To make a good movie

[j0lly]

I was just watching Fight Club and remembered that it is almost 2 years old. Why aren't more movies with substance being made. F.C was the last good movie that I saw in a theater. Most of my friends liked it and some hated it, which is puzzling to me. It came and went quietly. Nobody paid much attention to it (I was around AT at that time so maybe it was a big deal here). The same applies to Heat (1995). Another one of my favourite movies.

No big time reviews or fuss. Movies like Perl Harbor and Armageddon are box office hits. As inacurate as they may be, people love them. What does it take to make a good movie? So does a movie have to get bad reviews and do just OK at the box office to be good? Is the movie going public just plain stupid? I hate reading review because they never say, "The cast is bad and the movie sucks ass, two thumbs down." Sony pictures even made up a fictional movie critic just for the reviews. :|

 

[Mo0o]

i thought pearl harbor was a dud

 

[DanJ]

Ah yes...FC and Heat

Other great ones that are kinda recent:
Requiem for a Dream
Memento
Magnolia
Unbreakable (pretty good for what it is)

Those are kinda recent at least. Requiem being the best.

 

[Gusfo0]

Don't forget Traffic.

 

[j0lly]

Requiem for a Dream was a good movie so was Traffic. But do you see the pattern? These movies don't get the reviews they deserve. Sure imdb and other sites will have a high rating for these movies but people who rate these movies are geeks like me. Why does hollywood feed people sh!t and more importantly, why do people choose to eat it?

 

[Imaginer]

<< Why aren't more movies with substance being made >>



Because most people come to movies for the entertainment value instead of the enlightening value. Also, most people who do go to movies usually are the masses with a few having some tastes for good films.

 

[gopunk]

jay and silent bob srike back is coming out soon

j0lly, you think you're frustrated? try having the reviewers diss on your favorite films because they're &quot;immature&quot; and have the general public diss on them because they don't want to be &quot;immature&quot;. at least somebody (the reviewers) agree with you.

I hate reading review because they never say, &quot;The cast is bad and the movie sucks ass, two thumbs down.&quot;

they say that about the films i like.

 

[j0lly]

That is a good point. Maybe entertainment is more important at times than enlightenment. For example, Hindi movies are 3 hours long and the story line as pretty much been the same for the past twenty decades. Yet, people go because it is entertaining.

 

[j0lly]

Jay and Silent bob... now THATS entertainment

 

[gopunk]

That is a good point. Maybe entertainment is more important at times than enlightenment. For example, Hindi movies are 3 hours long and the story line as pretty much been the same for the past twenty decades. Yet, people go because it is entertaining.

well... one could argue the same is true for american movies i heard a quote from a famous director (an old one, i forget his name) that went something along the lines of: there are only a few plots, the difference is in how you get there.

some of the movies are enlightening but people are too daft to see it. take southpark: bigger, longer, uncut, for example. most people won't even give it a chance, once they see &quot;southpark&quot;. they're too blind to see the political message behind the movie.

 

[gopunk]

<< Jay and Silent bob... now THATS entertainment >>


snootchie bootchies my man