Here is a brief history of 3D. 3D in movies is hardly new. It started a long, long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. Actually it was in Los Angeles in 1922. It was a movie called "The Power of Love" and it was shown in what they call anaglyph 3D. Basically it comes out in 2 colors (in this case red and green) to give the illusion of depth. They required the 3D glasses that almost everyone from the 50's or 80's would recognize immediately. But times changed and as we get to the 1950's we see a change from red and green to red and blue. And thus stereoscopic filmmaking was born.
By the 1950s we had the "golden age" of 3D movies. The technology had greatly improved thanks to polaroid cameras and now such movies as "The French Line", "Taza, Son of Cochise", and of course the most famous 3D movie of its time, "The Creature From the Black Lagoon." All the major studios were making 3D movies. Stars as varied as Vincent Price to the 3 Stooges were all doing 3D movies. Major Hollywood Blockbusters and B movie trash were all doing 3D.
So what happened? 3D back then had some huge problems that just couldn't be fixed with the technology of the time. 1) you were showing two prints of the movie at the same time. If they got out of sync, it became very noticable. 2) headaches and eyestrain were not that uncommon. 3) if you were sitting to the sides, you wouldn't get the effect. and 4) any cartoons in 3D looked like cardboard cutouts. And thus the fad mostly went away.
Over time the technology got better and 3D was used more sparingly. By the early 1980s, the fad had come back. Westerns and horror movies in 3D became very popular. Movies like "Comin' At Ya!" and "Parasite" were big hits so more 3D movies were on the way. Then somebody somewhere got cute with the marketing of 3D movies. Horror sequels were all over the place and some of them were up to their 3rd installment. Part 3.... 3D.... hilarious! Get it? Because it's the 3rd movie and it's in 3D. Yeah, it's more than a bit lame. But that's why we have movies like Jaws 3D. It's the third in the series but it's called Jaws 3D. They also did Friday the 13th part 3 in 3D and Amityville 3D.
How were the movies? In a word... bad. They relied way too much on the novelty of 3D. Far too many scenes of things flying at the screen and not to mention horrible stories. But the real nail in the coffin was the price to produce some of these movies.
But like any horror movie fan will tell you, just because the coffin is closed, doesn't mean it won't open up again. Enter IMAX, Disney, and the King of Pop: Michael Jackson. Oh yes. I have to bring up Captain Eo. IMAX was using 3D for more documentary type movies. But good old MJ wanted to do something different. He made a music video shot in 3D as an attraction at Disneyland. It's still in operation as far as I know. Overall, a good video. If you are in Disneyland, go see it.
IMAX came up with what is called alternate eye shutterglass technology. It's a fancy way of saying your eyes are blinking. But it happens to work very well in making 3D effects. This began a lot of what I would call "gimmick movies". These are attractions specifically to be in 3D and they aren't whole movies. They are usually about 30 minute shorts. And of course they were successful because 3D was new and novel again.
So we hit the fast forward button again and we are now in the early part of the 2000s. James Cameron just loves 3D. There's no other way to say it. Ghosts of the Abyss, Spy Kids 3D: Game Over, and the Adventures of Shark Boy and Lava Girl all with 3D in mind: all of them using technology James Cameron helped design along with Vince Pace.
While many movies bombed at the box office, some were more successful. The Polar Express for example did amazingly well. But if we are going to talk about successful 3D movies, the first one on everyone's mind these days is Avatar.
Avatar was a groundbreaking movie. The 3D technology was unlike anyone had ever seen before. And in terms of finance, Avatar is one of the most successful movies ever made. So, 3D movies made a resurgence. Now just about all movies are made in 3D. It's even to the point where we have game consoles using 3D technology! Man it sure has come along way from the goofy red and green paper glasses.
Even with new technology, here's the problem with 3D. 1) The 'hazing' effect. Sometimes things in the background look too far away and sometimes blurred out all together in favor of objects in the foreground. 2) eyestrain, headaches, and motion sickness. Sometimes it's just too much to take in. 3) color loss. With the new 3D glasses, they are tinted dark to get rid of some of the harsh edges. So if you are going to watch a 3D movie shot at night... bring a book. 4) It's too prevalent. 3D is added to movies that have no business being in 3D. 5) It's expensive!!!!!!
Avatar might be one of the most successful movies of all time, but it's also the single most expensive movie ever made! Let's not forget that the average ticket price for 3D is at least 3 to 5 dollars more than a normal 2D movie. And what do you get for your money? What does it add to the movie except a novelty? I can't call it a cheap novelty because it definately isn't cheap.
Bottom line: Some movies do benefit from 3D. But usually they are the "popcorn" movies. They are the cheesy B movie schlock that are meant to be entertaining in an ironic way. I loved Drive Angry in 3D because it's a very stupid movie with lots of stuff flying at the screen. It wouldn't be nearly as enjoyable in normal format. Movies like Tron: Legacy benefitted by having the grid scenes in 3D but did anyone get any benefit from seeing The Green Hornet in 3D?
Avatar was meant to be an experience. 3D added to that immersive world full of colors and weird things everywhere. But did it make the story any better? 3D is a distraction. It's an expensive distraction to hide bad movies and squeeze more money out of the audience. And I promise, 2D won't ask you to buy a new tv just so you can enjoy it at home.
Showing posts with label Editorial. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Editorial. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
Friday, August 26, 2011
Horror vs Dark Comedy. So often confused
Happy Halloween everyone! I must not have gotten the memo but Halloween is coming early this year. I know this has to be true because Final Destination 5, Don't Be Afraid of the Dark, and Fright Night were all released in August. What's with all the scary movies coming out in August? I'd think that a release in October would be better financially. Just a thought.
Anyway, since I am now a "professional" amateur film critic and I'm inclined to go see some of these movies, I think I should give my own definition of what I think a "horror" movie really is.
Most people would think horror just means scary. For me, there's a big difference. Lots of things can be scary. Jason Vorhees is scary. But so is trying to tell my Dad you got into an accident while driving his Mustang. Horror is something much different than just scary. Scary is a very base feeling. It goes deep into the lower brain, fight of flight feelings we all face at some time. We get scared by the big, bad bully on the playground, we get scared by noises at night, I've been scared by a test I forgot about until the day before and never studied.
Horror is more of an atmospheric feeling. It's chilling. It's a feeling that goes deep into your soul and won't let go. It's a feeling not easily described. Perhaps an example: Jaws. Jaws is what I would call a "horror" movie. It got people so freaked out by sharks that there are people today that won't go to the beach because they are freaked out that a shark will come after them. The music, the POV cameras all give that feeling of being stalked. Like a predator is coming for you and won't leave until you are dead. It's a feeling that even though you tell yourself that rationally there's nothing to be afraid of, you still feel it.
I'm not talking about being startled, I'm talking about deep psychological phobias.
Most of what we think of in terms of "horror" movies I would call a dark comedy. I know. It's a very perverse thought and I'd better make my case on this. Let's take for example some of the Friday the 13th sequels because those are some of the better examples of what I'm talking about. We all kinda know the story: Jason Vorhees is an undead zombie who likes to kill people with a machete. He wears a hockey mask and just won't die. Have you seen some of the kills he does? Not all of them mind you. Some of them are really great! I remember seeing Kevin Bacon get an arrow through his neck and thought that was an awesome effect! But that's my point. I'm not afraid a zombie is under my bed with an arrow. (Yes I know about the real killer in Friday the 13th part 1 but my point is still valid) And some of the kills he makes are just out loud laughably funny. Remember the time Jason killed that guy in his sleeping bag? He grabbed the sleeping bag and bashed the poor guy against a tree! He did it in number 7 and Jason X. It's hilarious.
If you are laughing, chances are you are not scared.
Another thing: If you are cheering for Jason to kill some of these people, you are definately not scared. Watch Friday the 13th part 5 sometime. In one scene you have two people who are just cartoons. One guy with an axe chopping wood and a fat guy in a blue jogging suit with chocolate. Both of them... the guy with the axe is such a freak you want him to die and the fat slob is so annoying when he gets axed you don't feel scared. You're thinking, thank God. He's not in the rest of the movie.
There's no better example than the Final Destination movies. As of me writing this, I haven't seen Final Destination 5, but truth be told, I don't need to. If you've seen one, you've seen them all. These are movies for gore hounds. They are Itchy and Scratchy cartoons. You are meant to be repulsed by all the blood and gore, but also amused by the rediculous ways they die.
This is not horror!
If you want horror, give Paranormal Activity a try. It's craftmanship to see a spinning baby mobile and get a little weirded out by it. You don't need raging monsters or psycho killers to create horror. All you need is a feeling that things are just not right. And then you build on that. Every Halloween without fail I read Edgar Allen Poe's "The Raven" because it is exactly what I'm talking about. How a mourning man's mind can quickly turn from being amused at hearing a talking bird repeat the same word and then twist it in his own head to have it mean something so sinister that he gives up all hope of an afterlife.
Being so scared that it forever colors how you see the world. That is horror.
Anyway, since I am now a "professional" amateur film critic and I'm inclined to go see some of these movies, I think I should give my own definition of what I think a "horror" movie really is.
Most people would think horror just means scary. For me, there's a big difference. Lots of things can be scary. Jason Vorhees is scary. But so is trying to tell my Dad you got into an accident while driving his Mustang. Horror is something much different than just scary. Scary is a very base feeling. It goes deep into the lower brain, fight of flight feelings we all face at some time. We get scared by the big, bad bully on the playground, we get scared by noises at night, I've been scared by a test I forgot about until the day before and never studied.
Horror is more of an atmospheric feeling. It's chilling. It's a feeling that goes deep into your soul and won't let go. It's a feeling not easily described. Perhaps an example: Jaws. Jaws is what I would call a "horror" movie. It got people so freaked out by sharks that there are people today that won't go to the beach because they are freaked out that a shark will come after them. The music, the POV cameras all give that feeling of being stalked. Like a predator is coming for you and won't leave until you are dead. It's a feeling that even though you tell yourself that rationally there's nothing to be afraid of, you still feel it.
I'm not talking about being startled, I'm talking about deep psychological phobias.
Most of what we think of in terms of "horror" movies I would call a dark comedy. I know. It's a very perverse thought and I'd better make my case on this. Let's take for example some of the Friday the 13th sequels because those are some of the better examples of what I'm talking about. We all kinda know the story: Jason Vorhees is an undead zombie who likes to kill people with a machete. He wears a hockey mask and just won't die. Have you seen some of the kills he does? Not all of them mind you. Some of them are really great! I remember seeing Kevin Bacon get an arrow through his neck and thought that was an awesome effect! But that's my point. I'm not afraid a zombie is under my bed with an arrow. (Yes I know about the real killer in Friday the 13th part 1 but my point is still valid) And some of the kills he makes are just out loud laughably funny. Remember the time Jason killed that guy in his sleeping bag? He grabbed the sleeping bag and bashed the poor guy against a tree! He did it in number 7 and Jason X. It's hilarious.
If you are laughing, chances are you are not scared.
Another thing: If you are cheering for Jason to kill some of these people, you are definately not scared. Watch Friday the 13th part 5 sometime. In one scene you have two people who are just cartoons. One guy with an axe chopping wood and a fat guy in a blue jogging suit with chocolate. Both of them... the guy with the axe is such a freak you want him to die and the fat slob is so annoying when he gets axed you don't feel scared. You're thinking, thank God. He's not in the rest of the movie.
There's no better example than the Final Destination movies. As of me writing this, I haven't seen Final Destination 5, but truth be told, I don't need to. If you've seen one, you've seen them all. These are movies for gore hounds. They are Itchy and Scratchy cartoons. You are meant to be repulsed by all the blood and gore, but also amused by the rediculous ways they die.
This is not horror!
If you want horror, give Paranormal Activity a try. It's craftmanship to see a spinning baby mobile and get a little weirded out by it. You don't need raging monsters or psycho killers to create horror. All you need is a feeling that things are just not right. And then you build on that. Every Halloween without fail I read Edgar Allen Poe's "The Raven" because it is exactly what I'm talking about. How a mourning man's mind can quickly turn from being amused at hearing a talking bird repeat the same word and then twist it in his own head to have it mean something so sinister that he gives up all hope of an afterlife.
Being so scared that it forever colors how you see the world. That is horror.
Sunday, August 14, 2011
Sequels
I think it's time I talk about something positive. I don't want to be just that negative guy on the internet complaining about everything. And when it comes to movie sequels there are plenty of them that just don't live up to the original. So, how about I talk about my top three movie sequels that are way better than the original. I'm sure you can think of others but these are the ones that stand out as the top three in my mind.
3) Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back. The First Star Wars (episode IV) is a classic. It's so iconic and sets the tone for a modern fantasy story full of evil magicians, princess in destress, and an unlikely hero being tutored by the wise sage. So how do you improve on this story? By upping the stakes in just about every way. The movie starts on a desolate planet with the Empire right on top of them and they are relentless. The plans of the Empire change as well. They went from being a rule with an iron fist to we will make the hero fall to the dark side. And for both of you that have never seen the surprise twist towards the end, I won't spoil it but the goals of Luke Skywalker change forever.
2) Aliens. The sequel to the cult hit Alien starring Sigorney Weaver. Ridley Scott is no longer the director but in comes James Cameron. The original Alien was much more of a horror movie. The tag of the movie was: "In space noone can hear you scream." In the sequel we learn more about the mysterious Aliens. And just like in all good sequels, they raise the dread. Instead of one alien, this time there is an entire colony of them. Again I won't spoil the movie for those that haven't seen it but the plot is largely the same from the original but upped times ten. Far more action and even more danger makes for a brilliant movie.
And number one is:
1) Terminator 2: Judgement Day. Are you at all surprised? Much like Alien, the original was a mix of science fiction, action, and horror that works just so well together. And again we get James Cameron fresh off of directing the Abyss and Aliens. In the original it is the Terminator (Schwarzenegger) on a relentless mission to kill Sarah Connor before she can give birth to the savior of the human race. In T2, John Conner is a teenager and the machines want him dead. This time instead of the dreaded T101, we get the liquid metal T1000. He can look like anyone, sound like anyone, and is virtually indestructable. How do you fight such a monsterous threat? With another Terminator. Schwarzenegger now is the friend of humanity with a single goal; protect John Connor. A brilliant movie.
All of these movies are worth your time and go against the rule of sequels being horrible. If you haven't had the pleasure, check them out.
See you at the movies.
3) Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back. The First Star Wars (episode IV) is a classic. It's so iconic and sets the tone for a modern fantasy story full of evil magicians, princess in destress, and an unlikely hero being tutored by the wise sage. So how do you improve on this story? By upping the stakes in just about every way. The movie starts on a desolate planet with the Empire right on top of them and they are relentless. The plans of the Empire change as well. They went from being a rule with an iron fist to we will make the hero fall to the dark side. And for both of you that have never seen the surprise twist towards the end, I won't spoil it but the goals of Luke Skywalker change forever.
2) Aliens. The sequel to the cult hit Alien starring Sigorney Weaver. Ridley Scott is no longer the director but in comes James Cameron. The original Alien was much more of a horror movie. The tag of the movie was: "In space noone can hear you scream." In the sequel we learn more about the mysterious Aliens. And just like in all good sequels, they raise the dread. Instead of one alien, this time there is an entire colony of them. Again I won't spoil the movie for those that haven't seen it but the plot is largely the same from the original but upped times ten. Far more action and even more danger makes for a brilliant movie.
And number one is:
1) Terminator 2: Judgement Day. Are you at all surprised? Much like Alien, the original was a mix of science fiction, action, and horror that works just so well together. And again we get James Cameron fresh off of directing the Abyss and Aliens. In the original it is the Terminator (Schwarzenegger) on a relentless mission to kill Sarah Connor before she can give birth to the savior of the human race. In T2, John Conner is a teenager and the machines want him dead. This time instead of the dreaded T101, we get the liquid metal T1000. He can look like anyone, sound like anyone, and is virtually indestructable. How do you fight such a monsterous threat? With another Terminator. Schwarzenegger now is the friend of humanity with a single goal; protect John Connor. A brilliant movie.
All of these movies are worth your time and go against the rule of sequels being horrible. If you haven't had the pleasure, check them out.
See you at the movies.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
National Lampoon's Jumping the Shark
I don't get it. Look. I'm not a prude. I can get behind low brow humor. I grew up with the Three Stooges and Mel Brooks much like many of you have. Some of my favorite comedies are Mel Brooks movies. I've made it my goal to get as many of his movies on DVD as I possibly can. I love Blazing Saddles and History of the World part I. And of course my favorite comedy of all is Young Frankenstein. I'm not above sexual or perverse humor. But even I have my limits.
I'd have to say I knew I was getting too old for this type of movie was when American Pie and There's Something About Mary came out. I didn't get the joke. Seriously. I just didn't get it. I hear you now, "what's there to get? American Pie has a guy so desperate for sex he has sex with baked goods and There's Something About Mary is about a woman so sexually attractive that she makes men do stupid things to have sex with her." Yeah. That's what I don't get! If Jason Bigg's character wanted to have sex so badly he would put his penis in a pie, why not just pay for a prostitute? Because that's less rediculous? And I'm sorry, but I don't find the behavior of sexual predators endearing. If I were Mary, I'd have a can of pepper spray on me at all times. But like I said, I don't get it.
Not too long ago, I watched a movie called She's Out of My League with my Dad. He loved it. Me: less so. If the most memorable scene in the movie is Jay Baruchel cuming in his pants, I'll pass. So, someone needs to explain this to me. When did this manic glee become not only accepted, but the benchmark for all future comedies?
I bring up this topic because, as I usually do, I go out looking for movies to watch and review for my friends out there. I heard they are going to make a Harold and Kumar Christmas movie. I nearly choked on my own tongue. But it did get me thinking about National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation. I LOVE that movie! And it also got me curious about what other "National Lampoon" movies are out there because I haven't seen or heard of many after the Vagas Vacation bomb. And I now know why curiosity killed the cat.
Stop me when this movie starts to sound so stupid that it might collapse the sun. I'll write this word for word from wikipedia because I still can't believe such an animal can exist. A 2006 comedy film starring Paris Hilton, who also served as executive producer. Right about here is where I thought I saw the sun collapse. This is what scientists would call a singularity of stupid. A movie so vapid that no sense of good taste or comedy can escape. And this is what I mean. It's sexual humor run amok, I don't find it appealing or funny, and I have no idea how it is any different from any other sexually based comedy that has come out in the last 10 years.
Many of you might be thinking I'm exagerating. Surely this is as bad as it gets. You can't condemn an entire genre based on this one movie. Fair enough. Lets run down the list. Just for the sake of brevity I'll just name a few National Lampoon movies that will make the baby Jesus cry. National Lampoon's Boobies, National Lampoon's Barely Legal, Dirty Movie, Dirty Movie 2, National Lampoon's Dorm Daze, and National Lampoon's Dorm Daze 2. Can we please just start calling movies like this what they are? It's porn people. And you don't even get any good sex scenes so it's unfunny, boring, cock tease porn.
Is it just me? Is it just that I don't get the joke?
I'd have to say I knew I was getting too old for this type of movie was when American Pie and There's Something About Mary came out. I didn't get the joke. Seriously. I just didn't get it. I hear you now, "what's there to get? American Pie has a guy so desperate for sex he has sex with baked goods and There's Something About Mary is about a woman so sexually attractive that she makes men do stupid things to have sex with her." Yeah. That's what I don't get! If Jason Bigg's character wanted to have sex so badly he would put his penis in a pie, why not just pay for a prostitute? Because that's less rediculous? And I'm sorry, but I don't find the behavior of sexual predators endearing. If I were Mary, I'd have a can of pepper spray on me at all times. But like I said, I don't get it.
Not too long ago, I watched a movie called She's Out of My League with my Dad. He loved it. Me: less so. If the most memorable scene in the movie is Jay Baruchel cuming in his pants, I'll pass. So, someone needs to explain this to me. When did this manic glee become not only accepted, but the benchmark for all future comedies?
I bring up this topic because, as I usually do, I go out looking for movies to watch and review for my friends out there. I heard they are going to make a Harold and Kumar Christmas movie. I nearly choked on my own tongue. But it did get me thinking about National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation. I LOVE that movie! And it also got me curious about what other "National Lampoon" movies are out there because I haven't seen or heard of many after the Vagas Vacation bomb. And I now know why curiosity killed the cat.
Stop me when this movie starts to sound so stupid that it might collapse the sun. I'll write this word for word from wikipedia because I still can't believe such an animal can exist. A 2006 comedy film starring Paris Hilton, who also served as executive producer. Right about here is where I thought I saw the sun collapse. This is what scientists would call a singularity of stupid. A movie so vapid that no sense of good taste or comedy can escape. And this is what I mean. It's sexual humor run amok, I don't find it appealing or funny, and I have no idea how it is any different from any other sexually based comedy that has come out in the last 10 years.
Many of you might be thinking I'm exagerating. Surely this is as bad as it gets. You can't condemn an entire genre based on this one movie. Fair enough. Lets run down the list. Just for the sake of brevity I'll just name a few National Lampoon movies that will make the baby Jesus cry. National Lampoon's Boobies, National Lampoon's Barely Legal, Dirty Movie, Dirty Movie 2, National Lampoon's Dorm Daze, and National Lampoon's Dorm Daze 2. Can we please just start calling movies like this what they are? It's porn people. And you don't even get any good sex scenes so it's unfunny, boring, cock tease porn.
Is it just me? Is it just that I don't get the joke?
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
My response to the '80s "retro" movement in Hollywood
Movies are a hobby of mine. I watch a lot of movies. The biggest reason being that I live in Korea and there's actually very little to do. For a while there is a novelty to being in another country and being out of your comfort zone. But after a while, the unknown and unfamiliar becomes familiar and even a little boring. So, when things get boring, I start looking for a little escapism and I chose to watch movies. As a consequence I would like to at least think that I've become somewhat familiar with movie trends. And what I'm seeing is a return to '80s style movies.
For those who read this that either didn't live through the 1980s or were too young to remember most of it, the '80s kinda sucked. Musically, the '80s is defined by synthetic sounds, big hair, and the less said about the New Kids on the Block and Vanilla Ice the better. But when it comes to movies, they were campy, mindless, but very entertaining. Sometimes, we get some movies and music that went against this trend and that's why they stood out as masterpieces. I'm talking about Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th, Highlander, Rocky, Star Wars, Star Trek, and Die Hard just to name a few. (And yes I'm well aware that Rocky and Star Wars began in the 1970s but it was close enough for me.)
So why do I bring all this up? Because everything that involved the '80s has become popular enough again that everything is getting remade. On TV we see Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Voltron, and even Thundercats all modernized and relaunched for today's younger audience. We are getting "retro" movies based on 1980's television shows like GI Joe. But what bothers me the most are the remakes that are scheduled to come out: movies like Highlander and Conan the Barbarian.
My Dad often pokes fun at me because I like movies "from 30 years ago." And I take it as good natured fun. I certainly don't take offense to it. But it did get me thinking... Who doesn't like these movies? Apparently they are such great movies that Halloween and Nightmare on Elm Street were so good that they had to be remade for a newer generation.
When did all this start happening? I don't know. I'm sure anyone can point to a certain movie that either did well or didn't and that was the beginning but really it's not the point. The point is that the 'retro' movement is in full swing. One of the most popular movies in the box office today is Rise of the Planet of the Apes! A prequel to the Planet of the Apes movie done way back in 1968... and remade in 2001.
I'm not against updating classic stories for today's youth. Really. I'm not. But they must be done well. Would anyone say Planet of the Apes (2001) was in any way a good movie? How about GI Joe? They're making a sequel with Dwayne "the Rock" Johnson by the way. Do you get the feeling that it's getting taken seriously? I sure don't. I'm a child of the '80s. I was born in 1980. I was around for it. The Berlin Wall fell just one day before my ninth birthday! I grew up watching the Smurfs and Alvin and the Chipmonks. Do the research for yourself! 80's kids movies remade into movies today have all bombed at the box office. Parents want to take their kids to see it because it's what they grew up watching, kids want to see it because they are kids movies, studios want to make them because nostalgia is big money, and each one of them have been just HORRIBLE! Not because I'm too old to enjoy these movies, but because they fail on the most basic point in making these movies: They are nothing like what we remember them to be from our childhood. They take the name, get a bland children's script, and make a few quick bucks. It's embarrassing.
Here's the trick to nostalgia: You have a group of people that grew up with these kinds of stories. Let's take for example Conan the Barbarian. The remake hasn't been released yet but we can take some liberties from the theatrical trailer. The original came out in 1982 starring Arnold Scharzenegger and James Earl Jones. These guys were HUGE in the 1980s. They alone pushed this movie forward. As for the movie itself, it's epic. Really taking liberties with the classic story of Sparticus, Conan is kidnapped as a child and forced to work as a slave until he eventually breaks free, finds religion, and becomes a hero. Again, anyone from the 1980s probably saw this movie and liked it. So, to remake this story properly, generally speaking, we need to follow the story and get some of today's hottest actors. Who is in the 2011 Conan the Barbarian? Jason Mamoa, Rose McGowen, Rachel Nichols, and Mickey Rourke. Oh My God. Mickey Rourke aside, who are these people? Jason Mamoa? His biggest movie to date was a bit part in a Cedric the Entertainer movie? (Johnson Family Vacation) Rose McGowen some of you might remember she played a witch on the TNT TV series Charmed. Yeah. I don't remember her either. By the way, she's already being tabbed to play Red Sonja in that remake. God help us all. Has miss Rose been in any movies? Yes. She has. Scream, Death Proof, Encino Man, Monkeybone, and Biodome. If your most popular movies were supporting jobs to Pauly Shore, rethink your chosen profession. Rachel Nichols. Oh I didn't forget about you. What stellar performances have you been in to warrent being the love interest of Conan? The new Star Trek movie (a whole other rant I won't get into) GI Joe, and Dumb and Dumberer. In fairness she's done some other great dramatic movies and honestly she might do a good job. But does this cast scream "epic" to you?
Now watch the trailer for the Conan remake. What do you see? A lot of computer generated backgrounds, shaky camera shots, and scenes specifically meant to be seen with 3D glasses. (3D. also another rant for another time) But basically everything I hate about modern movies are being thrust upon a nostalgic movie and I'm supposed to just go with it and accept that this is how it is.
Where's my copy of the 1982 movie?
For those who read this that either didn't live through the 1980s or were too young to remember most of it, the '80s kinda sucked. Musically, the '80s is defined by synthetic sounds, big hair, and the less said about the New Kids on the Block and Vanilla Ice the better. But when it comes to movies, they were campy, mindless, but very entertaining. Sometimes, we get some movies and music that went against this trend and that's why they stood out as masterpieces. I'm talking about Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th, Highlander, Rocky, Star Wars, Star Trek, and Die Hard just to name a few. (And yes I'm well aware that Rocky and Star Wars began in the 1970s but it was close enough for me.)
So why do I bring all this up? Because everything that involved the '80s has become popular enough again that everything is getting remade. On TV we see Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Voltron, and even Thundercats all modernized and relaunched for today's younger audience. We are getting "retro" movies based on 1980's television shows like GI Joe. But what bothers me the most are the remakes that are scheduled to come out: movies like Highlander and Conan the Barbarian.
My Dad often pokes fun at me because I like movies "from 30 years ago." And I take it as good natured fun. I certainly don't take offense to it. But it did get me thinking... Who doesn't like these movies? Apparently they are such great movies that Halloween and Nightmare on Elm Street were so good that they had to be remade for a newer generation.
When did all this start happening? I don't know. I'm sure anyone can point to a certain movie that either did well or didn't and that was the beginning but really it's not the point. The point is that the 'retro' movement is in full swing. One of the most popular movies in the box office today is Rise of the Planet of the Apes! A prequel to the Planet of the Apes movie done way back in 1968... and remade in 2001.
I'm not against updating classic stories for today's youth. Really. I'm not. But they must be done well. Would anyone say Planet of the Apes (2001) was in any way a good movie? How about GI Joe? They're making a sequel with Dwayne "the Rock" Johnson by the way. Do you get the feeling that it's getting taken seriously? I sure don't. I'm a child of the '80s. I was born in 1980. I was around for it. The Berlin Wall fell just one day before my ninth birthday! I grew up watching the Smurfs and Alvin and the Chipmonks. Do the research for yourself! 80's kids movies remade into movies today have all bombed at the box office. Parents want to take their kids to see it because it's what they grew up watching, kids want to see it because they are kids movies, studios want to make them because nostalgia is big money, and each one of them have been just HORRIBLE! Not because I'm too old to enjoy these movies, but because they fail on the most basic point in making these movies: They are nothing like what we remember them to be from our childhood. They take the name, get a bland children's script, and make a few quick bucks. It's embarrassing.
Here's the trick to nostalgia: You have a group of people that grew up with these kinds of stories. Let's take for example Conan the Barbarian. The remake hasn't been released yet but we can take some liberties from the theatrical trailer. The original came out in 1982 starring Arnold Scharzenegger and James Earl Jones. These guys were HUGE in the 1980s. They alone pushed this movie forward. As for the movie itself, it's epic. Really taking liberties with the classic story of Sparticus, Conan is kidnapped as a child and forced to work as a slave until he eventually breaks free, finds religion, and becomes a hero. Again, anyone from the 1980s probably saw this movie and liked it. So, to remake this story properly, generally speaking, we need to follow the story and get some of today's hottest actors. Who is in the 2011 Conan the Barbarian? Jason Mamoa, Rose McGowen, Rachel Nichols, and Mickey Rourke. Oh My God. Mickey Rourke aside, who are these people? Jason Mamoa? His biggest movie to date was a bit part in a Cedric the Entertainer movie? (Johnson Family Vacation) Rose McGowen some of you might remember she played a witch on the TNT TV series Charmed. Yeah. I don't remember her either. By the way, she's already being tabbed to play Red Sonja in that remake. God help us all. Has miss Rose been in any movies? Yes. She has. Scream, Death Proof, Encino Man, Monkeybone, and Biodome. If your most popular movies were supporting jobs to Pauly Shore, rethink your chosen profession. Rachel Nichols. Oh I didn't forget about you. What stellar performances have you been in to warrent being the love interest of Conan? The new Star Trek movie (a whole other rant I won't get into) GI Joe, and Dumb and Dumberer. In fairness she's done some other great dramatic movies and honestly she might do a good job. But does this cast scream "epic" to you?
Now watch the trailer for the Conan remake. What do you see? A lot of computer generated backgrounds, shaky camera shots, and scenes specifically meant to be seen with 3D glasses. (3D. also another rant for another time) But basically everything I hate about modern movies are being thrust upon a nostalgic movie and I'm supposed to just go with it and accept that this is how it is.
Where's my copy of the 1982 movie?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)