why bad movies still being made?

amrrahmy said:
i think your laughing at the movie, and you have every right to.
Click to expand...

No, not in the way you say.

My example is The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension. My God, what a GLORIOUS mess of cheese, bad casting, bad effects, terrible costumes, suspect writing . . .

But somehow, it manages to become more than the sum of its parts, and it's a great watch -- not because it's bad, either, but because it's just plain fun. (And that absolutely brilliant end credits sequence doesn't hurt.)

And Callaghan talks about guilty pleasures -- one for me is Under Siege. Again, terrible movie. But I love it.

To say nothing of, well, I'm a guy. Every guy's got a little yen for the occasional explosion. Every guy's got a little Bay in him. Sometimes, bad movies are still fun, romping rides.

If I'm going to laugh AT a movie because it's so preposterous, a derisive laugh, well, that's what The Transporter is for. And Pierce Brosnan singing ABBA.
 
The real answer!

The real answer!

You can't judge a screenplay by its movie.

Okay, here's the script, tell me the movie:

Q-like gadget maker for CIA creates all kinds of cool weapons. A super-intelligent Professor type. When the democratically eleceted President of a country is assassinated, the Prof realizes it was done with one of his gadgets, so he goes to the head of the CIA. Tells CIA head that someone has stolen one of their gadgets, and used it for evil. CIA head says he will take care of it and sends Prof home... where a hit squad attacks! Prof escapes - but is being hunted by the CIA using the cool gadget-weapons he created! Because he's super-intelligent, he MacGyvers up some weapons - but he is still an older guy and not an action guy... and he must fight to survive while trying to uncover this splinter group within the CIA who are putting evil dictators in control of countries.

Script was called DEAD DROP and sold for a bundle.

The film has a different title.

Have you guessed yet?

It was CHAIN REACTION with Keanu as a dumb welder on the run because he knows who started a cold-fusion disaster in Chicago.

That's what happens to scripts on their way to the screen.

ARMAGEDDON was originally about an information analyst for the White House who discovers that a Native American tribe wants to move their reservation because a shaman has predicted a giant asteroid will hit... and when other information comes in that makes this sound real, he quits and rounds up his estranged wife and son and hijacks enough groceries to live out an asteroid strike... and makes peace with everyone who will die, More like DEEP IMPACT than the movie they made from that script.

You can not judge a script by its movie.

More:
http://www.scriptsecrets.net/tips/tip215.htm

- Bill
 
One thing that did not suprise me at all about Juno was learning that the script was locked before production and no major revisions were permitted during shooting.

The only show I've been fortunate enough to see that on first-hand, was Babylon 5.
 
Is that why Juno was such an unmitigated disaster on every conceivable level? Why we had twee "quirky" indie rant dialog that refused to end?

I guess Juno proves that sometimes re-writes are just what the doctor ordered. There was a decent script buried somewhere in there. Too bad the ex-stripper couldn't find it.
 
wcmartell said:
You can't judge a screenplay by its movie.

Okay, here's the script, tell me the movie:

Q-like gadget maker for CIA creates all kinds of cool weapons. A super-intelligent Professor type. When the democratically eleceted President of a country is assassinated, the Prof realizes it was done with one of his gadgets, so he goes to the head of the CIA. Tells CIA head that someone has stolen one of their gadgets, and used it for evil. CIA head says he will take care of it and sends Prof home... where a hit squad attacks! Prof escapes - but is being hunted by the CIA using the cool gadget-weapons he created! Because he's super-intelligent, he MacGyvers up some weapons - but he is still an older guy and not an action guy... and he must fight to survive while trying to uncover this splinter group within the CIA who are putting evil dictators in control of countries.

Script was called DEAD DROP and sold for a bundle.
Click to expand...

Holy crap that sounds pretty cool. I would rather see that than a lot of recent films released in the multiplexes.

I've never seen Chain Reaction but it doesn't sound like this at all.
 
StefanHaynes said:
Is that why Juno was such an unmitigated disaster on every conceivable level? Why we had twee "quirky" indie rant dialog that refused to end?

I guess Juno proves that sometimes re-writes are just what the doctor ordered. There was a decent script buried somewhere in there. Too bad the ex-stripper couldn't find it.
Click to expand...
How it was even nominated for Best Screenplay still gets my goat. And the fact that it won...:furious3:
 
Nektonic said:
Holy crap that sounds pretty cool. I would rather see that than a lot of recent films released in the multiplexes.

I've never seen Chain Reaction but it doesn't sound like this at all.
Click to expand...

The great Josh Friedman. The guy is a stud. They wouldn't have handed him over the keys to the Terminator franchise if he didn't know what he was doing.
 
terminator franchise can describe cinema timeline:
terminator, indie thriller.
terminator 2, big budget form of terminator pg13 rated.
terminator 3, the fall of the industry.
terminator: the sarah connar chronicles, wtf are they doing.
terminator salvation, i think it's some kind of transformer movies.
 
StefanHaynes said:
Is that why Juno was such an unmitigated disaster on every conceivable level? Why we had twee "quirky" indie rant dialog that refused to end?

I guess Juno proves that sometimes re-writes are just what the doctor ordered. There was a decent script buried somewhere in there. Too bad the ex-stripper couldn't find it.
Click to expand...

*shrug* I enjoyed the heck out of Juno. It wasn't realism, but it wasn't aiming to be, either.

Different strokes, again.
 
amrrahmy said:
terminator franchise can describe cinema timeline:
terminator, indie thriller.
terminator 2, big budget form of terminator pg13 rated.
terminator 3, the fall of the industry.
terminator: the sarah connar chronicles, wtf are they doing.
terminator salvation, i think it's some kind of transformer movies.
Click to expand...

Terminator = yes
Terminator 2 = similar in some ways, also was not pg13
Terminator 3 = I can't argue with that
Terminator: The Sarah Conner Chronicles = not as good as the first two films, but pretty good overall
Terminator Salvation = not out yet so we can't judge it, the end of the trailer has a robot that looks like a Transformer but other than that it has potential
 
i remember one of the cuts to be popcorn action rating.i call it the studio cut, even if rated r it would be one to many f words.

but overall, you can see that if the studio gives money, the studio limits some stuffs, the movie has to be more pop corn action, it needs to be light and fluffy.
 
CallaghanFilms said:
I blame MTV and the Entertainment-A.D.D. generation...
Click to expand...

There are plenty of bad films from 1903 to 1968. Ever see "The Happening?" You want to blame anybody blame George Lucas and Steven Spielberg who opened the floodgates to film executives who knew,know nothing about story, art, or film, but are trained in business. I know Hollywood is a business, but before the above-mentioned Gods of Special Effects, there was some credence given to movies as art and not just commodities. What's the last movie I saw that I really loved? Probably Howl's Moving Castle. Now that movie had a story.
 
mburgh said:
There are plenty of bad films from 1903 to 1968. Ever see "The Happening?" You want to blame anybody blame George Lucas and Steven Spielberg who opened the floodgates to film executives who knew,know nothing about story, art, or film, but are trained in business. I know Hollywood is a business, but before the above-mentioned Gods of Special Effects, there was some credence given to movies as art and not just commodities...
Click to expand...
If anything, I would give you that it may be a Supply and Demand case of Catch 22.

That being said...

If we're talking bad movies, then yeah...they've always been around. Good movies, on the other hand, used to be around alot poo pooing more each year than we have now. By my count there were only three or four truly good films in 2008.

George Lucas sold his creative soul long ago. Indy 4 marked the first time Spielberg allowed his "friend" Lucas to tempt him down that path. Hopefully, with Lincoln, he will be right back on that path of creative righteousness.
 
Part of the deal is that movies used to be the only game in town, now we have TV and cable TV series and cable TV prestige films. If you compare all "visual entertainement" from today to all of the stuff from any year in the past, I don't think it would be that much different.

And when we are talking about bad movies, the biggest question is always "By whose definition?" Because any movie that made a lot of money did so because of repeat viewings - people who thought it was a great film seeing it again and again. Many people loved PHANTOM MENACE... just not me.

- Bill
 
This does not refer to any one person here, but I think a lot of times we blame the industry for things. We blame the business of film, and we blame it all on cost and those running the show. The reality is they do what they think is right and what they believe will make money.

We can either adapt to the ways of the infamous Industry heads.

Give up and just remain hobbyists,

Or stay true to Indy roots, and make films that challenge the typical, and the norm and out sell the industry and its rules on our own.

Call me an idealist if you want, but the reality is nothing can hold us or our stories back, not money, not distribution, not stars, or producers. A true filmmaker who really believes in his or her story will find a way to make it happen, and to beat the infamous industry, and the system. Its going to take a lot of us with those same ideals to make great films, and get them out there on our own.

just my two cents,

Graham Robbins
 
One thing I've heard is how the screenplay development process under the WGA rules leads to unneeded tinkering with stories.

Like if you get hired to rewrite a studio movie, it's in your financial interest to change over 50% of it to try to get sole writing credit.

This means that every time a studio changes writers they risk good material being thrown away and changed for no valid reason.

Probably the best two examples of this are The Flintstones and Curious George movies, both of which had over 10 writers or writing teams involved. Those things were so badly whitewashed and destroyed nothing but grimy little morsels of lame comedy was left.
 
CallaghanFilms said:
If anything, I would give you that it may be a Supply and Demand case of Catch 22.

That being said...

If we're talking bad movies, then yeah...they've always been around. Good movies, on the other hand, used to be around alot poo pooing more each year than we have now. By my count there were only three or four truly good films in 2008.

George Lucas sold his creative soul long ago. Indy 4 marked the first time Spielberg allowed his "friend" Lucas to tempt him down that path. Hopefully, with Lincoln, he will be right back on that path of creative righteousness.
Click to expand...
Hard to say who led who for me. Both of them came out of the USC filmschool and blew out all the greatness of the filmworld. Lucas made one real classic "American Graffitti (which if you haven't seen lately, or in the original widescreen, holds up way better than Star Wars) and Speilberg made one real classic "Jaws"(Ditto above). Then came Outer Space and Indiana Jones. Don't get me wrong , I loved Star Wars when I first saw it, but now it feels silly to me. What happened was, I think, the success of those films removed content and experimentation from mainstream hollywood. In the last 30 years Indie developed but took to navel gazing. What's the choice? Go watch **** blow up for 2 hours, or watch Zooey Deschanel whine (I prefer this) and slam her fingers in drawers. Also, I think the personal vision thing hurts more than helps in some cases: originality is overratted and talent is rare, but the true bad legacy of the 1960's wasn't drugs, the Republican destruction of America, or the corporatization of filmmaking, but the corrosive and destructive idea that anyone can be an artist. Most directors are craftsmen, not geniuses, as are most script writers, actors, etc, however, we are convinced we are the next genius.

Meanwhile, I can go see Bridewars, now playing at all the movieplexes (all two) here in Pork Smith.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top