Movies & TV The Hangar Film Thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Lore said:
Is it just too long, generally?

Seems to me films are getting longer and longer without actually adding value... they seem to just meander for the first half hour or so and get nowhere.
Click to expand...
Have you seen Predestination? It's my fav Aussie film in the last 10 years. It has really odd pacing and the first 30 minutes could potentially bore someone. I am happy i got through it. Highly recommend it.

But I know what you mean. My gut feeling is perhaps films are trying to compete with the richness of a great TV series now. Tv dramas are at the top of their game.
 
DapperJong said:
Have you seen Predestination? It's my fav Aussie film in the last 10 years. It has really odd pacing and the first 30 minutes could potentially bore someone. I am happy i got through it. Highly recommend it.

But I know what you mean. My gut feeling is perhaps films are trying to compete with the richness of a great TV series now. Tv dramas are at the top of their game.
Click to expand...

TV series gets the bonus of being able to insert little cliff hangs every 25 minutes.. it's like pow pow pow pow, keeps hitting you to end each ep then resolves to start the next. Perfect for human brain.

Movies have to go with one sustained hit and hope they can keep you on that wave and make the final act worth the wait
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Howard Moon said:
TV series gets the bonus of being able to insert little cliff hangs every 25 minutes.. it's like pow pow pow pow, keeps hitting you to end each ep then resolves to start the next. Perfect for human brain.

Movies have to go with one sustained hit and hope they can keep you on that wave and make the final act worth the wait
Click to expand...
It's all very formulaic. The "Hollywood model" has been a staple since the 50s, however it's always been challenged by films that end up becoming classics. We studied Alien at uni and how it basically went against the model in nearly every sense. But Clooney is different. He has gone on to consider himself an auteur. So self indulgence often comes at the cost of entertaining people.
 
DapperJong said:
It's all very formulaic. The "Hollywood model" has been a staple since the 50s, however it's always been challenged by films that end up becoming classics. We studied Alien at uni and how it basically went against the model in nearly every sense. But Clooney is different. He has gone on to consider himself an auteur. So self indulgence often comes at the cost of entertaining people.
Click to expand...

Do you get to gain auteur status just by being a success? Or is it a certain type of success above normal success. The type where people go to see the actor, not the movie.

I look at a band like radiohead, gained huge success, critical and commercial - from that point they could get away with whatever they wanted (and have done so) they could play happy birthday on an elastic band and people would pay to watch..

Most successful actors still go the one for them one for me rotation on film choices, I guess to keep themselves satisfied and the industry appeased.

Would take a certain type (Clooney,Cruise) to lock themself up alone on a planet and let you watch them faff about for two hours and call it a classic.

Aurtuer = Grandiose Narcissisim?
 
GUMBLETRON said:
You also don't remember the long bad films of the past.
Click to expand...
www.businessinsider.com

Are movies getting longer? Here's the data

Each year's picks for the "best" films seem to be the longest. Why are acclaimed movies always so long? A data scientist breaks down the myth of long runtimes.
www.businessinsider.com www.businessinsider.com

It seems both of us are marking our age haha

According to that link (slightly out of date though it is), movies have got longer since the 1980s as we're no longer restricted to the amount of film you can fit on a single VHS tape and anyone who wants to win an Oscar is making movies that go for at least two hours. So basically all of the big budget stuff that's worth watching (and a bunch of stuff that isn't but wishes it was) is falling into that frame, whether or not they actually need two hours to tell their story.

But if you've spent some amount of time watching films that came out between the 60s and the 80s, then longer movies are a return to what was normal before home video put downward pressure on running time.
 
Lore said:
www.businessinsider.com

Are movies getting longer? Here's the data

Each year's picks for the "best" films seem to be the longest. Why are acclaimed movies always so long? A data scientist breaks down the myth of long runtimes.
www.businessinsider.com www.businessinsider.com

It seems both of us are marking our age haha

According to that link (slightly out of date though it is), movies have got longer since the 1980s as we're no longer restricted to the amount of film you can fit on a single VHS tape and anyone who wants to win an Oscar is making movies that go for at least two hours. So basically all of the big budget stuff that's worth watching (and a bunch of stuff that isn't but wishes it was) is falling into that frame, whether or not they actually need two hours to tell their story.

But if you've spent some amount of time watching films that came out between the 60s and the 80s, then longer movies are a return to what was normal before home video put downward pressure on running time.
Click to expand...

We miss the intermission for pee and popcorn break
 
Howard Moon said:
Do you get to gain auteur status just by being a success? Or is it a certain type of success above normal success. The type where people go to see the actor, not the movie.

I look at a band like radiohead, gained huge success, critical and commercial - from that point they could get away with whatever they wanted (and have done so) they could play happy birthday on an elastic band and people would pay to watch..

Most successful actors still go the one for them one for me rotation on film choices, I guess to keep themselves satisfied and the industry appeased.

Would take a certain type (Clooney,Cruise) to lock themself up alone on a planet and let you watch them faff about for two hours and call it a classic.

Aurtuer = Grandiose Narcissisim?
Click to expand...

I think it's just being comfortable with not making much money from a film. One, because it's not going to appeal to the masses, but you're also not getting the high level distribution. And normally distributors get an associate producer credit on a film and have a say on it. They know what makes money but they also know what is entertaining. Not to say a self funded film can't be entertaining, but major distributors obviously want safe entertainment.

I think music is a little different, because you can commit to it as you please. You don't need to lock in 2 hours of your life.
 
DapperJong said:
Have you seen Predestination? It's my fav Aussie film in the last 10 years. It has really odd pacing and the first 30 minutes could potentially bore someone. I am happy i got through it. Highly recommend it.

But I know what you mean. My gut feeling is perhaps films are trying to compete with the richness of a great TV series now. Tv dramas are at the top of their game.
Click to expand...
TV drama is where it's at, manufactured reality not included. :p

I haven't seen Predestination but the synopsis is fascinating *puts it on the endless watch list*

DapperJong said:
I think it's just being comfortable with not making much money from a film. One, because it's not going to appeal to the masses, but you're also not getting the high level distribution. And normally distributors get an associate producer credit on a film and have a say on it. They know what makes money but they also know what is entertaining. Not to say a self funded film can't be entertaining, but major distributors obviously want safe entertainment.

I think music is a little different, because you can commit to it as you please. You don't need to lock in 2 hours of your life.
Click to expand...
I guess commercialisation in general leads to formulaic, factory line style productions... The more you get towards independent (and therefore lower budget by default, I guess?) the more creative leeway you get not to follow the set formula, but the less money you make because you simply can't get the backing of people with connections and deep pockets.

It's the same with films, music, books, even clothing and tech to some extent. Verses and hooks, cliff hangers and ad breaks. The same basic cheaply produced s**t just change the name, colour, actor, or a few minor details and sell it again to the same idiots that bought it last time.


Actually I was reading G.R.R.M.'s blog a few weeks ago and there was this post about a TV episode he wrote in the '70s or '80s or something where this particular show had to have an 'average Joe' character in every ep that was experiencing all of this plot (I guess as like an audience viewpoint insert type situation), so he had this great idea for an episode and then had to go back and add this average Joe that didn't add any value whatsoever, just because the formula said so.

Seemed kind of weird but you see it all the time with like James Bond films or Marvel/DC universe or any number of other things that are made in a sort of episodic series, it's like the old police procedural/whodunnit stuff that just won't die.
 
Lore said:
I guess commercialisation in general leads to formulaic, factory line style productions... The more you get towards independent (and therefore lower budget by default, I guess?) the more creative leeway you get not to follow the set formula
Click to expand...
Yes but that will not stop a lot of independent artists from following a money making formula, especially if they are up and coming. Perhaps they also wanna make some money and break through so to speak. In the case of people like Clooney, yeah I guess he is more likely to take those risks as they aren't putting their dinner money into film stock (or external hard drives lol).

And also the formula is an actual thing. Distributors literally have defined script page numbers that a film needs to wrap certain acts up by. And also a checklist. Love story, star in mind, etc (just like you stated above). It has been re-written a few times though. And it's usually when these pesky independent artists come up with a better formula and steer revenue away. This is not so prevalent these days. A massive turning point in cinema was Easy Rider. That film made Hollywood give a lot of control to the writers and directors because they knew they didn't have a handle on how that particular film was made. That gave way to filmmakers like Coppola, Scorsese, Altman, Kubrick etc to take over and lead. The next shift would come with Star Wars which heralded in the blockbuster formula and so on.
 
DapperJong said:
Yes but that will not stop a lot of independent artists from following a money making formula, especially if they are up and coming. Perhaps they also wanna make some money and break through so to speak. In the case of people like Clooney, yeah I guess he is more likely to take those risks as they aren't putting their dinner money into film stock (or external hard drives lol).

And also the formula is an actual thing. Distributors literally have defined script page numbers that a film needs to wrap certain acts up by. And also a checklist. Love story, star in mind, etc (just like you stated above). It has been re-written a few times though. And it's usually when these pesky independent artists come up with a better formula and steer revenue away. This is not so prevalent these days. A massive turning point in cinema was Easy Rider. That film made Hollywood give a lot of control to the writers and directors because they knew they didn't have a handle on how that particular film was made. That gave way to filmmakers like Coppola, Scorsese, Altman, Kubrick etc to take over and lead. The next shift would come with Star Wars which heralded in the blockbuster formula and so on.
Click to expand...
Perhaps I meant alternative rather than independent. 🤔

I kind of wonder what influence Netflix and similar subscription based streaming services will have in terms of paradigm shifts. The obvious ones are like bitrate, provisioning for ad breaks that don't exist on that platform (yet?), and the binge-able aspect complete with 'are you still watching?' reminders every four episodes. Some of the original programming is heading towards 10-15 hour movies chopped into bits, which is a format that suits book adaptations quite well if nothing else. Not sure that theatric releases will ever end up being 10-15 hours long, but they could play a bit on the 8K/3D sort of stuff that you currently can't stream or easily watch at home on a 13" laptop screen...
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Lore said:
Perhaps I meant alternative rather than independent. 🤔

I kind of wonder what influence Netflix and similar subscription based streaming services will have in terms of paradigm shifts. The obvious ones are like bitrate, provisioning for ad breaks that don't exist on that platform (yet?), and the binge-able aspect complete with 'are you still watching?' reminders every four episodes. Some of the original programming is heading towards 10-15 hour movies chopped into bits, which is a format that suits book adaptations quite well if nothing else. Not sure that theatric releases will ever end up being 10-15 hours long, but they could play a bit on the 8K/3D sort of stuff that you currently can't stream or easily watch at home on a 13" laptop screen...
Click to expand...

The Irishman was begging to be a series ! But there's no oscars in tv series..
 
Howard Moon said:
The Irishman was begging to be a series ! But there's no oscars in tv series..
Click to expand...

Who needs an Oscar anyway?

"Unfortunately, the critical worth, artistic vision, cultural influence and innovative qualities of many films are not given the same voting weight. Especially since the 1980s, moneymaking "formula-made" blockbusters with glossy production values have often been crowd-pleasing titans (and Best Picture winners), but they haven't necessarily been great films with depth or critical acclaim by any measure."


👀


ahaha wikipedia is a damned wormhole;

"Steven Spielberg isn’t basking in the glow of Best Picture Oscar-winner “Green Book,” which he supported in this year’s contentious Oscar race. His Academy Award attention is now devoted to ensuring that the race never sees another “Roma” — a Netflix film backed by massive sums, that didn’t play by the same rules as its analog-studio competitors."

www.indiewire.com

The Spielberg vs. Netflix Battle Could Mean Collateral Damage for Indies at the Oscars

Post "Roma," the Academy will discuss rules to level the playing field, but Netflix adjustments could affect indie titles. Expect a battle.
www.indiewire.com www.indiewire.com
 
Lore said:
Who needs an Oscar anyway?

"Unfortunately, the critical worth, artistic vision, cultural influence and innovative qualities of many films are not given the same voting weight. Especially since the 1980s, moneymaking "formula-made" blockbusters with glossy production values have often been crowd-pleasing titans (and Best Picture winners), but they haven't necessarily been great films with depth or critical acclaim by any measure."


👀


ahaha wikipedia is a damned wormhole;

"Steven Spielberg isn’t basking in the glow of Best Picture Oscar-winner “Green Book,” which he supported in this year’s contentious Oscar race. His Academy Award attention is now devoted to ensuring that the race never sees another “Roma” — a Netflix film backed by massive sums, that didn’t play by the same rules as its analog-studio competitors."

www.indiewire.com

The Spielberg vs. Netflix Battle Could Mean Collateral Damage for Indies at the Oscars

Post "Roma," the Academy will discuss rules to level the playing field, but Netflix adjustments could affect indie titles. Expect a battle.
www.indiewire.com www.indiewire.com
Click to expand...

Remember when they told one joke in the Martian- called it a comedy so they could circumvent the no sci fi Oscar clause?

Tricks
 
Howard Moon said:
Remember when they told one joke in the Martian- called it a comedy so they could circumvent the no sci fi Oscar clause?

Tricks
Click to expand...
There was definitely more than one joke in The Martian.
 
Loonerty said:
It is a sci fi.
Click to expand...

Was only making comment on this to lore re: the farce of awards season and how it may dictate releases

"One of Hollywood’s most high-profile awards ceremonies, the Golden Globes, is to change its rules following controversy over science-fiction epic The Martian’s victory in the best comedy section in January.

The decision by the makers of Ridley Scott’s blockbuster to compete as a comedy was widely criticised."
 
GUMBLETRON said:
Ahem - Best Comedy or Musical.
Click to expand...
Were there any that had one random musical number in the middle just to qualify? Also, does it count if it’s an after credits scene? 🤔🤔
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top