Tired of 2-word movie titles beginning with "The"

Chris Light

Chris Light

Veteran
do filmakers minimize the title of their film in such a way to envoke some profound meaning to their film, or make the film seem like the be-all-end-all of the subject matter with which they are presenting? it seems pretentious, egotistic, and since it's overly used, quite detrimental to the films themselves...two-word titled movies that begin with "The" usually don't hold up. i'm sure someone will give examples to the contrary, and that's fine. go make "The (insert word)"

Chris
www/vimeo.com/chrislight
 
here you go, as you predicted... a few filmmaker gods you have just offended...

Robert Altman
John Carpenter (x2)
Francis Ford Coppola
Alfred Hitchcock
Stanley Kubrick

...i would duck if i were you. :)
 
Zak Forsman said:
here you go, as you predicted... a few filmmaker gods you have just offended...

Robert Altman
John Carpenter (x2)
Francis Ford Coppola
Alfred Hitchcock
Stanley Kubrick

...i would duck if i were you. :)
Click to expand...

With the exception of The Thing, The Fog and The Killing, all of the titles you're referring to weren't even named by the filmmakers.

But my real point is: The subject of this thread is RETARDED.
 
I'm sure many filmmakers do chose a title with "The" in it to make it sound more profound. But there are many "The" movies that do hold-up to the name.

"The Others" was a good flick. I hear "The Orphanage" was good too. "The Host" was great! The list could go on and on.

So your theory has "The Holes" in it. :)
 
How dare those filmmakers use nouns, adjectives and definite articles to describe their movies. How pretentious!
 
Would a Uwe Boll film by any other name not smell as sour?

I don't care what a film is titled if it's good... there's enough pseudo-intellectual bullsh*t in the world as it is... if something can be rendered down to it's simplest definition I gotta' support it. If anything I'd say that films with titles like "there will be blood" or "no country for old men" are pretentious... but again... in those cases I don't even think about the title other then as needed to make reference.

Some flicks have "the" and some don't... I think the decision depends on how broad the concept is... and the perception that the marketing team is going for... The Spiderman... or The Superman would be dumb because the general film-going public has enough understanding of the character involved through pop-culture... Birds wouldn't have worked for The Birds... because there's nothing ominous about "Birds"... it sounds like a generic nature show... but "those" birds tells us there's something to be concerned about this occurance of birds... just like Ring wouldn't have worked either... because it's obscure and weak, compared to The Ring.

"The" gives the necessary importance to a single term when simplifying a film's content... in some cases it would be awkward to look for ways around it... what alternative name would you have given to The Thing, The Illusionist, The Birds, etc. etc.

This thread would hold more weight if you gave some good alternatives to movies that had "the" titles... although... if it were me, I'd have titled The Birds "Aviary Assualt".
 
Yeah "the" is a sure fire recipe for failure.

That's why The Beatles never really made it as a band.


I find this all a bit silly. I think a films title might be the must irrelevant part of a film.
 
well, i was not going to IMDB every movie in history to see if they all "hold up", so i'm not surprised if some of you think my opinion is trash. it just seems as if a lot of new filmmakers, or ametuers (which i consider myself), and the like are doing this to somehow finalize the meaning of their film. it just seems like more poeple are doing it, and it was something i noticed, so i thought i'd comment on it. i really didn't consider some of the greats, as Forsman mentioned at the beginning, as i didn't cite examples or make exclusions. to do so would have been time consuming...it was just a mini rant.

didn't mean to offend or start an uprising, as i have much respect for all those who responded. i have learned a lot from all of you whether you know it or not.

sorry to have wasted your time. The End.
 
I've always found the long, full-sentence movie titles which try to sound clever, pretentious and obnoxious.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
The Englishman Who Went Up a Hill But Came Down a Mountain
 “To Wong Foo Thanks For Everything, Julie Newmar!“
The Incredibly True Adventure of Two Girls in Love

But, some long titles are just funny as hell:

The Fable of the Kid Who Shifted His Ideals to Golf and Finally Became a Baseball Fan and Took the Only Known Cure (1916)

Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines, or How I Flew from London to Paris in 25 hours 11 minutes (1965)

The Green Goods Man; or, Josiah and Samanthy's Experience with the Original 'American Confidence Game' (1905)

The Fable of the Throbbing Genius of a TankTown Who Was Encouraged by Her Folks Who Were Prominent (1916) (I'm sure this is a real gripping piece)

The Man with the Smallest Penis in Existence and the Electron Microscope Technician Who Loved Him (2003) (netflix anyone?)
 
I made a film called "The Wicked" and I'm far from a pretentious filmmaker. Some may even call me a schlock filmmaker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top