this context? In what way is something bad?). But recognizing the subjective element, and that "what I like doesn't automatically equate with "good quality," doesn't negate the reality of quality.

I think the contextualization is more then probably necessary - it's essential. It might be one thing to measure how well the camera's stayed in focus (if intended to be in focus) - that's objective and little affected by the point of view of the observer/critic. But even various aspects that might indicate quality - sophisticated characters, believable behavior, effective use of scenery, interesting dialogue - all depend on subjective interpretation and filtering anyway because whether or not something "works" for the observer is inherently subjective.

 

[Ryujin]

I think the contextualization is more then probably necessary - it's essential. It might be one thing to measure how well the camera's stayed in focus (if intended to be in focus) - that's objective and little affected by the point of view of the observer/critic. But even various aspects that might indicate quality - sophisticated characters, believable behavior, effective use of scenery, interesting dialogue - all depend on subjective interpretation and filtering anyway because whether or not something "works" for the observer is inherently subjective.

Right. And what is considered "objectively" good, in art, is merely the consensus between people who have a podium from which to speak, still making it subjective.