Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 Posted:   Oct 16, 2013 - 9:19 AM   
 By:   RoryR   (Member)

As regards killing off cartoon superheroes: What's the point?

Exactly, what is the point? A superhero movie is always going to be about a superhero defeating a villian, and he (or she) will defeat the villian. There's no suspence. It's like James Bond. Is James Bond ever going to lose in the end? No. So, the question becomes, how many times do you need to see the same thing over and over? I'm as bored with James Bond as I am with Batman, Superman, Spideman, Ironman, or whatever.

But, it's not really the movie's fault. It's an audience that seems to never tire of seeing the same thing, again and again, and filmmakers, or at least the executives that hire them, that pander to whatever sells.

 
 Posted:   Oct 16, 2013 - 9:47 PM   
 By:   Dana Wilcox   (Member)

As regards killing off cartoon superheroes: What's the point?

Exactly, what is the point? A superhero movie is always going to be about a superhero defeating a villian, and he (or she) will defeat the villian. There's no suspence. It's like James Bond. Is James Bond ever going to lose in the end? No. So, the question becomes, how many times do you need to see the same thing over and over? I'm as bored with James Bond as I am with Batman, Superman, Spideman, Ironman, or whatever.

But, it's not really the movie's fault. It's an audience that seems to never tire of seeing the same thing, again and again, and filmmakers, or at least the executives that hire them, that pander to whatever sells.


Part of the thing with both the cartoon superheroes and James Bond is that it's not just the same people watching these things over and over again. James Bond started in the early 1960s, and while I'm one of those geezers that loved JB from the very first one on, we're on our third generation of Bond-lovers by now and by all appearances, still going strong. So as bored as you may be by them, the appeal of these characters has sustained across the years, and shows no signs of fizzling out. A hell of a lot more money has been spent by moviegoers on cartoon superhero and James Bond flicks than will ever cross the palm of Quentin Tarantino!

 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2013 - 7:24 AM   
 By:   RoryR   (Member)

Part of the thing with both the cartoon superheroes and James Bond is that it's not just the same people watching these things over and over again. James Bond started in the early 1960s, and while I'm one of those geezers that loved JB from the very first one on, we're on our third generation of Bond-lovers by now and by all appearances, still going strong. So as bored as you may be by them, the appeal of these characters has sustained across the years, and shows no signs of fizzling out. A hell of a lot more money has been spent by moviegoers on cartoon superhero and James Bond flicks than will ever cross the palm of Quentin Tarantino!

You know that Tarantino has wanted to make a James Bond movie for years, but the Bond producers have said, "Thanks, but 'No Thanks!'." They don't trust what he would do with the franchise. As much as I find Tarantino shallow and stupid (and most of his movies too), I do think he'd bring at least an energy to the Bond films that it's lacked for decades now. I think the Bond movies have pretty much calcified into "movies for old farts," or, as you say, "geezers." What was the last Bond film, SKYFALL, but an elaborate send off for Judi Dench (age 79), with a damn near walking dead Albert Finney (age 77) thrown in for good measure. Now, I'm not knocking old people (I'm in my mid-fifties.), but when I look at my favorite Bond movies -- the ones from the '60s -- I don't see them as entertainment for the older crowd. They were the height of pop culture then, now they're not much more than nostalgia. You say they're still "going strong." I have to disagree. I think they're just "going along."

I also wish people would stop confusing popularity with quality. Just because something is popular doesn't mean it's therefore good. Cigarette smoking has been, and still is, popular, but it ain't good. Eating a lot of foods full of sugar and salt is popular, but again, not good. And I would argue -- as I'm doing -- that just as junk food isn't good for you, neither is junk movies. And it's not just bad for you, it's bad for the culture. We (the geezers) really shouldn't celebrate it. We should be dissatisfied with it. Is this how you want to spend the last years of your life, being served entertainment that's just a regurgitation of what's been popular for decades, but that really offers little in substance?

And, by the way, just because Dr. Zaius is my avatar, and the original APES film my favorite movie since childhood, doesn't mean that I celebrate the milking of the concept that Fox has done (they ran it into the ground in the '70s), or that I'm all that enthusiastic about the "yet-another-sequel" coming out next year. If it's a good movie with some brains to it, then lucky movie and lucky everyone who sees it, but if not, then it's just another piece of movie junk food -- a bad thing.

 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2013 - 7:34 AM   
 By:   LeHah   (Member)

So the cusp of your opinion, RoryR, is that you're feeling old and outdated by modern sensibilities.

WELCOME TO THE CLUB OF EVERYONE ELSE.

 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2013 - 8:13 AM   
 By:   OnlyGoodMusic   (Member)

Just an example: Thor is a guy with a blond wig who carries a plastic hammer with him.

How can ANY adult worthy of the name (adult, i.e.) watch such drivel without dying of shame?

 
 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2013 - 8:24 AM   
 By:   joan hue   (Member)

I watched the first Thor movie and enjoyed it. Looking forward to the second one. I am certainly an adult, and I guess I have no shame.

 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2013 - 9:43 AM   
 By:   LeHah   (Member)

Just an example: Thor is a guy with a blond wig who carries a plastic hammer with him.

How can ANY adult worthy of the name (adult, i.e.) watch such drivel without dying of shame?


I am at such a loss to respond to this with any form sincerity yet I can't even bring myself to sarcasm.

 
 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2013 - 9:54 AM   
 By:   Ado   (Member)

Thor was far superior to Avengers. It has better and fewer characters, a more personal emotional story. The action is more interesting and more related to the story, it has a better director, better score. Gee, I could keep going.

Thor is terrifically entertaining, if you are too 'grown-up' to enjoy it that is really sad.

I think it is also better than the last Batman picture, there I connected it to the thread again.

 
 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2013 - 9:58 AM   
 By:   Gordon Reeves   (Member)

We share your baffled befuddlement, Le, but we haveta raise the ante a mite by asking:

Just who gets to authoritatively decide what's roll eyes ADULT roll eyes?!?

Since most of us are Grups (in some sense), taking injurious umbrage at others' likes and dislikes certainly doesn't purify one's perceptions other than warning those who do it's an awwwwwwwwful long drop from such Himalayan heights of pure opinionation.

As for that egoholic Tee-entity, when he gets some actual Adult LIFE EXPERIENCE (rather than exposure and edjimication from primarily inside a mo'om pitcher theatre) then maybe he just Might have something to offer other than cinematic thievery on an odious scale.

Don't hold your breath (tho that's why 'Forever' was invented; it'll take some folks at least that long, if not beyond Infinity).

 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2013 - 10:04 AM   
 By:   LeHah   (Member)

Just who gets to authoritatively decide what's ADULT?!?

I go by the old Harlan Ellison adage: "You are a success as an adult if you can have what you wanted as a child."

 
 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2013 - 10:09 AM   
 By:   Gordon Reeves   (Member)

BUENO.

 
 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2013 - 10:47 AM   
 By:   joan hue   (Member)

LeHah, I love that Ellison adage. I still have a few more child-like items to go.

 
 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2013 - 12:03 PM   
 By:   Joe E.   (Member)

Just an example: Thor is a guy with a blond wig who carries a plastic hammer with him.

How can ANY adult worthy of the name (adult, i.e.) watch such drivel without dying of shame?


By buying a ticket?

 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2013 - 1:54 PM   
 By:   Sigerson Holmes   (Member)

So, the question becomes, how many times do you need to see the same thing over and over?

That's not the question at all, folks. May as well ask, "We all know the lights are gonna come up again at the end, when the projection device turns off, so what's the point?

The question should be: Given the conventions of the form (that the lead character always survives, and all the other childish nonsense), what ELSE does this property offer for our entertainment? How is it different this time? What's imaginative about it? Clever about it? Charming about it? How was the music, by the way? The notion that the only kind of suspense possible in any drama is the question of whether the lead character lives or dies at the end strikes me as astoundingly ignorant. We're not all drama students, true, but haven't we seen enough movies, plays and TV to know better than that?!

 
 
 Posted:   Oct 17, 2013 - 3:09 PM   
 By:   Gordon Reeves   (Member)



Apparently knot, Sig smile.

 
 Posted:   Oct 18, 2013 - 8:49 AM   
 By:   OnlyGoodMusic   (Member)

I am at such a loss

You're ALWAYS at a loss. At ANYTHING.

Grown-ups watching stupid shenanigans of cartoon-come-to-would-be-life characters (Pow! Shazam! Whack!) are just this: SAD!

 
 Posted:   Oct 18, 2013 - 8:54 AM   
 By:   RoryR   (Member)

The notion that the only kind of suspense possible in any drama is the question of whether the lead character lives or dies at the end strikes me as astoundingly ignorant. We're not all drama students, true, but haven't we seen enough movies, plays and TV to know better than that?!

Was that what I was saying? I don't think so. It's incredible the capacity for misunderstanding.

What I was saying was that what makes comicbook/superhero movies "not interesting" is you always know how their stories are going to be resolved. The plots are formulaic. So, for the subject of this thread, I find myself in agreement with a filmmaker I don't think is all that interesting either -- but he's right.

Now, somebody tell me I'm ignorant again. Let's see how interesting that is.

 
 Posted:   Oct 18, 2013 - 9:17 AM   
 By:   solium   (Member)

So, the question becomes, how many times do you need to see the same thing over and over?

That's not the question at all, folks. May as well ask, "We all know the lights are gonna come up again at the end, when the projection device turns off, so what's the point?

The question should be: Given the conventions of the form (that the lead character always survives, and all the other childish nonsense), what ELSE does this property offer for our entertainment? How is it different this time? What's imaginative about it? Clever about it? Charming about it? How was the music, by the way? The notion that the only kind of suspense possible in any drama is the question of whether the lead character lives or dies at the end strikes me as astoundingly ignorant. We're not all drama students, true, but haven't we seen enough movies, plays and TV to know better than that?!


It's not the destination it's the journey.

 
 Posted:   Oct 18, 2013 - 9:55 AM   
 By:   LeHah   (Member)

You're ALWAYS at a loss. At ANYTHING.

Grown-ups watching stupid shenanigans of cartoon-come-to-would-be-life characters (Pow! Shazam! Whack!) are just this: SAD!


You truly are the Larry Storch of the FSM board.

What I was saying was that what makes comicbook/superhero movies "not interesting" is you always know how their stories are going to be resolved.

You DO realize there is a finite number of stories that can be told, right?

 
 
 Posted:   Oct 18, 2013 - 12:12 PM   
 By:   Octoberman   (Member)

You truly are the Larry Storch of the FSM board.


I don't think the rest of the FSM board feels that way. So how about not taking shots at someone in the board's name?

As to the topic at hand...
Maybe what's needed is a portrayal of Batman which takes a hard-boiled detective story approach, just as someone above referred to. And it should probably be a period piece true to the era in which he first appeared.

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2014 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.