Yes but it sounded resentful.Like movies are anything other than machines to make money.
And we can't have you resenting people making money.
That's just not what Davy C's Big Society is all about.
(And we can't have you resenting people making money.
That's just not what Davy C's Big Society is all about.
Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob,
Fri 14 Jan 2011, 11:57,
archived)
DaveyC can stickthe big society up his gaping arsehole (after Murdoch pulls out).
I am resentful - not so much about the money making, but about the way Hollywood insists on sucking everything good out of films in pursuit of that money. Approx ten years ago saw a new golden age in comic book adaptations, where studios were seeing the rich characters and stories, all laid out and ready for the screenwriters. We had some real beauties come out, but now they are intent on turning anything remotely comic booky into a film, regardless of quality.
I blame the comic book geeks. It seems like they could stick a giant poster up saying "this film will shit in your mouth and fuck you in your ears" and they'll still flock to it in droves, just because it's based on a comic book they liked as a kid.
(I am resentful - not so much about the money making, but about the way Hollywood insists on sucking everything good out of films in pursuit of that money. Approx ten years ago saw a new golden age in comic book adaptations, where studios were seeing the rich characters and stories, all laid out and ready for the screenwriters. We had some real beauties come out, but now they are intent on turning anything remotely comic booky into a film, regardless of quality.
I blame the comic book geeks. It seems like they could stick a giant poster up saying "this film will shit in your mouth and fuck you in your ears" and they'll still flock to it in droves, just because it's based on a comic book they liked as a kid.
Damocles wants no part of your debauchery,
Fri 14 Jan 2011, 12:03,
archived)
"this film will..."That's quite a niche market, though...
;-)
(;-)
J Peasemould Gruntfuttock Alpha Mike Foxtrot,
Fri 14 Jan 2011, 12:12,
archived)
Ah now there I have to disagree.In fact I'd say this rebooting nonsense occurred at the very tentative release of Batman Begins, but the proper influx of comic book films now have been affected the death of an actor who happened to do a cracking performance of a fictional character. With that in mind many came to see The Dark Knight who weren't comic book afficianados.
It's true that perhaps for a long time studios are seemingly in tune with some nerds as they're offering some nostalgia trips from geeky material which has aged considerably but become that hallowed type of cult classic. It's just a shame they can't write scripts as well as they can come up with lucrative ideas.
(It's true that perhaps for a long time studios are seemingly in tune with some nerds as they're offering some nostalgia trips from geeky material which has aged considerably but become that hallowed type of cult classic. It's just a shame they can't write scripts as well as they can come up with lucrative ideas.
Christian's Bolt and Ski,
Fri 14 Jan 2011, 12:15,
archived)
nah, the hollywoodshit-train was at full speed long before Ledger died. Although his stellar performance and the massive profits on BB/TDK no doubt gave the shit-train another boost.
The problem is more to do with the timing of the new spidey film. When batman begins was released, the old (by which I mean burton-era) batman movies had been forgotten for a few years. People were ready for a new batman movie, and the studio recognized this, recognized the great source material, and out a great team on it. And the results were great. Sony, with the new spidey, are putting a cheap team on it (about 1/4 the budget of the spiderman 4 film that got cancelled) and are effectively releasing it in lieu of a sequel. That's a recipe for good-old-fashioned home cooked turd stew right there.
(The problem is more to do with the timing of the new spidey film. When batman begins was released, the old (by which I mean burton-era) batman movies had been forgotten for a few years. People were ready for a new batman movie, and the studio recognized this, recognized the great source material, and out a great team on it. And the results were great. Sony, with the new spidey, are putting a cheap team on it (about 1/4 the budget of the spiderman 4 film that got cancelled) and are effectively releasing it in lieu of a sequel. That's a recipe for good-old-fashioned home cooked turd stew right there.
Damocles wants no part of your debauchery,
Fri 14 Jan 2011, 12:30,
archived)
Well I know the shit didn't start there, but I think the reasoning for all the reboots have started there.What I meant to say was it's the popularity of such reboots - some darker, some merely taking an unconventional spin on the material, Batman Begins, Casino Royale have inspired studios to not worry about keeping with a film canon which might have been so important a while ago. I do know that there were many Batman films is pre-production after Batman and Robin, including one with a script by Frank Miller, all of which never really got off the ground. So it seems apparent that as the shit Burton/Schumacher ended the studio released the campy stuff whilst mildly amusing was shite.
Maybe when Marvel movies have made their escapade into a massive Avengers film and other films to introduce you to the characters they'll focus on actually telling a fucking cinematic story.
(Maybe when Marvel movies have made their escapade into a massive Avengers film and other films to introduce you to the characters they'll focus on actually telling a fucking cinematic story.
Christian's Bolt and Ski,
Fri 14 Jan 2011, 14:20,
archived)