Dr. DVD

I have to say that reading this thread title and then seeing the topic directly below it (Human Centipede) at the time of this post kind makes on think he might have a point.

Solid Snake

If anything...I haven't cared about Coppola for a long time. I respect his craft though. I still Dracula was ok, enjoyable yes..but ok. Maybe it's the fact that so much of it was a production set (and not a convincing one at that) that bothers me..that and Reeves being totally miscasted.

on topic:
Maybe filmmakers should head studios that would allow a breath of originality (that term may be offensive to some but you know what I mean). Until that day..we'll be surrounded with good gems out of a lot of turds.

Rival11

Very well said.

It comes down to who's saying it and why. And just like it was mentioned previously by another user...every conversation with a filmmaker who is past their prime or maybe even washed up "films are just going in a different direction man...times are changing...people are losing interest...blah, blah, blah. Today it seems filmmakers with talent are given a lot more opportunity to make a film than ever and how is that a bad thing?

Sure there's a lot of shit out there...now more than ever actually but there are also a lot of solid films being made as well.

People are into movies more now than they ever were (and uh, some of us take them way to seriously) but there's nothing wrong with that, it's an art form and a damn cool one. Even critic reviews have evolved from the standard "I hated this movie because the director doesn't have a proven track record" to a more in depth, direct approach to the reader. I've actually even taken up to a few select reviewers on this site who have saved me some headache. This is great for me because I don't always have the time to dig into a film a little bit to see if it may or may not fit my tastes and yes, I really feel the reviews I read from the critics I like (both here and a fwew other sites) are that good now.

I don't know too much about coppola to say that he's wrong or maybe we're all taking it of context??? I don't know but about a year and half ago I came to a huge halt with renting/buying/watching films in general. Now, a local video store opened up around the corner from me that offers new releases at 2 bucks a pop (yes, only two dollars for a new release) and they have a huge selection - I asked how the hell they compete and they simply said "We're about people renting in quantity, you have two movies in you're hand, if they were 4 bucks a pop you prob have looked around for a little bit and then walked out".

I rambling like an idiot now so I'll stop here. Just posting my thoughts like others - I'm not going nuts over the subject or anything and I could actually be wrong but I'm just going by what I see and how I look at films in general.

Sonic

I'm sure many of you guys don't know this, but Coppola shits gold nuggets and pisses Coca-Cola.

Gerry P.

Once again, Coppola is not saying that movies are dying, but that cinema is dying. The fact that so many people don't understand the basic premise of his argument is proof that he is, to some extent, right.

Did anyone happen to notice that Miramax's staff was cut by two-thirds just two weeks ago?

wm lopez

With all this unemployment and families having to watch their budget maybe the next generation will start watching movies made before 1980. And will then stop supporting these remakes.

Bandoman

Wait..this was Coppola?

Gerry P.

That would have been a step up.

The Bus

These statements always make me laugh. Cinema and film won't die. Perhaps theatrical viewing the way we know it now won't exist in 20 years. It's certainly very different today from 20 years ago. But films will still exist.

This new world is not allowing the studios to take big monetary risks. Stuff like Land of the Lost bombing (even though it deserved to) is never good news. But that's not a risk. Audiences are not worse off because movies like Land of the Lost won't be made anymore.

I think we'll see a change in tier pricing. At some point the business will shake up and distributors, production companies, theaters, media companies, and audiences will figure out a system for true tiered pricing. We already sort of have it now with discount runs and (on the high end) 3D/IMAX shows. There's one or two movies a year where I have no problem paying $15 to see them. Avatar is probably this year's example.

At the same time, it would be nice to have choices that are cheaper. What if a studio were to put out a new movie with a lower ticket price. What if the major chains started showing new movies as well as discount-run ones. I'd like to go to the theater I currently go to and see Inglourious Basterds for $3 or $4 today.

On the consumer side, the pricing system for movie theaters is extremely unsophisticated. Once it catches up, I think things will get more exciting. But that may not happen until well into the next decade.

Ash Ketchum

Bring back double features.

I was curious to see both JENNIFER'S BODY and WHIP IT! If they played together, one five minutes after the other (for a bathroom break) for the same price, I would probably have gone. But I can't see paying $12.50 (current standard price in NYC) each. That's $25 for two movies that would have been little more than B-movies in the old studio system. The DVDs will probably cost less.

Jon2

I think it's too late.

Syfy?