6 Annoying Things Hollywood Needs to Stop Doing Comments - Mania.com



COMMENTS AND RESPONSES

Showing items 11 - 20 of 43
<<  <  1 2 3 4 5 >  >>  
Divo366 12/11/2009 8:10:23 AM

Ok, I agree with most everything... but I just had to throw out one argument..

Let's not forget one of my favorite movies... that '80's, Tim Curry favorite.. Clue!  I love that movie!!  Great cast, done right.. and all from a board game!

pekstrand 12/11/2009 9:04:27 AM

6) I think it depends on the film. Some ideas work for comedy. Even Land of The Lost would have worked for comedy, just not the comedy they presented. I'd much rather see a movie like Hot Fuzz or Shaun of The Dead, where the comedy flows out of an absurd situation taken seriously.

5) Again, reboots can be well done, it just depends on how you do it. Just look at Star Trek. It's a matter of providing the right materials. For all intent and purposes, Tron is a reboot. Sure it's a sequel as well, but it's a sequel to a film made 30 years ago. That's a reboot, no matter how you want to look at it.

4) Totally disagree. CGI is essential for some stories. As long as there's a solid story, it shouldn't matter. The only time CGI becomes problematic is when the story is so weak you notice the CGI above all else. When there's a great story, the CGI should become seamless and simply bring you into the film. I agree with Wiseguy, I think AVATAR will be a perfect example of CGI done well.

3) I have no problem with planning trilogies. Outside of the fact that some stories simply demand it, i.e., Chronicles of Narnia, LOTR, etc. it helps to get fantasy films made. Being able to film multiple films simultaneously saves money for a studio and allows the likelihood of getting fantasy films to the big screen to increase.

2) Yeah, OK I'll agree for the most part, although I did enjoy the film CLUE. However, I recall the same thing being said about amusement park rides and out of that we got Pirates of The Caribbean. Granted we also got Haunted Mansion, but my kids loved it.

1) I agree on the Uwe Boll front %100. As for Stephen Sommers and Brett Ratner, Ratner has made some really enjoyable films. And handpicking out the 3rd film in a series and knocking the man is a bit unfair. The first two rush hours were very enjoyable. Plus his films have grossed almost a billion dollars domestically. Stephen Sommers has directed eight films, which have grossed over 700 million dollars domestically. Bottom line, they continue to give Sommers and Ratner money to make films because people like them. "Fanboys" may bitch and moan about them, but the general public eats them up. And let's be honest, Hollywood is far more interested in what the general public wants and is willing to plunk down ten bucks to see.

scytheofluna 12/11/2009 9:37:04 AM

Wiseguy is dead on about reboots and remakes.  Elektra, Daredevil, Spiderman, X-Men, Superman, Fantastic 4, Ghost Rider, Punisher (yet another), they all need to be put on the back burner for a few years and rebooted.  If you don't wanna' see 'em, don't go, but don't try to speak for everybody.  Did you somehow miss the fantastic Star Trek reboot?  I went from totally opposed, to on the fence, to cautiously optimistic, to not being able to wait for the sequel.  Fiction as good as Star Trek shouldn't be lost to time, and as long as you can involve creative people who take the original material seriously there's no reason that you can't bring back a dead or dying franchise and do it justice, or revive a franchise that took a wrong turn somewhere.  Are you seriously implying that the Spiderman franchise should continue unabated after "New Goblin", "Skinny Venom", "Should already be dead Gwen Stacy", "Emo Parker" and "Sandman actually killed Uncle Ben but it's okay because his daughter is sick"?  Are you serious?

Other than that your list is pretty solid, but if you seriously don't think we need a Halo movie you need to put the crackpipe down, and get real.  Go watch the short films Halo: Landfall, and Halo: We are ODST before you speak that kind of blasphemy again.

Games like the Halo series, Gears of War, Bioshock, Prince of Persia, Assassin's Creed, Dead Space, they're all pretty cinematic anyway.  The acting in Uncharted 2 is some of the most compelling, heartfelt work I've heard in years.  The trouble when making films based on games is that egotistical filmmakers are often involved and they always assume that "hey this game is great, but wouldn't it be better if we did it my way?", and the answer is simply no it's never better if we do it your way.  Most of these games have their own voice, their own tone, and in every case that a game has been adapted, all of the good things were lost in the translation.  Especially with Gears and Halo, everything from the art design to the score needs to be in line with the games.  A lot of the problem with game adaptations is that they've been poorly made, but even the choices of which films to adapt haven't been sound.  Alone in the Dark?  The games haven't been good for ten years, and even then they were quickly outshined by Resident Evil. That franchise failed due to the fact that the filmmakers practically ignoring the source material and put all of their emphasis on a character that doesn't even exist in the games.  Even the forthcoming Prince of Persia film while looking like a solid film, would have been better off just sticking to the beautifully written story from the game it's named after.  Bioshock, Halo, and Gears of War could all be cinematic masterpieces, because the stories, characters and art design are fantastic.  You just need creative involvement of the developers, and filmmakers who are willing to put their own ideas aside in order to make the films that fans want to see.  Halo is a helluva lot different than Monopoly, and while peanut butter sandwiches are damned tasty, the comparison is inexplicable.

jdiggitty 12/11/2009 11:59:42 AM

About Uwe, apparently, his movies make a ton of money vs investment, so its probably just a business decision to rape a franchise for quick cash in 6 months. Other than Dungeon Siege (Microsoft, but a flailing franchise) all the game movies he's made came from devs in financial trouble. Crytek is a German company as well so that may explain that one further.

The thing that bugs me about Uwe, if you've ever listened to him, he thinks he's making masterpieces and people are just too stupid to "get it".

 

comicbookguy 12/11/2009 12:13:52 PM

Best list ever!!!

TheDrow 12/11/2009 12:56:14 PM

I have to say that I think he missed the point. It's not about rules to follow or where you get a story from it's about making great movies and telling vivid interesting stories.

As Divo366 said, Clue was a great movie. Halo would have been a great movie if done by a director who took it seriously. CGI can be a beautiful thing when it is used right and blended well with traditional effects. Ideas for great movies can be found in the strangest of places. And sometimes movies just need to be silly, fun and take you along for a ride.

The problem is when a director focuses to much on any one gimmick or element and expects that to carry a movie that is bereft of storytelling. 

Directors need to focus in on the story that they are telling and the best way in which to get that story across.  They need to keep their attention on one simple phrase.  "Be a storyteller and tell the story well." 

Do that the rest will take care of itself.
 

Jasinner 12/11/2009 1:25:46 PM

I would TOTALLY love to see a movie about Peanut Butter and Jelly Sandwiches!!!!!!

DeeJay4ADay 12/11/2009 3:37:14 PM

6. Agreed.  One reason people tend to make jokes is to cope with things they don't truly understand.  Land of the Lost--- which I've not seen--- simply reeked of "I don't get it" on the part of the producers.

5. Agreed.  A remake or reboot is acceptable when there is some form of new art that would justify it.  Otherwise, it's entirely possible that continuing the story would be equally (or more) successful.

4. Disagree.  When done correctly (e.g. most of the audience doesn't percieve it to be CGI), this works.  Yes, there have been instances of overkill, but I think Hollywood has gotten much better at preventing this.

3.  Agree in part.  I think producers should prepare for trilogies, but they shouldn't fetter their creative crew with the pressure to prepare for 3 installments as if they're an eventuality.  Planet of the Apes has proven to be a great example as to why you shouldn't prepare for sequels (by not preparing for a sequel until the third installment, many would argue they ended-up with a much stronger product).

2.  Disagree.  Right now, many genre fans view board games with the same contempt that some cultural elitists view comic books.  Board game experiences are culturally valid, and moving them to another medium doesn't break any rules of convention.  Smits... claiming that "nobody" plays Monopoly is akin to dismissing the X-Men as a "funny book" unworthy of film treatment.

1. Disagree.  Ratner has made a number of good movies.  Sommers has also made a few good ones, as well  (though projects such as Mummy Returns were absolutely painful.  In regard to Boll, I only disagree on the grounds that his films don't even look as if Hollywood has put much money behind them (Bloodrayne being an outlier, of course).

hubbellJames 12/11/2009 5:26:13 PM

 How about two simple things:  1 Stop filming scenes in the dark and trying to pass it off as artistic.   2 Stop miking scenes so the action and ambivalent noise overpower the dialogue.

WarCry 12/11/2009 5:42:16 PM

I agree in principal with #4 on this list, but there should have been a better example.

Why? you may ask?

One of the #1 complaints about BOTH TF movies was "too much people, not enough giant robots!!!!" or (for my money) "too much Chevy commercial, not enough giant robots!!!"

The point about CGI is correct, but TF is NOT a good example to make that point.

<<  <  1 2 3 4 5 >  >>  

ADD A COMMENT

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Please click here to login.