OK, first, I'm not talking specifically about the latest Ghostbusters movie with the female cast, too much has been written about that movie already, I didnt see it. Largely for the same reasons as James Rolfe of Cinnemassacre, said about the lack of original features and the mining of movies in a sort of nostalgia industry.
It had nothing to do with the female casting decisions (I dont think that is as radical as anyone makes out, it didnt have any significance for me, I think most movies make those sorts of casting decisions these days and if that's the main talking point of your movie then your movie may not be any good, its the same as that pic of the guy in the post for Ready Player One with the really long leg, its like studios will try anything, court any sort of controversy or triviality to get attention because it pays).
Anyway, my question is why cant they make movies like Ghostbusters anymore? It was a great original concept, it was funny and more than your regular studio cash cow, they followed it with a good sequel too. Part of it is the casting, the talent could make a shit movie great in my opinion, I dont know if Bill Murray, or the others, were the icons that they've grown to be since but they were great, they've always been great.
I dont think studios can manage to pull something like these movies off today, The Goonies is another good example that I can think of too, when they tried a third movie, in the spirit of the first two Ghostbusters with Evolution, it came up short, I think I'm being charitable about that as it was alright, everyone I was with complained about it when we were leaving the cinema but I thought it was as good as a lot of other movies I've had to sit through.
Of the two movie story arcs that I've thought were good this last while, Hunger Games and Divergent, the story/plot was what I really found interesting, I mean the politics of gladiatorial games and exploitative provincialism, on the one hand, and, on the other, government by a futuristic typological factionalism arising from mistakes in futuristic genetic engineering? I never ever would have given "young adult" or "teen" genre's the credit of coming up with either of those back drops, the talent is fine in either movie but I do think that you could reshoot them with someone else and its going to be the same movie, the subtexts about relationships, character development, I kind of think of as secondary to that of the plot and plot progression, although that's maybe just me.
Also, do you think that cinematic releases are not what they once were? Or is it just that I've grown up and am giving my attention to other things? Like I remember the launch of Tim Burton's Batman reboot, it was huge, lots of build up, lots time afterwards until it had "faded", games tie ins, TV tie ins, interviews, hype, merchandising, trading cards, sticker albums, the whole nine yards and it was ubiquitous too. I dont get a feel that movies are like that anymore. When there is a big release it feels like "hmm, yeah, well, it is a saturday" or something like that.
It had nothing to do with the female casting decisions (I dont think that is as radical as anyone makes out, it didnt have any significance for me, I think most movies make those sorts of casting decisions these days and if that's the main talking point of your movie then your movie may not be any good, its the same as that pic of the guy in the post for Ready Player One with the really long leg, its like studios will try anything, court any sort of controversy or triviality to get attention because it pays).
Anyway, my question is why cant they make movies like Ghostbusters anymore? It was a great original concept, it was funny and more than your regular studio cash cow, they followed it with a good sequel too. Part of it is the casting, the talent could make a shit movie great in my opinion, I dont know if Bill Murray, or the others, were the icons that they've grown to be since but they were great, they've always been great.
I dont think studios can manage to pull something like these movies off today, The Goonies is another good example that I can think of too, when they tried a third movie, in the spirit of the first two Ghostbusters with Evolution, it came up short, I think I'm being charitable about that as it was alright, everyone I was with complained about it when we were leaving the cinema but I thought it was as good as a lot of other movies I've had to sit through.
Of the two movie story arcs that I've thought were good this last while, Hunger Games and Divergent, the story/plot was what I really found interesting, I mean the politics of gladiatorial games and exploitative provincialism, on the one hand, and, on the other, government by a futuristic typological factionalism arising from mistakes in futuristic genetic engineering? I never ever would have given "young adult" or "teen" genre's the credit of coming up with either of those back drops, the talent is fine in either movie but I do think that you could reshoot them with someone else and its going to be the same movie, the subtexts about relationships, character development, I kind of think of as secondary to that of the plot and plot progression, although that's maybe just me.
Also, do you think that cinematic releases are not what they once were? Or is it just that I've grown up and am giving my attention to other things? Like I remember the launch of Tim Burton's Batman reboot, it was huge, lots of build up, lots time afterwards until it had "faded", games tie ins, TV tie ins, interviews, hype, merchandising, trading cards, sticker albums, the whole nine yards and it was ubiquitous too. I dont get a feel that movies are like that anymore. When there is a big release it feels like "hmm, yeah, well, it is a saturday" or something like that.
