Death To Hollywood!!!!!!!!

edited June 2011 in General Chat
Seriously, from looking at the list of future films coming out of Hollywood on IMDB, most are remakes and just utter garbage.

The future of film from these money grabbing con artists is a joke.

I mean, a remake of Total Recall? WHY??????

I wish they would just implode.

Nothing that comes out today is worth my time at all. All the movies that were highly rated and ass kissed by people like The Dark Knight and Inception.......yawn.

Heres the box office crap out at the moment:

1. The Hangover Part II $85.9M
2. Kung Fu Panda 2 $47.7M
3. Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides $39.8M
4. Bridesmaids $16.6M
5. Thor $9.53M


This really is a shit decade for films. You can tell me that there were 90's and 80's films that sucked too but at least they were made with some heart and creativity and didnt rely on CGI, perfect looking people and mundane story lines.
«1

Comments

  • edited June 2011
    Lonnie wrote: »
    I mean, a remake of Total Recall? WHY??????

    Because this time they have money for a chick with 5 boobs. Just imagine that!

    total-recall-3-boobs.jpg
    PS: That is the only scene I remember from that movie and I still wonder why.

    Yes current cinema is shit but most movies in the past haven't been better. It's mostly nostalgia (like the movie on your avatar) or remembering the good movies and forgetting about the crap ones.
  • edited June 2011
    Yeah, Hollywood sucks... what else is new? I'd be lying if I said that I wasn't ecstatic for The Thing prequel this October and Prometheus next Summer. Also, I don't blame Hollywood for the dire state it's in, I blame the schmucks who spend their money buying tickets for the excrement that Hollywood produces. You want a change, simple; don't pay to watch garbage and instead seek out and support films with artistic integrity.
  • edited June 2011
    We all loved the 3 boobed babe hehe. Its more than nostalgia tho man, past movies were made with creativity. all we have now is a set formula of CGI based turds.
  • edited June 2011
    der_ketzer wrote: »
    Yes current cinema is shit but most movies in the past haven't been better. It's mostly nostalgia (like the movie on your avatar) or remembering the good movies and forgetting about the crap ones.

    I feel that I must say that I do think that an over-reliance on CGI these days has made things worse, visually at least. However, your statement certainly rings the bell of truth with great aplomb.
    Lonnie wrote: »
    Its more than nostalgia tho man, past movies were made with creativity. all we have now is a set formula of CGI based turds.

    Whilst there is some truth to what you say, none the less that's a sweeping generalisation.
    der_ketzer wrote: »
    total-recall-3-boobs.jpg

    Surely you should have used puppies to cover those... puppies! The cat should be placed lower down!
  • edited June 2011
    Davies wrote: »
    Yeah, Hollywood sucks... what else is new? I'd be lying if I said that I wasn't ecstatic for The Thing prequel this October and Prometheus next Summer. Also, I don't blame Hollywood for the dire state it's in, I blame the schmucks who spend their money buying tickets for the excrement that Hollywood produces. You want a change, simple; don't pay to watch garbage and instead seek out and support films with artistic integrity. Problem solved.

    Well yes you are right its the losers who pay to see the garbage but the problem isnt solved is it If only a small percentage of us 'seek out and support films with artistic integrity'.

    My biggest concern is why the masses dont stop and think "wtf is this shit im not happy with the way films are today" they just consume and consume.

    And all this gimmicky HD bullshit. I'd happily watch a film in 360p if it had a good storyline and was character driven.
  • edited June 2011
    Davies wrote: »
    Whilst there is some truth to what you say, none the less that's a sweeping generalisation.

    Ok, give me some movies you think totally suck from the 90's or 80's and I will compare them with the shitty ones of today, I can guarantee the old ones would fair better.
  • edited June 2011
    Lonnie wrote: »
    My biggest concern is why the masses dont stop and think "wtf is this shit im not happy with the way films are today" they just consume and consume.

    Well, that's easy to answer... most people are either ignorant to the quality that's available outside of the mainstream or are just plain shallow and are quite happy to watch nothing other than a series of explosions and one liners for the entirety of their life. Also, there's moments when even the deepest of souls just want to watch a movie where one can leave their brain at the door from time to time.
    Lonnie wrote: »
    And all this gimmicky HD bullshit. I'd happily watch a film in 360p if it had a good storyline and was character driven.

    Of course HD isn't necessary to watching a great film but to dismiss HD as "gimmicky bullshit" is well... bullshit. Try watching Blade Runner on Blu-ray and then tell me that it doesn't enhance the experience. Go on, I dare you. 3D on the other hand...
    Lonnie wrote: »
    Ok, give me some movies you think totally suck from the 90's or 80's and I will compare them with the shitty ones of today, I can guarantee the old ones would fair better.

    Okay, that's utter garbage you're sprouting now. I could produce a list to counter your nonsensical argument but frankly I've got better things to do.
  • edited June 2011
    Cheese on toast.
  • edited June 2011
    Lonnie wrote: »
    We all loved the 3 boobed babe hehe. Its more than nostalgia tho man, past movies were made with creativity. all we have now is a set formula of CGI based turds.

    I can agree on that completely. Movies in earlier days were more imaginative and I would choose puppet Yoda over CGI-Yoda anytime.
  • edited June 2011
    Lonnie wrote: »
    Cheese on toast.

    That's your response? Okay, I admit it; you've defeated me. How can I possibly counter that powerful argument of truth?!
    der_ketzer wrote: »
    I can agree on that completely. Movies in earlier days were more imaginative and I would choose puppet Yoda over CGI-Yoda anytime.

    Visual effects were generally much more imaginative before the influx of CGI hit and in that respect; yes, films were more creative back in the day because they had to be (due to a limitation of tools). However, very little of this has any bearing upon story, character and dialogue... you know, the script!
  • edited June 2011
    der_ketzer wrote: »
    I can agree on that completely. Movies in earlier days were more imaginative and I would choose puppet Yoda over CGI-Yoda anytime.

    Same. Like Two Face's face in TDK, was done with CGI. LAZY in my opinion. Gone are the days of cool set pieces, replaced by boring CGI.
  • edited June 2011
    Lonnie wrote: »
    Same. Like Two Face's face in TDK, was done with CGI. LAZY in my opinion. Gone are the days of cool set pieces, replaced by boring CGI.

    For someone who is harking on about the lack of depth of story, you certainly seem hung up on the visual side of things. Are you just comparing popcorn movies or is this a discussion on film? Take "The Road" for example; was that a shallow film, devoid of creativity? It may surprise you to know this but "The Road" actually has a fair amount of CGI but the difference is that it's used to tell the story and create the post-apocalyptic world. CGI isn't the Devil, it can be a filmmakers friend when used appropriately.
  • edited June 2011
    Lonnie wrote: »
    Ok, give me some movies you think totally suck from the 90's or 80's and I will compare them with the shitty ones of today, I can guarantee the old ones would fair better.

    Ferngully, Garbage Pale Kids, The Neverending Story part 2 + 3, (Battlefield Earth, okay that one was from 2000) , Batman & Robin, Highlander 2, Beastmaster 2...
  • edited June 2011
    bollocks
  • edited June 2011
    Man what is up with this site i just wrote a load of replies and it takes a year to reload the page???? I have perfect internet too.
  • edited June 2011
    der_ketzer wrote: »
    Ferngully, Garbage Pale Kids, The Neverending Story part 2 + 3, (Battlefield Earth, okay that one was from 2000) , Batman & Robin, Highlander 2, Beastmaster 2...

    Urgh, you're actually humouring him?
  • edited June 2011
    Davies wrote: »
    Urgh, you're actually humouring him?

    Whats up man?
  • edited June 2011
    Davies wrote: »
    Urgh, you're actually humouring him?

    No. I just gave him some movies that sucked in the 90s and 80s so he can tell me how much better than today's crap they are. Just as he requested.
  • edited June 2011
    der_ketzer wrote: »
    Ferngully, Garbage Pale Kids, The Neverending Story part 2 + 3, (Battlefield Earth, okay that one was from 2000) , Batman & Robin, Highlander 2, Beastmaster 2...

    Simply put, look at the titles. AWESOME, totally awesome. Nothing like that made today. Jst shitty American toilet humour bollocks like The Hangover.
  • edited June 2011
    Davies, instead of flexing your repressed intellect, why don't you tell me whats soooo great about todays bullshit boring technology VS a good storyline instead?

    Edit-And DEATH to the mashed potato-for brains public that consume the foul poison of Hollywood-en.
  • edited June 2011
    Lonnie wrote: »
    Jst shitty American toilet humour bollocks like The Hangover.

    I actually tried watching that movie for the first time today and didn't get a single laugh out of it after 42 minutes. That was supposed to be a comedy? I don't know. Maybe I am just not the target audience for that movie. e.g. I am not drunk right now...

    I will finish it later but I already lost all hope.
    Lonnie wrote: »
    Davies, instead of flexing your repressed intellect, why don't you tell me whats soooo great about todays bullshit boring technology VS a good storyline instead?
    What do you think of Black Swan? I think that had a really good imaginative plot.
  • edited June 2011
    der_ketzer wrote: »
    I actually tried watching that movie for the first time today and didn't get a single laugh out of it after 42 minutes. That was supposed to be a comedy? I don't know. Maybe I am just not the target audience for that movie. e.g. I am not drunk right now...

    I will finish it later but I already lost all hope.

    I despair at the state of the film industry at the moment...well....the mainstream anyway, as thats all that seems to matter to the clones of society.

    I find myself watching awesome Asian/asia extreme movies, or any foreign film...theres so many hidden gems to be found.

    Ity just amazes me that the fanboys of the world cream their pants when garbage like X Men 1st Class comes out and shitty Transformers and the likes.

    I havnt actually seen Black Swan yet, I did think about renting it out the other night but theres something about it thats made me avoid it for now, prob because I cant stand Natalie Portman. I wasn't impressed with The Wrestler, but kudos to Aranofsky for his continuing foray into more interesting ideas. Have you seen his awesome Requiem for a Dream?
  • edited June 2011
    Ghost Busters III and Indiana Jones 5 are coming out as well.
  • edited June 2011
    doodo! wrote: »
    Ghost Busters III and Indiana Jones 5 are coming out as well.

    SOAFB whyyyyy.......

    Haha had to laugh at Indiana Jones and The Crystal Numb Skull...Indiana Jones and aliens??? Ridiculous, next it'll be something more absurd like Indiana Jones and The Horror of Justin Beiber Fever.

    Loved the lead lined fridge tho, what a stupid stupid scene. Everyone in Terminator 2 could of done with one of those, if only they knew.
  • edited June 2011
    Lonnie wrote: »
    Davies, instead of flexing your repressed intellect, why don't you tell me whats soooo great about todays bullshit boring technology VS a good storyline instead?

    Okay fine...

    Let's list some of the arguably great films that have come out in recent times...

    * High Fidelity (2000)
    * O Brother, Where Art Thou? (2000)
    * Gladiator (2000)
    * Best in Show (2000)
    * American Psycho (2000)
    * Requiem For a Dream (2000)
    * Donnie Darko (2001)
    * Mulholland Drive (2001)
    * The Royal Tenenbaums (2001)
    * The Man Who Wasn't There (2001)
    * 28 Days Later (2002)
    * Secretary (2002)
    * Lost In Translation (2003)
    * Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World (2003)
    * Kill Bill Vol. 1 & 2 (2003, 2004)
    * Pan’s Labyrinth (2006)
    * There Will Be Blood (2007)
    * No Country For Old Men (2007)
    * Slumdog Millionaire (2008)
    * The Road (2009)
    * Drag Me to Hell (2009)
    * District 9 (2009)
    * Inglourious Basterds (2009)
    * 127 Hours (2010)
    * Shutter Island (2010)
    * The Social Network (2010)
    * True Grit (2010)
    * Inception (2010)

    ...and that's only just scratching the surface. Also, I purposefully haven't even touched upon the countless classic foreign films from the last decade as I've tried to keep things in Hollywood as much as possible for the sakes of making a point.

    As for films that sucked from the 80s and 90s. Why don't you save me some time and go and watch some Nostalgia Critic videos.
  • edited June 2011
    * Donnie Darko (2001)-
    * Kill Bill Vol. 1 & 2 (2003, 2004)
    * Pan’s Labyrinth (2006)
    * No Country For Old Men (2007)
    * Slumdog Millionaire (2008)
    * The Road (2009)
    * Drag Me to Hell (2009)
    * Inglourious Basterds (2009)
    * 127 Hours (2010)
    * Shutter Island (2010)
    * Inception (2010)

    Don't agree with these ones. I mean, Drag Me to Hell? Really?
  • edited June 2011
    We disagree again , Lonnie. I enjoy Indiana jones 4, it's not perfect, but i waited a long time to see it and over all I thought it was enjoyable. Yes, it has a few stupid scenes but in the light of 50s adventure films, and silly sci fi films in the 50s with aliens, it's pretty spot on. I think Lucas was going for a era of film , and that most people simply missed the nod. Most people probably aren't aware that the original 3 films are inspired of a era of film, 30s morning TV shows. Forget the proper name for such shows.

    The point is the 4th movie, had its flaws but over all I didn't think it was completely rotten. If I was going to rate them, I'd probably rate them all about the same. As they all follow in the footsteps of their film eras they were based within. I think most people just aren't that film aware, and don't see the connection.

    My degree used to be in film. I was going to be a director, but well, I'm in graphic design now. I chose to change degrees because of the job market.

    I've studied film , studied Lucas. Lucas likes to take from the roots of film, and work off his child hood. That's where he got most his ideas for his famous franchises, such as Star Wars, which he mostly got from Buck Rogers and other shows he watched as a child.

    I'm a pretty big Lucas fan, even though he's gone off a bit of a deep end. I will watch and enjoy The Phantom Menace and other movies of his that most people would consider less than desirable. I'm not sure what he had in mind for the Phantom Menace, but the saber scenes of that film are very well done and remember-able.

    I honestly think that as a film, KOTCS is misunderstood. People used to always complain about TOD over the years, and now people support it, as a Indiana jones film. What people fail to realize is that a movie like TOD was inspired in the same film era as the first and last film. It just pulled more of the adventure aspect from that era of film.

    If you ever watch the original journey to the center of the earth and then watch a film like KOTCS the connection is obvious.

    LOL I knew Lonnie and Davies would get a long :D
  • edited June 2011
    Lonnie wrote: »
    * Donnie Darko (2001)-
    * Kill Bill Vol. 1 & 2 (2003, 2004)
    * Pan’s Labyrinth (2006)
    * No Country For Old Men (2007)
    * Slumdog Millionaire (2008)
    * The Road (2009)
    * Drag Me to Hell (2009)
    * Inglourious Basterds (2009)
    * 127 Hours (2010)
    * Shutter Island (2010)
    * Inception (2010)

    Don't agree with these ones. I mean, Drag Me to Hell? Really?

    Taste is subjective. Why do you think I used the term "arguably great". Also, if you don't like films like "Pan's Labyrinth" or "No Country For Old Men" then you need to acknowledge that you're in the minority and produce a counter argument accordingly.
  • edited June 2011
    If you like Lucas you should check out THX 1138. While slightly boring, it has alot of pre-star wars stuff in it.
  • edited June 2011
    Davies wrote: »
    Taste is subjective. Why do you think I used the term "arguably great". Also, if you don't like films like "Pan's Labyrinth" or "No Country For Old Men" then you need to acknowledge that you're in the minority and produce a counter argument accordingly.

    I'm sorry but your whole movie list there was generic mainstream praised films, I'm guessing you worship Robert Ebert too.
  • edited June 2011
    Lonnie wrote: »
    I'm sorry but your whole movie list there was generic mainstream praised films, I'm guessing you worship Robert Ebert too.

    If you would care to engage in a discussion with myself on film in an adult manner then by all means please do. However, responses such as...
    Lonnie wrote: »
    Cheese on toast.
    Lonnie wrote: »
    bollocks
    Lonnie wrote: »
    ... I'm guessing you worship Robert Ebert too.

    ... do not form a constructive argument. In fact, they serve to demonstrate as to why you were banned from this forum in the first place.

    You're very quick to dismiss titles such as "No Country For Old Men", "The Road" and "Pan’s Labyrinth" but you claim that titles such as "The Neverending Story 3", "Battlefield Earth" and "Batman & Robin" are "awesome". If you can't see the hypocrisy in your baseless argument and non-sensical responses then I don't know what to tell you.

    It seems to me that you're much more mainstream then you would care to admit.
  • edited June 2011
    Lonnie wrote: »
    If you like Lucas you should check out THX 1138. While slightly boring, it has alot of pre-star wars stuff in it.

    I really like that movie, though I've only seen it one time. It's a great movie. I'm not sure if I have my copy around. I can't remember when I last saw my copy and where it was.
  • edited June 2011
    Beh, smells like teen bullshit.

    People are being too snobbish about movies. Sure, there are some crap made out here, but one cannot deny that some of the more popular movies are actually good.

    I mean, how can it be that nearly 90% of all the movies get an average rating of 25% (not a fact)? It's not that the movies just plain suck, it's more to do with the fact that the moviegoers are bullshitting us.

    I mean, Scott Pilgrim, a good movie, wasn't even watched by the same goddamn people who said "ZOMG AWEXOME MUST SEE". It bombed pretty hard. That just shows that most of these people who hate on Hollywood are just full of shit.
  • edited June 2011
    Davies wrote: »
    If you would care to engage in a discussion on film in an adult manner then by all means due but responses such as...







    ... do not form a constructive argument. In fact, they serve to demonstrate as to why you were banned from the forum in the first place.

    You're very quick to dismiss titles such as "No Country For Old Men", "The Road" and "Pan’s Labyrinth" but you claim that titles such as "The Neverending Story 3", "Battlefield Earth" and "Batman & Robin" are "awesome". If you can't see the hypocrisy in your baseless argument and non-sensical responses then I don't know what to tell you.

    It seems to me that you're much more mainstream then you would care to admit.

    I could care less about being banned because I speak my mind regardless of what an elitist sub intellect like you thinks. See my irony there?

    Pans Labyrinth-GARBAGE. Notice you choose the films that, according to your kind, are filled with deep meaningful messages, and praised by pretentious little snobby critics, when really, its a total mess of a film combining fantasy elements with a stupid war plot. sorry, i dont buy it.

    No Country for Old Men-what IS so good about it? It started off so well, very promising, al lthe directors did was cut the film short to avoid the cooker cutter typical ending. WOW. Bravo. They actually f***** the movie up.
  • edited June 2011
    Lonnie wrote: »
    * Donnie Darko (2001)-
    * Pan’s Labyrinth (2006)
    * No Country For Old Men (2007)

    [...]Don't agree with these ones.

    What? Well there is no hope for you then.
  • edited June 2011
    LOL, it was a student project at first actually. THX, which later was made into a motion picture. Also, Tim Burton's Student project Frankenweenie is being made into a modern motion picture. Did that happen yet? I don't keep up on it like I used to.

    Lonnie, you've made your point, man. We know how you feel, Davies, you disagree, why has this become un-civil. Lonnie, lol, expressing your opinion is one thing but you don't have to STICK IT TO HIM. Dude, man. Some people here are going to agree with you, and some aren't.

    I'm not teaming up on you, I like your posts. But I think your attacks on our boy Davies are a bit extreme, he doesn't make the movies, sure he supports them , but it's not like he's directly responsible.
  • edited June 2011
    doodo! wrote: »
    LOL, it was a student project at first actually. THX, which later was made into a motion picture. Also, Tim Burton's Student project Frankenweenie is being made into a modern motion picture. Did that happen yet? I don't keep up on it like I used to.

    Lonnie, you've made your point, man. We know how you feel, Davies, you disagree, why has this become un-civil. Lonnie, lol, expressing your opinion is one thing but you don't have to STICK IT TO HIM. Dude, man. Some people here are going to agree with you, and some aren't.

    Hahahahaha...fair enough. F*** it, I just dont care anymore. I feel totally isolated in my opinions, fighting a shit world full of bullshit.

    I'm 26 years of age and I feel 60.

    I just want substance and meaning back in my life.

    And decent films which are WORTH PAYING TO SEE.

    Is it too much to ask?

    You just wait until I start making my own films and bust onto the scene in the nude.
  • edited June 2011
    Lonnie wrote: »
    I could care less about being banned because I speak my mind regardless of what an elitist sub intellect like you thinks. See my irony there?

    I also speak my mind and am doing so when I say this; try forming an argument and stop throwing petty insults my way. You're making yourself look rather foolish.
    Lonnie wrote: »
    Pans Labyrinth-GARBAGE. Notice you choose the films that, according to your kind, are filled with deep meaningful messages, and praised by pretentious little snobby critics, when really, its a total mess of a film combining fantasy elements with a stupid war plot. sorry, i dont buy it.

    My kind? I'm sorry, I wasn't aware you knew me and my taste in film. For your presumptuous information, I chose the films I did because we were having a discussion based around Hollywood. Did you want me to list some of my favourite recent foreign and independent films? I could but it doesn't seem relevant to the topic at hand.
    Lonnie wrote: »
    No Country for Old Men-what IS so good about it? It started off so well, very promising, al lthe directors did was cut the film short to avoid the cooker cutter typical ending. WOW. Bravo. They actually f***** the movie up.

    Nobody's claiming that you have to like the films that most critics praise but the above is not an argument that holds bearing upon the inane point you're trying to make.

    P.S. Before you reply with a load more thinly disguised personal insults; why don't you take your time and form a counter argument that holds some weight.
  • edited June 2011
    I just think we should respect what people like in movies. Sure, the Seltzer and Friedberg films are mostly pure shit in its purest form (Scary Movie 3 and onwards, Epic Movie, Disaster Movie, Vampires Suck), but if people like these movies, respect their opinions.

    I mean, I know people who like High School Musical.
  • edited June 2011
    Davies wrote: »
    I also speak my mind and am doing so when I say this; try forming an argument and stop throwing petty insults my way. You're making yourself look rather foolish.



    My kind? I'm sorry, I wasn't aware you knew me and my taste in film. For your presumptuous information, I chose the films I did because we were having a discussion based around Hollywood. Did you want me to list some of my favourite recent foreign and independent films? I could but it doesn't seem relevant to the topic at hand.



    Nobody's claiming that you have to like the films that most critics praise but the above is not an argument that holds bearing upon the inane point you're trying to make.

    P.S. Before you reply with a load more thinly disguised personal insults; why don't you take your time and form a counter argument that holds some weight.

    Ok ok, you're right, personal insults and that....I get the RAGE when I get onto the subject of films etc (politics) and I just cant comprehend some peoples opinions of films I totally f****** hate.

    What bothers me are the high and all mighty people that ell me oh Lonnie you didnt get Inception etc thats why you didnt like it, and you cant join our awesome book club because you havnt read our favourite book Catcher in the Rye.

    rgnrkgnrnroutgp5rtgkr4ot[24ko59-fgregreg5t5gtgtfhghg........just watever man i cant be f****** anymore.

    You just like watever you like vice versa.
This discussion has been closed.