Just for Discussion: Food for thought... don't you think...

  • 1
  • Idea
  • Updated 2 years ago
Since these threads are called "conversations", there are a few questions I wanted to raise, I'm curious to know your opinion because that's been bugging me for months.

Aren't there too many Star Wars movies?
Sure they're making money, it's called milking the cow and the SW legacy is so great one can't ignore it. But doesn't it also desserve the saga by demystifying the original material?  Do we need all these many background stories? Are you interested in the childhood of Alfred the Butler's or Lois Lane's high-school years? Maybe as long as it makes money, there's no reason to stop it... I guess the same reasoning applies to superhero films. But it seems to indicate that today, it's impossible to make anything spectacular that doesn't rely on previous material, and it's kind of lazy, you know. If you have a great legacy, all the budget to have convincing special effects, a huge fandom, will the quality of the story change anything?

Stars voicing Animation?
Yes, it existed before, George Sanders voiced Shere Khan and Peter Ustinov was an unforgettable Prince John but where have all the June Forays, Bill Thompsons', Phil Harrises gone? You know, voices dedicated to the world of animation. Roger Ebert said he didn't want to know which star voiced whom before watching the film because it distracted from the story and turned the viewing into a spot-the-star game instead of concentrating on the story. Yet it's part of the marketing campaign. It's like the real thrill of the film comes from hearing actors' voice rather than enjoying the film. It's even worse in France where animated films use like stand-up comedians with too "normal" voices while there used to be fantastic voice-actors from the 50s to the 90s. A shame, really.

High Heels...
What is it with women and high, and I mean very high, heels? In every red carpet gallery, you can see them wearing extremely high heels, some heels are even longer than their feet, I mean the foot seems to have an inclination superior to 45°. Granted height can be issue for an actor when it comes to play leading roles, not that it prevented Tom Cruise or Tom Hardy to succeed, but there has never been anything 'wrong' or unappealing for an actress to be short, why does she need to make herself longer, petite frames can be pretty to watch and  very cute, so why are short or average-sized actresses obsessed with wearing terrifically high heels. What's wrong with looking short for women whose job isn't fashion-model anyway?

That's all for a start, thanks for sharing your thoughts :)
Photo of 15yearsIMDber aka ElMo

15yearsIMDber aka ElMo

  • 4548 Posts
  • 5488 Reply Likes

Posted 2 years ago

  • 1
Photo of Steve Crook

Steve Crook, Champion

  • 1449 Posts
  • 1846 Reply Likes
Hello Sdk ElMaruecan,
> Aren't there too many Star Wars movies?
Yes, but so what? You don't have to watch them all
 
> Stars voicing Animation?
'Twas ever thus. I agree with your quote from Roger Ebert
 
> High Heels...
Some people (especially some women) really like them.
But what can you do about it?
 
If they want to ruin themselves for the sake of fashion, what can you do?

    Steve
Photo of 15yearsIMDber aka ElMo

15yearsIMDber aka ElMo

  • 4548 Posts
  • 5488 Reply Likes
Mmm, for the Star Wars issue, I'm not sure it's that simple. The "you don't have to watch it" can work if we speak of an individual work with which we're in disagreement, but don't you think (not a rhetorical question, I'm really asking) that this overdose of franchise movies can kill Hollywood's creativity when it comes to big budget movies?
(Edited)
Photo of Steve Crook

Steve Crook, Champion

  • 1449 Posts
  • 1846 Reply Likes
What about all of the remakes & sequels (or "reboots" or whatever else they want to call them)? Hollywood ran out of good, original ideas many decades ago  :)
    Steve
Photo of albstein

albstein

  • 1008 Posts
  • 2038 Reply Likes
I think both the Star Wars and the Animation Voices issue are discussed widely by movie fans.

I would even find it interesting to see movies in the Star Wars universe, but not connected to any of the original characters. Just stories based on their own premises, maybe an alien mafia city run by someone like Jabba the Hut, or a resistance fight on a planet that has nothing to do with Jedi vs Sith.

But of course, if you attach "Han Solo" or "Jedi" to the project, it's much more marketable. The same with remakes, they should remake movies with interesting premises that were badly executed, instead they do it to movies that work perfectly fine. 

I don't know if studio heads underestimate the intelligence and curiosity of their audience. On a short-term basis, reyling on previous material is a solid business decision, but on the long run it makes cinema less and less relevant to the general public, which leads to smaller attendance figures, which frightens studios and makes them rely even more on previous material. A vicious circle.