Dillinger4
Es gibt Zeit
Has David Lynch stopped making films due to lack of funding? I thought it was due to other reasons
Are film franchises more common nowadays?
- Thread starter Lord Camomile
- Start date
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
I'm talking about the 1980 remake of the 50's version, starring Kurt Russel. Not the 2010 remake which was crap
Fez909
toilet expert
You nailed it with your last sentence: all the original screenplays are in the world of film away from the mainstream. There's still a vast amount of new films coming out which are not sequels or remakes. They just don't do as well in the box office, and cinemas are increasingly less likely to show them.
Mainstream films cost a ridiculous amount of money these days so the studios are reluctant to risk losing out a shedload of cash, and they know sequels have a ready made audience, so they make more of them. Independent and [most?] foreign film-makers don't have the cash to throw about on the latest special effects or whatever, so they are able to take more risks without worrying about recouping their investment.
Fez909
toilet expert
Reno
The In Kraut
Yes, he has stopped because he can't get funding. That's why he made his last film Inland Empire on an SD video camera. He does concentrate on music and painting now because he finds it too difficult to hustle for money to make films. He still makes to odd commercial.
Soderbergh has been very outspoken that directors with a personal vision have no place in Hollywood anymore: http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2013/jan/30/steven-soderbergh-retires-from-film
Reno
The In Kraut
That's were entertainment for adults has gone and it has often been remarked that this is a golden age of US television. The Sopranos, Treme and Breaking Bad are todays The Godfather, Nashville or Taxi Driver. Even the fantasy Game of Thrones is so much more sophisticated in terms of storytelling, characterisation and dialogue than its big screen equivalent The Hobbit/LOTR.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
I can't recall much film fantasy that has the depth and complexity of GoT to be honest- ok GoT has the advantage in running length. If you know better, let me know, I'd be right on the errr legitimate purchasing sites
Reno
The In Kraut
It was more of a footnote to the point I was making. I'm not a fantasy fan and GoT is the only one that I genuinely have been able to get into and it has found its home more comfortably on TV rather than the cinema.
Reno
The In Kraut
That's because they aren't rubbish.
There is a lot of rubbish US TV, but then there always have been rubbish films. We measure a cultural achievements by the best rather than the worst though, so we measure 70s Hollywood by Chinatown or Jaws rather than by Song of Norway or Beyond the Poseidon Adventure.
That's because they aren't rubbish.
But they are very formatted and standard and have the same stories as Friends or Cosby Show etc
So kind of rubbish....
Reno
The In Kraut
They are well written and well performed sitcoms and they are among the most critically acclaimed US comedies of the last decade. Just because they are of a particular genre doesn't automatically make them rubbish.
Reno
The In Kraut
Fez909
toilet expert
It could be that decent TV is a consequence of shit mainstream films? Like you say, nothing has the depth of the current run of long story arc dramas we seem to be blessed with.
There are books which you know would make awesome films, but they'd have to slim them down so much that they risk ruining what made them great. Then there's making a trilogy or whatever, which worked for LOTR, but not many other things would get such a good adaptation. Too much risk, not enough reward.
With TV, though, people are quite happy to commit themselves to 5+ series of 12 episodes and let the story unfold. I don't know how well TV shows like Breaking Bad do financially, but I'm guessing they do alright. Also, people seem less bothered about special effects with TV shows, and so they can save money there. And I suppose with TV you get to tweak the format while it is ongoing to increase the chance of a good reception - another thing film lacks.
We are in a golden age of TV, yep.
Reno
The In Kraut
It was the second, the first was called Satan Met a Lady. And His Girl Friday was the second and the most famous version of The Front Page. And the Judy Garland A Star is Born was the third version of that story. And Hitchcock, Hawks and Capra all remade one of their own films.
Fez909
toilet expert
No, it was the third. The first version was released in 1931 under the same name (Maltese Falcon).
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0022111/?ref_=sr_2
The Garland version of A Star is Born was the second, not third version.
The Front Page was originally a play.
Lord Camomile
Yipchaa!
It's nice when other people make your point far more eloquently than you do 
As has been said, while there have always been franchises and there are still original films made, it feels like the balance has shifted, particularly in the mainstream studio system. Filmmakers (by which I mean the moneyfolk, mostly) are thinking far more in terms of franchises than they used to, it seems anyway.
I don't think it was usual for a fairly mainstream film to get 2-5 sequels the way it is now.
And of course, if they don't like it they just reboot!
As has been said, while there have always been franchises and there are still original films made, it feels like the balance has shifted, particularly in the mainstream studio system. Filmmakers (by which I mean the moneyfolk, mostly) are thinking far more in terms of franchises than they used to, it seems anyway.
I don't think it was usual for a fairly mainstream film to get 2-5 sequels the way it is now.
And of course, if they don't like it they just reboot!
I guess it depends on what you mean by mainstream. As has been noted, there were lots of serials and and all the cowboy films such as Roy Rogers, Charles Starret, Gene Autrey, Hopalong Cassidy weren't likely to be very original. Whilst these might have had B movie budgets, they were very mainstream.
Quatermass 2 from the 1950s is an early example of a numbering system for a film.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050873/trivia?ref_=tt_trv_trv
It's a bit odd on that graphic to highlight the move from 7 original films to 0 in 2011. They could have said 7 original films in 1981 and just 1 in 1991. The move from 1 to none 20 years later is not that big a move.
Many films have historically not been original (I.e. they are based on other source material). 81 was obviously a good year for original material.
The key move for me is the move from 2 to 8 sequels which is pretty depressing but as has been noted there are lots of original and interesting films out there so it doesn't bother me too much that the most successful films and many of the films that clog up the summer schedules are sequels.
Lord Camomile
Yipchaa!
That is definitely part of it. Increasingly even a trilogy doesn't seem to be enough, it has to be a series.
skyscraper101
0891 50 50 50
What pisses me off is that everything is green screened and CGI'd to fuck. I just don't have any interest in whatever comic book rehash they want to bring out next because it will just be a world of CGI.
At least with the old 80s & 90s there was a nice mix of Special FX, CGI, makeup and live action stunts. These days most of the stuff is filmed in a giant green studio with bodysuits and shit.
At least with the old 80s & 90s there was a nice mix of Special FX, CGI, makeup and live action stunts. These days most of the stuff is filmed in a giant green studio with bodysuits and shit.
weltweit
Well-Known Member
What irritates me is how much is 3d for no reason and to no great effect.
I loathe 3d and have yet to see a film that it has positively enhanced.
skyscraper101
0891 50 50 50
Me too. I can't even watch 3D, it gives me a headache.
Reno
The In Kraut
I give you The Maltese Falcon, but the 1937 A Star is Born was an illegitimate remake of What Price Hollywood? from 1932 and The Front Page (which I know was a play) was first filmed in 1931 which makes His Girl Friday second of four films based on it.
Similar threads
