Originally Posted by Snowmaker

All probably going to be PG-13 too.

Originally Posted by glassdragon

Doesn't this same post get posted like twice a week?

Originally Posted by Jay G.

Have posters run out of new ideas?

Originally Posted by glassdragon

Didn't say you were wrong for asking, or that it was against any rules, just that the question seems at least to me more along the lines of a dead, and beaten horse by now :P

And the answer to your question. Yes, they ran out of ideas years ago.

Originally Posted by Nick Danger

Pan's Labyrinth seemed original to me. Perhaps you've just seen too may fairy tales with Nazis.

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs

Yea, this topic does get posted all the time. We covered this in my film history class at NYU.

Here were the main point.

-During the 70s corporations like Coke started by film studios. They saw movies more as products than an artistic medium.
-The rise of the blockbuster
-Advertisers control a vast amount fo the content in movies because they don't want to be associated with movies deemed "too controversial" movies generally must have a happy ending. No one wants to see a movie with a sad ending it wouldn't make them want to buy their products.
-Studios usually do whats already done before, over and over because those ideas have a proven track record. (e.g. black guy/white guy buddy comedy, fish out of water situations, etc.)
-Studios are more concerned with getting a big star attached to a movie than what the movie is really about. (Will Smith could play Superman if he really wanted to)
-The rise of the music video director to fim.

Then Hollywood goes through phases (e.g. teen comedy, horror, CGI, superhero, I think we're in the video game/toy adaptation phase now with GI Joe, Transformers.)

Bottom line Hollywood is really about money not artsitic integrity for the most part so expect to see the same things recycled for a while.

Side Note: I know there are the exceptions of what are considered presitige fils which are usually released at the end of the year. These films ae made for very little but the whole purpose of them is to get good PR for the studio. The studios with the best PR become the ones the bigger stars are attracted to working with for the next year.


Prb my fave class ever.

Originally Posted by Ronnie Dobbs

BTW, you can always rent Altman's "The Player" too.

Originally Posted by Nick Danger

Ronnie, I'd also say that if you need $100 million to make a movie, you're going to need to find investors willing to front you the money. Investors aren't going to write checks that big unless they're expecting a good rate of return. They could put the same money in T-bills if they only wanted zero interest. So there is always pressure to make a 'safe' movie that will make a guaranteed profit. What could be safer than yet another Batman movie?

Originally Posted by Brack

If we're talking about mainstream movies, sure, there's not a whole lot of originality. As much as it's popular to blame studios for this trend, they're only following the formula that has proved to be profitable. If people stop attending these movies, that's when they'll stop making them.

As far as originality goes, I really liked Marc Forester's Stay from a few years ago. I don't think movies usually present new ideas and concepts, but are able to present ideas and concepts in new ways.

Originally Posted by Shannon Nutt

It's like someone remaking The Wizard of Oz or Casablanca. They can make it LOOK better, but it won't BE better.

Originally Posted by Trigger

One remake I'd like to see from the 80s is No Way Out with Kevin Costner and Gene Hackman. Great story - bad music and Sean Young.