Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Sun Oct 26, 2014 2:19 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good? 
Author Message
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 7493
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
To anyone who says this year hasn't been worse, I disagree. Last year by the end of March I'd seen and liked The Grey, Chronicle, and the Hunger Games. This year all I have is Side Effects

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sun Mar 17, 2013 2:26 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:04 pm
Posts: 1747
Location: New Hampshire
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
JamesKunz wrote:
To anyone who says this year hasn't been worse, I disagree. Last year by the end of March I'd seen and liked The Grey, Chronicle, and the Hunger Games. This year all I have is Side Effects


And I didn't care muc for Side Effects. It was an uneven film, and tried to be too much all in one movie.

_________________
Death is pretty final
I'm collecting vinyl
I'm gonna DJ at the end of the world.


Sun Mar 17, 2013 3:10 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3748
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
Sexual Chocolate wrote:
Vexer wrote:
Well not for me it wasn't, normally I find films longer then two and a half hours a tough sit, but I was never bored once during Bad Boys 2, I never became "numb" to the film(though I can understand why some would). I can't wait for Bad Boys 3.


This sort of goes back to my first point. If Bay is the high standard for you, then you don't have much of a starting point with which to compare the very best in action cinema. As an example, if you compare Bad Boys II to the chariot race in Wyler's Ben-Hur, or any of the action sequences directed by Kurosawa,* or the car chase in The French Connection, or anything in John Woo's Hong Kong films, then it's easy to see where Bay is lacking. But without that frame of reference, you can't see it.

*I especially highlight Kurosawa, because he is one of the greatest action directors that ever lived.

I never said Bay was my "high standard", I don't think he's one of the best directors by any means, I just find his films entertaining is all. Oh and for the record, I do have that "frame of reference", i've seen all those films you mentioned and I won't pretend Bay's output is on the same level as Hard Boiled or anything like that, but that dosen't one cannot find them enjoyable in they're own right.


Sun Mar 17, 2013 3:27 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2010 4:04 pm
Posts: 1747
Location: New Hampshire
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
Vexer wrote:
I never said Bay was my "high standard", I don't think he's one of the best directors by any means, I just find his films entertaining is all. Oh and for the record, I do have that "frame of reference", i've seen all those films you mentioned and I won't pretend Bay's output is on the same level as Hard Boiled or anything like that, but that dosen't one cannot find them enjoyable in they're own right.


That's rather interesting. I was not aware you were a fan of Kurosawa and Woo; I don't recall you ever mentioning them on the forum.

Well...as a way of proving I don't totally live in the past, I suppose you may have seen a movie last year called Premium Rush. Now that was a good action movie; it had a great rhythm to it and made awesome use if its locations. If you haven't seen it, check it out.

_________________
Death is pretty final
I'm collecting vinyl
I'm gonna DJ at the end of the world.


Sun Mar 17, 2013 4:11 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3748
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
Sexual Chocolate wrote:
Vexer wrote:
I never said Bay was my "high standard", I don't think he's one of the best directors by any means, I just find his films entertaining is all. Oh and for the record, I do have that "frame of reference", i've seen all those films you mentioned and I won't pretend Bay's output is on the same level as Hard Boiled or anything like that, but that dosen't one cannot find them enjoyable in they're own right.


That's rather interesting. I was not aware you were a fan of Kurosawa and Woo; I don't recall you ever mentioning them on the forum.

Well...as a way of proving I don't totally live in the past, I suppose you may have seen a movie last year called Premium Rush. Now that was a good action movie; it had a great rhythm to it and made awesome use if its locations. If you haven't seen it, check it out.

I like some of Kurosawa's films but not all of them. I like almost everything Woo has done, even his Hollywood ouput(Face/Off is my all time favorite action film), I was excited back when he was rumored to be directing a film adaption of Metroid, too bad that never happened. I have mentioned Woo on here before, but that was before you became a member.

I did see Premium Rush last year and found it enjoyable.


Sun Mar 17, 2013 5:03 pm
Profile
Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:44 pm
Posts: 1807
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
Quote:
Before we get Iron Man 3, Man of Steel, Star Trek: Into Darkness, and The Wolverine, we must wade through another month or two of mediocrity.


Those movies all cost more than 150 mil, involve plenty of CGI, and carry fanbases in the form of millions of dudes under 30. In other words, you're guaranteed to love all of them and they will all 4 of them surely make it into your top 10 lists at the end of this year. So in regards to 2013, you don't have much to complain about.

You must realize that the only reason you don't see the value in films like Bullet to the Head or Resident Evil is because you're not open to the idea of them having any value. It seems like you're not open to the notion that their creators might actually have brains in their skulls and not be bumbling neanderthals. All I see is that you're prejudiced against action movies with lower budgets.


Sun Mar 17, 2013 6:11 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 10:42 pm
Posts: 1429
Location: Bangkok
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
Ironic that you said those things about prejudice and not open to things in the second paragraph, when in the first paragraph you just presume that some of us are "guaranteed to love all of them and they will all 4 of them surely make it into your top 10 lists at the end of this year", based on nothing but the movies' budgets and generalization of the fanbase. The speed in which you go from condescending to hypocrisy in barely 2-3 sentences apart is just breathtaking.

Vexer, I'm curious to know what do you think of Speed? For me, I recognize that there are action movies made with better quality in the story and technical senses (for example, Die Hard), but imo Speed is just so thrilling and endlessly rewatchable that it may be my favorite action movie.


Sun Mar 17, 2013 10:35 pm
Profile
Producer

Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 11:04 am
Posts: 2244
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
Meh. I would say this has been an average year. We usually only get a few great movies at most in the early parts of the year. And this year, I've only seen one great film and that is Side Effects. So yeah, pretty typical. Lots of enjoyable movies, some forgettable movies. I haven't outright hated anything yet although I still have yet to see Identity Thief or Movie 43 or A Haunted House yet.


Sun Mar 17, 2013 10:38 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 446
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
MGamesCook wrote:
Quote:
Before we get Iron Man 3, Man of Steel, Star Trek: Into Darkness, and The Wolverine, we must wade through another month or two of mediocrity.


Those movies all cost more than 150 mil, involve plenty of CGI, and carry fanbases in the form of millions of dudes under 30. In other words, you're guaranteed to love all of them and they will all 4 of them surely make it into your top 10 lists at the end of this year. So in regards to 2013, you don't have much to complain about.

You must realize that the only reason you don't see the value in films like Bullet to the Head or Resident Evil is because you're not open to the idea of them having any value. It seems like you're not open to the notion that their creators might actually have brains in their skulls and not be bumbling neanderthals. All I see is that you're prejudiced against action movies with lower budgets.


The last sentence is something I've talked about a lot and is valid in terms of argument and brings up a reasonable and debatable point. I wish you didn't veer off into the telling people what they really think thing, though, and I'm not sure we can say that it applies to Sean (in this example) based on such a limited sampel. The four films he listed are films I seriously doubt I'll ever see, but I won't ever see Bullet to the Head either, and that doesn't make me a bad person. But you're taking it a little too far in that there are valid and defensible reasons that he may be looking forward to those films. You claim that people aren't open to certain films having value, but you're doing the exact same type of prejudice in the other direction. If someone looks forward to any film because of the filmmaker, the lore, the actors, etc... that's all fine and great. If it's just a trailer that gets them amped, that's also cool. I agree with you that many are simply prejudiced against low-budget and early-year action films, but you can't look at this sample size, or the fact that someone didn't like Bullet to the Head, and say that that is what proves their prejudice.


Sun Mar 17, 2013 11:10 pm
Profile
Producer

Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 11:04 am
Posts: 2244
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
Bullet to the Head was okay, but it wasn't a very memorable movie. For starters, it's a very repetitive movie. They find one bad guy, they question him, Stallone kills him. This happens over and over again. The partner is such a lightweight actor. He has no real presence especially compared to Stallone. Speaking of Stallone, a part of me applauds the movie for having the Stallone character be such an asshole. It's an interesting choice. On the other hand though, it's hard to get behind him when he's really just a thug. But Stallone is fine in the part. And Jason Momao is surprisingly good as one of the main bad guys. I loved their ax fight at the end. But overall, it's entertaining but highly forgettable.

IMO, The Last Stand was much better.


Sun Mar 17, 2013 11:21 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3748
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
peng wrote:
Ironic that you said those things about prejudice and not open to things in the second paragraph, when in the first paragraph you just presume that some of us are "guaranteed to love all of them and they will all 4 of them surely make it into your top 10 lists at the end of this year", based on nothing but the movies' budgets and generalization of the fanbase. The speed in which you go from condescending to hypocrisy in barely 2-3 sentences apart is just breathtaking.

Vexer, I'm curious to know what do you think of Speed? For me, I recognize that there are action movies made with better quality in the story and technical senses (for example, Die Hard), but imo Speed is just so thrilling and endlessly rewatchable that it may be my favorite action movie.

I thought Speed was a really good film, and like Ebert I found the sequel enjoyable as well.


Sun Mar 17, 2013 11:24 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:35 am
Posts: 423
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
JamesKunz wrote:
I don't think you know what the word "queue" means. I think you mean "cue"


Yeah, I realised my mistake just now and hoped that somehow nobody had visited this thread to notice my stupid error. One too many whiskeys on St. Patty's day... My bad :?

Oh well, joke ruined, try harder next time I suppose.

On topic. 2013 will get good when I see movies that I like... May sound vague, but it's like that every year. I don't know what the good movies are until they're released and the positive buzz convinces me to see it. You can't really look into the future at a movie nobody has seen and know if it's going to be any good. It's just a case of 'let's wait and see'. There's a lot of films from great directors coming out this year. Any year with the Coen bros, Guillermo del Toro, Edgar Wright, Neill Blomkamp and Alfonso Cuarón is worth looking optimistic about.


Last edited by Awkward Beard Man on Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:18 am, edited 1 time in total.



Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:14 am
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:07 pm
Posts: 1588
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
MGamesCook wrote:
You must realize that the only reason you don't see the value in films like Bullet to the Head or Resident Evil is because you're not open to the idea of them having any value. It seems like you're not open to the notion that their creators might actually have brains in their skulls and not be bumbling neanderthals. All I see is that you're prejudiced against action movies with lower budgets.


Re: That lasr sentence. Oh really? What about El Mariachi? That's a low-budget action film and it's a damn good one.. I saw Bullet To The Head mainly because I'm a Walter Hill fan and I found it to be okay. Not great. But entertaining enough while it's on albeit it totally evaporates the minute it's over. A pro job. But Hill can do better.

It's easy to forget that the original Terminator was pretty low budget for the era it was released in. Hell the original Die Hard (probably my favorite action movie of all-time aside from some John Woo ones) wasn't as high budgeted as its sequels.

Back on the subject.

This year is very similar to last year in that regard. Late last year I observed that while 2012 was significantly better as a whole than 2011 if I were just going by the first 6 months it would be worse. 2912 was pretty backloaded and 2013 might be the same.

_________________
This ain't a city council meeting you know-Joe Cabot

Cinema is a matter of what's in the frame and what's out-Martin Scorsese.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1347771599


Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:56 am
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 8:09 pm
Posts: 724
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
Shade2 wrote:
You claim that people aren't open to certain films having value, but you're doing the exact same type of prejudice in the other direction.


This has been explained, ad nauseum, to this guy for something like 2 years. He can't seem to grasp the concept, so, you know, fuck it.

Anyway, I think 2013 is just about to get rolling. Stoker is out, The Place Beyond the Pines is coming out in a few weeks, the new Danny Boyle film Trance is being released in early April (late March if you're in the UK), and Mud is coming out at the end of April.

I'm excited for all 4, but like Shade, I can't fucking wait for Mud.

I also think Oblivion looks like it could be really good, as well. And I'll probably end up seeing Olympus Has Fallen, even though I think it looks kind of bad.


Mon Mar 18, 2013 10:36 am
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 446
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
PeachyPete wrote:
And I'll probably end up seeing Olympus Has Fallen, even though I think it looks kind of bad.


Exactly. It's a weird feeling. The same reason I'll see F&F 6 and be excited to do so.


Mon Mar 18, 2013 12:18 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:57 pm
Posts: 443
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
Shade2 wrote:
PeachyPete wrote:
And I'll probably end up seeing Olympus Has Fallen, even though I think it looks kind of bad.


Exactly. It's a weird feeling. The same reason I'll see F&F 6 and be excited to do so.


But it's Die Hard....IN THE WHITE HOUSE! Surely, it will be a better Die Hard movie than the actual Die Hard we got.


Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:01 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3748
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
patrick wrote:
Shade2 wrote:
PeachyPete wrote:
And I'll probably end up seeing Olympus Has Fallen, even though I think it looks kind of bad.


Exactly. It's a weird feeling. The same reason I'll see F&F 6 and be excited to do so.


But it's Die Hard....IN THE WHITE HOUSE! Surely, it will be a better Die Hard movie than the actual Die Hard we got.

Don't forget, there's also White House Down, I wonder which one of those two films will be better?


Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:06 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 2:49 am
Posts: 446
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
Vexer wrote:
Don't forget, there's also White House Down, I wonder which one of those two films will be better?


Say what you will about their talent, but Fuqua and Emmerich are very different directors. I anticipate liking Fuqua's and not seeing Emmerich's, but who knows?


Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:41 pm
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 3748
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
Shade2 wrote:
Vexer wrote:
Don't forget, there's also White House Down, I wonder which one of those two films will be better?


Say what you will about their talent, but Fuqua and Emmerich are very different directors. I anticipate liking Fuqua's and not seeing Emmerich's, but who knows?

They are certainly different, Fuqua is more consistent in that i've only disliked one of his films(King Arthur) and i've disliked three of Emmerich's films(Anonymous, 10,000 B.C. and 2012), but they're both pretty good at what they do, so it'll be interesting to say the least.


Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:46 pm
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 4:33 pm
Posts: 584
Post Re: So, When is 2013 Going to Get Good?
MGamesCook wrote:
Quote:
Before we get Iron Man 3, Man of Steel, Star Trek: Into Darkness, and The Wolverine, we must wade through another month or two of mediocrity.


Those movies all cost more than 150 mil, involve plenty of CGI, and carry fanbases in the form of millions of dudes under 30. In other words, you're guaranteed to love all of them and they will all 4 of them surely make it into your top 10 lists at the end of this year. So in regards to 2013, you don't have much to complain about.

You must realize that the only reason you don't see the value in films like Bullet to the Head or Resident Evil is because you're not open to the idea of them having any value. It seems like you're not open to the notion that their creators might actually have brains in their skulls and not be bumbling neanderthals. All I see is that you're prejudiced against action movies with lower budgets.


Incorrect. On the contrary, thrillers and comic-book films rarely make the top of my best-of lists. I am not even sure if Marvel's The Avengers or The Dark Knight Rises made my top fifty last year. As a side-note, I would like to point out that, having seen all of Paul W.S. Anderson's films, I can safely say that he is a bumbling neanderthal. :D

I will confess that I have a great deal of admiration for genre cinema, but that in no way is an indication that I dislike independent films and arthouse productions. My top five films of 2012 were Zero Dark Thirty, Amour, Holy Motors, The Master, and Argo. Out of those five films, four are the products of independent studios, with three barely getting any publicity outside of awards talk and critics' top-ten lists. The last time a comic-book film was even in my top ten was The Dark Knight, which was my favorite movie of 2008. For some time, I was thinking of going with 4 Months, 3 Weeks, and 2 Days, but a) I saw it in 2007, and b) I consider it a 2007 film, seeing as it was released in Romania that year.

Guess what my favorite action film of 2012 was? It wasn't The Dark Knight Rises. It wasn't The Avengers. It wasn't even Skyfall. It was Looper, which was made on a mere $30 million budget. That's less than the $55 million it cost to make Bullet to the Head. It is also less than half of what it cost to make Paul W.S. Anderson's latest cinematic abomination, Resident Evil: Retribution, which cost $65 million.


Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:10 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr