Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

20 years later, the movie "Total Recall" still kicks butt

<< < (20/23) > >>

40hz:
@4wd -

re: 40hz's "out"

I think some if you might be misunderstanding my intentions when I speak about Hollywood taboos.

I'm not trying to prove a point about what makes a good or bad movie. Nor am I making a statement about the superiority or inferiority of the mainstream American movie industry.

When I mentioned these "no go" story elements, it was in the context of trying to account for the general lack of originality and the reluctance on the part of the industry to take chances when it came to movie plots. And the reason for this reluctance is twofold: the desire not to offend mainstream public sentiments (i.e. money) and fear of censure by a small but highly vocal 'moral' and conservative collective (i.e. money).

In a nutshell, if it's something that will impact the box office, or draw the public wrath of legislators or the religious, it's not going to be considered for production until those concerns can be minimized. Hollywood is mainly looking to make "4-quadrant" type 'perennial hit' movies. They're rarely looking to make great ones.

Again it's no knock from me. It's just how they perceive their business environment. And American moviemaking is a business.

I didn't come up with these taboos on my own. Many screenwriting books and seminars either hint at or come right out and talk about the issue of "unacceptable" topics. It comes as a shock to many hopeful writers that American movie studios are not all that liberal or open to radical or disturbing ideas for movies - even though virtually all of them would deny it if asked.  

This is one of the reasons why some truly great books get bad screen adaptations. Many of the wild and dangerously thought provoking elements that made the book so great won't be allowed in the screenplay.

Simple reality of the trade: Wanna sell your script to a US studio? Avoid certain topics and images.   8)


 
    

Innuendo:
I wouldn't necessarily have classed the ending in No Country For Old Men as evil/bad guy winning because it's left too open, it's not final.  Hollywood could go on to make 13+ sequels as usual.-4wd (June 28, 2010, 06:42 PM)
--- End quote ---

Not sure what you mean....it seemed pretty final to me.

SpoilerThe bad guy has gone on a spree killing everyone who has ever come into contact with the money. He has the money and no one knows where he is. The only law enforcement officer who was pursuing him in earnest is now back at home retired from the chase & beaten. Most likely he knows that the bad guy may very well come after him as well with a good chance of him dying.

Not much chance of a sequel, either, as the bad guy is a ghost. He was only seen when he needed to be seen in order to get what he wanted. At the end of the movie he had what he wanted & the only one who really lived to tell the tale was Tommy Lee Jones & again, who knows how long he'll remain alive.

Innuendo:
Can you tell me how 'No country for old men' ends? I went to the theater to see it and was send out because I was snoring too loud. Rented it twice but I cannot get past the halfway point, before falling asleep. With 'There Will be Blood' I fell only asleep once.-Shades (June 28, 2010, 07:04 PM)
--- End quote ---

See my spoiler above for No Country For Old Men, but I agree....both that and There Will Be Blood were way longer than they needed to be....and neither one had a real, proper ending, IMHO.

The most recent one with Nicolas Cage is hardly worth the trouble. Then again, I am not impressed by the latest works of N.C. in the first place. The first release was way more disturbing to me.

--- End quote ---

Yes, I was referring to the original, but even the remake has the bad guys winning. I don't know what to think about Cage. He was making some pretty good movies there for awhile. Oh well, at least he's off making Disney movies now so I won't have to put up with him anymore. :)

4wd:
Let's also not forget Howard Hawks original screen adaptation of by John W. Campbell, Jr.'s 1938 sci-fi novella Who Goes There.

...

It's a good enough story that his film was remade two additional times. Carpenter's 1981 version (relocated from the North Pole to Antarctica) kept the original vibe and resulted in that rarest of all Hollywood creatures: a remake that compared favorably with an original. The 1998 edition was long on special effects and name actors, but somehow didn't quite capture the eerie feelings of isolation and weirdness that the previous two versions produced. Maybe this is just one of those pictures that benefits from slightly stilted dialog, lesser acting talent, and B&W photography.-40hz (June 15, 2010, 02:04 PM)
--- End quote ---

Going back to one of the earlier posts, Carpenter's 'The Thing' is one of my all time favourite films, (right up there with Alien), but I hadn't heard of a remake in 1998.

Can you give me link in IMDB to it please?

Also, get ready for The Thing (2011) - I just hope it turns out better than the plot summary.

Deozaan:
I just hope it turns out better than the plot summary.
-4wd (June 30, 2010, 06:41 PM)
--- End quote ---

That shouldn't be too hard.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page