Hollywood's disconnect

Yahoo! News ^ | July 26, 2005 | Michael Medved

[Ciexyz]

I enjoyed "Fantastic Four" but was saddened that it included the totally superfluous use of "g-damn". In a film marketed for kids? I say, "Tender ears!" (It was extremely offensive to me, too, as an adult.) They didn't have to do that. It makes me less likely to go back to the cineplex, when I gave them a chance to appeal to me, a consumer, and they slap my religious convictions in the face.

I'd like to see the film again, but only if it is run thru the censorship people who produce copies that cut out offensive moments.

[BradyLS]

For several years now, I've gone to movies less and less. As others have said, the social climate almost gaurantees that asses and their cell phones and other noises and behaviors are close by. That, and most movies don't contain subjects I want to see. Or often have left-leaning slants in the ones I do.

Also, it's hard to escape movies even when you aren't in the theater to watch them. Review shows and sites are everywhere and most trailers nowadays practically give the movie away. Heck, after you pay for your ticket and popcorn, it's a 90 minute wait for the twist that _might_ make the movie passably interesting.

[dsc]

Wow, so many great movies not on that list at all.

Treasure of the Sierra Madre, Casablanca, From Here to Eternity...

[Rastus]

Is it the General Lee in the video? The doors weren't a gag in the original show. They were welded shut, which is a common safety requirement for a racecar.

[MarkL]

"then I heard that Jessica Simpson worked really hard to prepare for the role in that movie"

Huh? I'm trying to imagine what that would involve. I mean, it ain't Shakespeare, y'all.

Well, I heard she hired a "coach" for the movie...

Dialog coach? Probably not...

Acting coach? Probably not...

Personal trainer? Ding, Ding, Ding... We have a winner!

Mark

[dsc]

"Personal trainer? Ding, Ding, Ding... We have a winner!"

If you can't act you'd better be eye-candy, I guess. Still not enough to get me to pay to rent the DVD, much less go to a theater.

I was thinking about the usual Hollyweird suspects the other day, and it occurred to me that in a country the size of the US there *must* be at least several hundred really good-looking women with the potential to become truly fine actresses.

Lauren Bacall turned into a leftist, but in her first movie (To Have and Have Not, with Bogie) she was a sensation. There must be, oh, fifty or a hundred potential Bacalls out there.

I note that Mel Gibson has said that he's not going to use any stars in his next movie. It will be interesting to see what unknowns he can discover.

[discostu]

The motion is there to tell the story. Movies are a story. I want plot in my movies, which the good ones have.

[discostu]

Well they're going to have to go through some pruning, that's just the nature of movies vs books, even short books if done completely faithfully would turn into incredibly long (and generally rather slow) movies. As for the allegorical content I hope they keep it, but we'll see.

[Borges]

And therein lies the difference between us. It's not something I prioritize in movies. Something like '2001' is one of my favorite films of all time even though plot is quite minimal.

[discostu]

There's TONS of plot in 2001, also lots of brilliant direction, but there's a solid story that's being told with that brilliant technique. I love 2001, I love Kubrick (though Eyes was a definite disappointment), you can have good moves AND a good story. Spielberg USED TO do both, but not any more, thus why I don't like him anymore.