Movies Talk! Talkin' about movies!

[RCBH928]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/fi ... e37815375/

News article suggests that the year 1999 was the best year in cinema history. All this time I thought it must have been nostalgia. I keep wondering why movies are not as fun as they used to be and 1999 was always my bench mark.

Honestly, I think cinema was ok up until around 2007 or so. The Dark Night, for me, was the movie the signaled the death of originality and launch of the franchise/sequel theater. It was too successful for what it was, they rebooted Batman only 17 years later of the original and only 8 years from the last installment. By this measure we should have a reboot of LoTR, Harry Potter, The Matrix, and remake of The Gladiator by now. And now thats all what we get, reboots and sequels.

[isiolia]

Honestly, I think cinema was ok up until around 2007 or so. The Dark Night, for me, was the movie the signaled the death of originality and launch of the franchise/sequel theater. It was too successful for what it was, they rebooted Batman only 17 years later of the original and only 8 years from the last installment. By this measure we should have a reboot of LoTR, Harry Potter, The Matrix, and remake of The Gladiator by now. And now thats all what we get, reboots and sequels.

To be fair, Batman already had several different incarnations, and wouldn't have fit in with increasingly-campy direction that the previous set of films had set on. Nolan, instead, seemed to key on the direction the comics were taking at the same time - Begins shares some parts of Batman: Year One, which had come out before Burton's first film.

While, personally, I don't think what you've mentioned is all we get...there certainly is a lot of franchise focus. I think something to consider there is how much TV has flourished at the same time, to the extent that we're now considered to be in the second "Golden Age of Television". What's interesting here is how nicely the two years you mention line up with that. 1999? Debuts of The Sopranos and The West Wing. 2007 was the year Netflix started streaming, and in turn, producing original content.
More or less, we saw film go from being the serious medium, to sharing the stage with TV and later streaming. So maybe some of the shift you've seen is due to the prospect of making something a show rather than a movie less of a prestige move, and more a creative one.

[RCBH928]

Honestly, I think cinema was ok up until around 2007 or so. The Dark Night, for me, was the movie the signaled the death of originality and launch of the franchise/sequel theater. It was too successful for what it was, they rebooted Batman only 17 years later of the original and only 8 years from the last installment. By this measure we should have a reboot of LoTR, Harry Potter, The Matrix, and remake of The Gladiator by now. And now thats all what we get, reboots and sequels.

To be fair, Batman already had several different incarnations, and wouldn't have fit in with increasingly-campy direction that the previous set of films had set on. Nolan, instead, seemed to key on the direction the comics were taking at the same time - Begins shares some parts of Batman: Year One, which had come out before Burton's first film.

While, personally, I don't think what you've mentioned is all we get...there certainly is a lot of franchise focus. I think something to consider there is how much TV has flourished at the same time, to the extent that we're now considered to be in the second "Golden Age of Television". What's interesting here is how nicely the two years you mention line up with that. 1999? Debuts of The Sopranos and The West Wing. 2007 was the year Netflix started streaming, and in turn, producing original content.
More or less, we saw film go from being the serious medium, to sharing the stage with TV and later streaming. So maybe some of the shift you've seen is due to the prospect of making something a show rather than a movie less of a prestige move, and more a creative one.

I am a big fan of the Tim Burton Batman to me that is the true Batman. I don't know anything about the comics, either way it was still too early for a reboot. Now we have what ? 3 Spiderman reboots in 20 years?

I do agree that tv series became a competitor to films and that might have affected the film making industry, yes I agree "creativity" and "originality" has shifted to tv. I wouldn't say we are in the tv golden age, more specifically tv-series(or series) golden age. I am also not sure if we can call it an age, it has been going for a long time since Sopranos pilot in 1999, moving to stuff like Desparate Housewives, Lost, Breaking Bad, and at the last of them is Chernobyl. TV was more popular back in the 90s and 80s with stuff like ProWrestling, reality tv, talk shows, sitcoms, and news. Only the series increased in popularity, I bet everything else ratings has fallen down. In its place we have all internet platforms filling the gap like FB, YouTube, Twitter(news), Twitch.tv streaming...etc etc.

[RCBH928]

I never understood the popularity of the Blair Witch Project, its iconic today, but even back then when I viewed it honestly sucked. I think many people fell for the "real footage" marketing, when in reality it was shot to look like it was "home recorded" or that it was based on a real story.

The ending was interesting though, I liked it, no other movie ended that way so its unique at least. Its unconventional

But I really like the branding, the symbol and the cover art is very unique and matches the idea behind the movie very well especially for its era. It screams 1999 DVD. I think it really pushed its hype and sales.

[RCBH928]

I am looking for opinions on

1) The Dark Tower: 5.6 score on imdb, I want to watch it because its by Stephen King then again I am hesitant to watch it because its by Stephen King. His movies can be any where from Children of the Corn all the way to The Shawshank Redemption. If it has a low score because “its not true to the book” I am ok with that.

2) Bloodsports: I dont think I ever watched a Van Dam movie and I am not much into just scene after scene of choreographed cheesy fights but the trailer seemed like it had substance. If its closer to Bruce Lee movies I am ok with that..

[isiolia]

1. I wouldn't say it's just that it's a horrible adaptation. Technically it was billed as a sequel as well, since the events are cyclical (sort of like the Evangelion rebuild movies). However, just as a basic consideration, they're taking an IP that stretches across seven (or eight, depending on how you count them) books and now prequel graphic novels and all that too, that's certainly R-rated material in it's original form...and making an hour and a half long PG-13 movie centered around a kid. It wasn't the original intent. The project had been passed around for years, and was originally supposed to be a lot more. It just got Hollywood-ed to death.
It's not an unwatchable movie or anything, it's just...rushed and toned down to the point of being generic.

2. It's a martial arts movie. A surprise hit one that was JCVD's breakout role, but, it is what it is. Most Bruce Lee movies were too though. I'd say it's worth checking out - that or Kickboxer - for his earlier movies. If the point is wanting to watch JCVD in action, then you could always go for Universal Soldier or Timecop or something too.

[stickem]

Bloodsport is basically street fighter 2. Big fan of jcvd, I find everything after "the quest" garbage though. Didnt know he was in breakin', what the hell could he have played lol.

[RCBH928]

thanks, Looks like KickBoxer Bloodsports and The Quest are all good options, will choose one and if I like it I will see the others.

[PretentiousHipster]

Just got reminded of the Canadian trash horror film Science Crazed. One of the most ridiculous films in existence.

This scene is a perfect summary of it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pF8uPvK7nqk

[RCBH928]

M. Night Shyamalan is one of the most confusing talents in Hollywood, one piece of work is amazing the other makes you scratch your head. I was surprised to learn that he only directed 2 movies prior to The Sixth Sense, and he was 29 at the time. What kind of strings do you have to pull to convince a Hollywood studio to make you the director of a Bruce Willis movie in the late 90s when you are in your 20s? It does not help that he is an Indian immigrant, its not like he is Jaden Smith.