my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Latest trend in movies: defying physical laws. (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Latest trend in movies: defying physical laws. Tim Reed Better Projection Pays Posts: 5246 From: Northampton, PA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 07-09-2003 02:38 PM                       The review of Charlie's Angels made me think of the latest annoying trend in movies these days. Characters can no longer simply kick or punch someone in fights. They must now jump 10 feet high, pause in the air, change direction, and kick on their way back down. Or, if they really want to show-off, they turn a flip while climbing in altitude, stop, simultaneously kick two people while they're up there, change direction, wait for the other bad guy to approach from the front so they can kick him, and then do a back flip on the way back down. What's with this crap? Are we supposed to be impressed? Are filmmakers doing it to impress themselves? Well, it's not working, it's spoiling a lot of pictures. You can get the audience to accept most any premise or fantasy element. But even within fantastic situations there has to be a framework, an element of credibility; the characters must remain believeable. And certain things should remain constant - like basic physical laws applied to normal human characters! Certainly, Luke Skywalker can grab a light saber from across the room, but unseen worlds and the concept of "the force" have been established within that story. It doesn't betray the characters. But if C3PO performed the same feat, or Luke suddenly broke into a song, we couldn't accept it. Charlie's Angels are supposed to be present-day detectives (or whatever they are). And, yes, I understand that picture's a farce, but the wild wire stuff is defintely wearing thin.  |  IP: Logged Mike Olpin Chop Chop! Posts: 1852 From: Dallas, TX Registered: Jan 2002 posted 07-09-2003 03:50 PM                     But it LOOKS SO COOL!!!  |  IP: Logged Christian Appelt Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 505 From: Frankfurt, Germany Registered: Dec 2001 posted 07-09-2003 04:27 PM                     Tim, it`s a fact that most filmmakers do not know any more how to shoot a simple dialogue scene that will hold viewers interest. They know nothing about body language of actors, so they stick to their tv-like closeups and think it will be "intense". How many directors could do a good comedy timing like, let`s say Blake Edwards? While I like rough comedy, I find it less and less exciting seeing yet another sh*t-flying-around or kick-in-the-balls or caught-in-the-zipper gag. But certainly with films like MATRIX RELOADED the trend of non-stop action will come to an end. What can you put on top of that CGI/action stuff? I found myself losing interest in ALL CHARACTERS because they are never truly in danger, they resurface like in a Tom&Jerry cartoon and nothing this side of a nuclear blast can hurt them. People will get tired of that phoney stuff, but what is to replace it? Quality pictures cannot be bought a X zillion budget, they have to happen.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 07-09-2003 06:51 PM                        Cut the special efx budget. Put the savings into the writing budget. That would solve 90% of the problems. This is why Pixar and other animation houses have such good stories...they are not catering to some stupid star egos, they are spending the money on story.  |  IP: Logged Per Hauberg Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 883 From: Malling, Denmark Registered: Jul 2000 posted 07-10-2003 03:13 AM                        Yep: Not having 16 or so screens to choose from, X-MEN, MATRIX, CHARLIE'S ANGELS, HULK and TERMINATOR in a row is just what You need to not even bother going into Your own cinema. It's as painful as it is true ! -But from tomorrow screen 2 will have the anti-stuff: THE THIRD MAN as matinee the next week. Thank God for old stuff to at least comfort Your own taste. p.  |  IP: Logged Tim Reed Better Projection Pays Posts: 5246 From: Northampton, PA Registered: Sep 1999 posted 07-10-2003 02:43 PM                       Good points, guys. (Okay, Mike, we're supposed to be impressed. Thanks for clarifying that. ) Christian made a good observation; the fancy-schmancy impossible stuff makes you not care about the characters. There is no peril. Indeed, I hope it comes to an end. Mike and Per, I couldn't agree more! I've always said the art of good moviemaking was lost sometime in the 1950s, forget technical advances. It's no wonder most of the movies I have at home are old ones. They're more satisfying.  |  IP: Logged Dennis Benjamin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1445 From: Denton, MD Registered: Feb 2002 posted 07-10-2003 11:13 PM                        Of course, this all goes along with americans paying the cosmetic surgeons to make them look as fake as possible. All this goes hand in hand.....you know???  |  IP: Logged Adam Fraser Master Film Handler Posts: 499 From: Houghton Lake, MI, USA Registered: Dec 2001 posted 07-10-2003 11:38 PM                        Beginning with MI:2 this really got out of hand, most of the stunts that are clearly impossible could be made to be just as cool but cutting the efx, and hiring professional stunt drivers and people, although they cant do 20 flips in the air and suddenly stop or jump a 500 ft span in a car, I think the real thing looks much better.  |  IP: Logged Phil Hill I love my cootie bug Posts: 7595 From: Hollywood, CA USA Registered: Mar 2000 posted 07-10-2003 11:56 PM                  I get really tired of all the phony DIGITAL crap-o EFX that seems to be the standard in a lot of the films of today. To me, it stems from too many of the young and up-and-coming (Hollywood) film-makers not having a foot in reality and their heads up their collective ass. They were brought up on video EFX and role-playing games and have no concept of what looks real and believable. That, plus the lame teeny-bopper and bubble-gum and 20-something audiences that were brought-up the same way and enjoy that crap, seem to perpetuate BAD films. I would much rather watch "real" EFX than all that digital crap! (Even if it's cheesy!) I think there is more of a thrill in watching when you know it's real and there is a real person that risked their life to pull it off! NOT some asshole that wanted to save $ by using digital people. Maybe it's the fault of the bean-counters, but I doubt it. They may contribute to the crap, but it's more of a producer forcing the director to "make-all-the-$-ya-can." Gosh, what do you call that? Oh, yeah... GREED!!!! By the same token, I think SOME digital EFX are great as an AUGMENT to the real thing. >>> Phil  |  IP: Logged Ken Lackner Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1907 From: Atlanta, GA, USA Registered: Sep 2001 posted 07-11-2003 01:27 AM                     My $.02: In THE MATRIX, it falls within the story that a person can jump ten feet in the air, kick two people at the same time, change directions, hold position in mid air and wait for another bad guy to kick, etc.... This is all explained in the story, so it is acceptable. (If you've seen the movie, you obviously know what I'm talking about. If you haven't, just trust me that in The Matrix, and only in The Matrix, it IS acceptable for these things to happen.) BTW, I think The Matrix was an awesome movie. But I do not think that film makers should borrow these ideas and use them in movies that take place in present day with "normal" characters, such as Charlies Angles. It is possible that they are making fun of The Matrix. This was fine when it first came out. The first movie I can recall to do this was Deuce Biggalow: Maile Gigolo. But so many movies have done it since then that it is no longer funny. In fact, it has not been funny for quite some time.  |  IP: Logged Carl Martin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1424 From: Oakland, CA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 07-11-2003 02:27 AM                        also, the hallmark effect of the matrix -- the camera pan while the action is frozen -- is basically an honest-to-god photographic effect, and that is very cool. matrix 2, on the other hand, was just bloated with cg crap. carl  |  IP: Logged Christian Appelt Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 505 From: Frankfurt, Germany Registered: Dec 2001 posted 07-11-2003 02:47 PM                     Ken, there certainly is a logic within the Matrix situation where the characters can do such impossible things. But when we really care for characters in a film, we do it on a non-abstract level. We accept them as real people within the film`s universe. But although we KNOW (on an intellectual level) that they can jump ten stories down or ten feet high in the air, EMOTIONALLY we react like it happened in a real world. I can speak only for myself, but I couldn`t care more than for a cartoon character that just walked from a cliff. There has to be some kind of link between our real-life experience and a film`s reality. Remember John Carpenter`s THE THING (1982) ? Around the middle of the film I felt somewhat numbed by the crazy gore effects, and I thought: "What else could they do?". Well, they DID find something. The characters decide to check each man`s blood for alien infection. When a scalpel cut into the first thumb, an audience of 400 people squirmed in their seats! After so much ultra-violence Carpenter got them by the simplest of effects - something which could happen to you... Well, I thought MATRIX RELOADED was an entertaining film, but what it left fades quick from my memory. Maybe it a question of age, and at 35 I am just too old to have fun with that kind of action...  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 07-11-2003 02:51 PM                     Anyone notice Pirates of the Caribbean didn't have any of this crap in it, yet it was a great movie?  |  IP: Logged Michael Schaffer "Where is the Boardwalk Hotel?" Posts: 4143 From: Boston, MA Registered: Apr 2002 posted 07-11-2003 02:57 PM                        Yes, Brad, those ghost pirates were very realistic. Except for the tiny detail that they were dead, it didn`t seem that they violated any natural laws. The guy whose eye kept popping out was very realistic too - he reminded me of a friend whose eye kept popping out in the weirdest situations. Then it would lie on the table, staring at you.  |  IP: Logged Brad Miller Administrator Posts: 17775 From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall) Registered: May 99 posted 07-11-2003 03:11 PM                     AAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRGGHHHHHHHHH! But you've never seen a cursed pirate in the moonlight, Michael. You shouldn't speak of what you don't know. Not to worry, we have plenty of them here in the US for you. Besides, I was referring to the movie in general, not the 10 minutes of ghost pirates. That was needed for the story.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.