DRAGONLORD'S 2016 MOVIE GUIDE

[Guestx]

Ghostbusters tied at the box office by a movie with a $5M budget. I don't know if that's a woman thing or a black thing, but I'm not happy about it.

I am totally lost when it comes to interpreting this comment.

 

[BisexualMMA]

I am totally lost when it comes to interpreting this comment.

Understanding the complex humor of my post requires a two part answer key.

The first step is to note the factual basis of the tied box office revenue over the weekend by Ghostbusters (>$150M budget and massive unscrupulous promotion) and Lights Out ($5M budget and farted out as a studio afterthought).

The second step is to watch the second trailer for the 2016 classic film Ghostbusters, starring Kristen Wiig, Melissa McCarthy and Marsha Warfield, and note the humor exhibited at the timestamped moment below.

 

[scorpipede]

it's a horrible movie. I'd watch Warcraft or Fant4stic again before i watch Fight Valley again

you watched it????????

 

[Guestx]

Understanding the complex humor of my post requires a two part answer key.

The first step is to note the factual basis of the tied box office revenue over the weekend by Ghostbusters (>$150M budget and massive unscrupulous promotion) and Lights Out ($5M budget and farted out as a studio afterthought).

The second step is to watch the second trailer for the 2016 classic film Ghostbusters, starring Kristen Wiig, Melissa McCarthy and Marsha Warfield, and note the humor exhibited at the timestamped moment below.

Ah okay, I get it.

BTW, Lights Out is actually supposed to be pretty good. I believe it's also made by a first-time director based on a short he did. So it's not some thoughtless throw-away horror film as it seems you may think.

 

[BisexualMMA]

Ah okay, I get it.

BTW, Lights Out is actually supposed to be pretty good. I believe it's also made by a first-time director based on a short he did. So it's not some thoughtless throw-away horror film as it seems you may think.

I have no opinion on the movie. But I don't think the distributors were expecting a whole lot, and probably wouldn't have taken a 10 to 1 bet that it would match Ghostbusters' revenue at this stage. It seems to me that they're pleasantly surprised by the success so far.

I'm hearing good things about it, and may check it out.

Anyway, I'm just enjoying the failure of Ghostbusters after Sony's and Feig's promotional methods and process of creating the film.

 

[Guestx]

I have no opinion on the movie. But I don't think the distributors were expecting a whole lot, and probably wouldn't have taken a 10 to 1 bet that it would match Ghostbusters' revenue at this stage. It seems to me that they're pleasantly surprised by the success so far.

I'm hearing good things about it, and may check it out.

Anyway, I'm just enjoying the failure of Ghostbusters after Sony's promotional methods and process of creating the film.

Indeed. Well check out lights out. It is, at the very least, a passion project.

BTW, isn't it weird that there is basically one genre--horror--that can reliably make very low budget films while still seeing solid box office returns? No other genre can make such a claim.

 

[BisexualMMA]

Indeed. Well check out lights out. It is, at the very least, a passion project.

BTW, isn't it weird that there is basically one genre--horror--that can reliably make very low budget films while still seeing solid box office returns? No other genre can make such a claim.

We continue to culturally sink toward the lowest common denominator...

You'd be wiser to put your money behind Paranormal Activity 23: The Queef Dimension than On Golden Pond II.

 

[Guestx]

We continue to culturally sink toward the lowest common denominator...

You'd be wiser to put your money behind Paranormal Activity 23: The Queef Dimension than On Golden Pond II.

I'm not a huge horror fan, but I can enjoy the occasional film from the genre. But I understand what you're saying,.

Why do you think that's the case, though?

I suspect that ultimately it has to do with people wanting excitement and thrills from the theatrical experience more than anything else.

 

[odog]

It's true, though. Or rather, I read that it was true.

Uwe Boll.

It's the only way it makes sense.

My brother had had to deal with Uwe for work. Apparently not a nice guy.

 

[BisexualMMA]

I'm not a huge horror fan, but I can enjoy the occasional film from the genre. But I understand what you're saying,.

Why do you think that's the case, though?

I suspect that ultimately it has to do with people wanting excitement and thrills from the theatrical experience more than anything else.

I think horror has (for the most part) fallen into the same kind of mass-produced formulaic "fill the screen with crap" approach that has characterized action movies as of late (eg. Transformers). It's just done at a smaller scale for lower stakes. You can put $200M behind Transformers 6 and hope to make $800M, or you can diversify your portfolio and make 30 $5M horrors and hope that ten of them make $50M and ten of them make $20M.

With action, it's get a big name star and fill the screen with as many explosions and robots / dragons as possible. With horror, it's make a scary poster and write a script that enables as many jump scares as possible. That or take the Wan / Roth approach and write a script that justifies as much blood and torture as possible.

Both are disposable "turn your mind off" / "get drugged with quick cuts, flashes and noises for 2 hours" type of entertainment. They seem to be movies geared toward an audience that is checking its phone periodically during the movie.

Speaking of On Golden Pond 2...maybe the closest thing I can think of is a movie I made a thread about yesterday called "Last Love" with Michael Caine. The movie made $1.9M at the box office, and my thread has literally zero replies. Like you said, the small, contained human drama lives on an ever-shrinking island of the cinema landscape.

As for horror...people nowadays call The Exorcist dated and not scary. I don't know if I've ever seen a horror that rich in round characters and human drama. The fear was created due to the high stakes because you cared about the people. If you thought descending into promiscuous teen slashers in the 80s was bad, to me that's nothing compared to how shitty Paranormal Activity is.

Or take the Green Inferno. Eli Roth managed to create a cannibal horror where you simultaneously dislike the environmentalists and the corporations, the cannibals and the victims. I wanted the cannibal tribe to be wiped from the earth, but not before they did the world a service and killed all of the annoying environmentalists. Stakes = zero.

 

[milliniar]

you watched it????????

yep it's been online for a while

 

[pinkybrief]

We continue to culturally sink toward the lowest common denominator...

You'd be wiser to put your money behind Paranormal Activity 23: The Queef Dimension than On Golden Pond II.

Lmoa 23!

 

[Guestx]

That or take the Wan / Roth approach and write a script that justifies as much blood and torture as possible.

Both are disposable "turn your mind off" / "get drugged with quick cuts, flashes and noises for 2 hours" type of entertainment. They seem to be movies geared toward an audience that is checking its phone periodically during the movie.

I'm surprised to see you throw Wan in there. I know that he did the first Saw, but The Conjuring was more recent and I thought it was refreshing in the way that it did NOT rely on "as much blood and torture as possible."

But I agree with your general sentiment.

Speaking of On Golden Pond 2...maybe the closest thing I can think of is a movie I made a thread about yesterday called "Last Love" with Michael Caine. The movie made $1.9M at the box office, and my thread has literally zero replies. Like you said, the small, contained human drama lives on an ever-shrinking island of the cinema landscape.

Interesting, maybe I'll have to check that movie out. I can't say I've heard about it.

I wonder how a movie like that turns a profit.

As for horror...people nowadays call The Exorcist dated and not scary. I don't know if I've ever seen a horror that rich in round characters and human drama. The fear was created due to the high stakes because you cared about the people. If you thought descending into promiscuous teen slashers in the 80s was bad, to me that's nothing compared to how shitty Paranormal Activity is.

I've debated even with myself about how scary The Exorcist really is, but regardless of any of that it's one hell of a good movie. Easily my favorite horror film of all time. I have this 25th Anniversary VHS box set that is just incredible. It literally comes in a big box and has the movie, the soundtrack on CD, still photos from the set, a frame of film from the movie, and some other shit that I can't remember right now. It's great.

 

[BisexualMMA]

I'm surprised to see you throw Wan in there. I know that he did the first Saw, but The Conjuring was more recent and I thought it was refreshing in the way that it did NOT rely on "as much blood and torture as possible."

But I agree with your general sentiment.

I was mainly associating him with Saw and all the sequels he produced.

He actually did quite a good job directing Death Sentence. I might go as far as to call it the best Death Wish ripoff ever made, which is saying quite a bit.

I haven't seen either Conjuring. But it seems like he is capable of more and better than Saw movies.

 

[Guestx]

I was mainly associating him with Saw and all the sequels he produced.

He actually did quite a good job directing Death Sentence. I might go as far as to call it the best Death Wish ripoff ever made, which is saying quite a bit.

I haven't seen either Conjuring. But it seems like he is capable of more and better than Saw movies.

I've heard of Death Sentence but never seen it. Maybe I should check it out.

As for The Conjuring, I think it's a very solid horror film overall but it falls off a bit in the third act. Basically, the first 3/4 of the film is great. The last quarter is typical Hollywood bullshit.

 

[Pixelated Porn]

Or take the Green Inferno. Eli Roth managed to create a cannibal horror where you simultaneously dislike the environmentalists and the corporations, the cannibals and the victims. I wanted the cannibal tribe to be wiped from the earth, but not before they did the world a service and killed all of the annoying environmentalists. Stakes = zero.

The thing I liked about this movie A LOT was it taking down SJW bullshit and much of it mirrored real life.
You can't help but here the final girl telling her story who the cannibals were a peaceful tribe and were attacked by the developers and compare that to the whitewashing of european attacks commited by muslimrefugees.

As a social statement I thought the movie was good. But I would argue that you do care about the main girl coz she sooooo white.

Agreed. Why was this movie even made?

Why are 99% of the movies today made? Why was ghostbusters remake made? Why was karate kid remake made? Why was Exorcist 3 called the exorcist 3???








Based on a successful movie or franchise

 

[BisexualMMA]

The thing I liked about this movie A LOT was it taking down SJW bullshit and much of it mirrored real life.
You can't help but here the final girl telling her story who the cannibals were a peaceful tribe and were attacked by the developers and compare that to the whitewashing of european attacks commited by muslimrefugees.

As a social statement I thought the movie was good. But I would argue that you do care about the main girl coz she sooooo white.

I think it could have achieved what you are saying quite while, but Roth's writing simply wasn't up to the task of making the characters anything but annoying (and rarely is). And not even annoying because of their philosophies, but annoying because they just say lots of inane shit.

Do you really think Eli Roth was trying to make a social commentary on Muslim immigration?

And that the protagonist woman was keeping silent about those horrors because she was a SJW apologist? I'll admit that I don't have a better theory. I actually have no clue why she lied about her experience in the jungle. It just struck me as Eli Roth's misinterpretation of the ending to Titanic.

 

[Pixelated Porn]

I think it could have achieved what you are saying quite while, but Roth's writing simply wasn't up to the task of making the characters anything but annoying (and rarely is). And not even annoying because of their philosophies, but annoying because they just say lots of inane shit.

Do you really think Eli Roth was trying to make a social commentary on Muslim immigration?

And that the protagonist woman was keeping silent about those horrors because she was a SJW apologist? I'll admit that I don't have a better theory. I actually have no clue why she lied about her experience in the jungle. It just struck me as Eli Roth's misinterpretation of the ending to Titanic.

"Do you really think Eli Roth was trying to make a social commentary on Muslim immigration?"
I never said he did. It reminds me of it though. Basically any lying about the way thiings/people are can fit it.
You have some group of foreign people who you say were innocent and it was someone else who did shit to them....meanwhile the group of foreign people did some heinous ass shit and and the SJW is lying and covering up for them. (see Merkel and syrian refugees and media cover up of refugee crime)

I think Eli Roth was DEFINITELY making a statement against SJWs and he has said as much.

When you are basically setting up a satire (which this is) you can expect to have despicable and annoying characters...especially if those are the people you are satirizing. I still say the main girl is likeable.

Look at American Psycho which is also a satire, none of the characters are likeable at all (eh, maybe jean) but people do like Patrick Batemen and some even idolize him, which is funny because the author thinks you should pity him.

"keeping silent about those horrors because she was a SJW " - her behavior was such, ignoring the truth to push HER AGENDA/VIEWPOINT. we see this all the time now.
If not, then why lie and coverup for people who murdered her whole group???????????

Do you think the last season of South Park was a hit piece against SJWs and PC culture???

 

[BisexualMMA]

"Do you really think Eli Roth was trying to make a social commentary on Muslim immigration?"
I never said he did. It reminds me of it though. Basically any lying about the way thiings/people are can fit it.
You have some group of foreign people who you say were innocent and it was someone else who did shit to them....meanwhile the group of forgeing people did some heinous ass shit and and SJW is lying and covering up for them.

I think Eli Roth was DEFINITELY making a statement against SJWs and he has said as much.

When you are basically setting up a satire (which this is) you can expect to have dispicable and annoying characters...especially if those are the people you are satirizing. I still say the main girl is likeable.

Look at American Psycho which is also a satire, none of the characters are likeable at all (eh, maybe jean) but people do like Patrick Batemen and some even idolize him, which is funny because the author thinks you should pity him.

"keeping silent about those horrors because she was a SJW " - her behavior was such, ignoring the truth to push HER AGENDA/VIEWPOINT. we see this all the time now.

Do you think the last season of South Park was a hit piece against SJWs and PC culture???

The thing with Patrick Bateman is that he was interesting, and well written. That's what made it work as a piece of satire. You wanted to see Patrick Bateman do everything, from select business cards to get his laundry done. He was interesting, not annoying.

If you aren't going to have a likable or heroic protagonist, he or she should be interesting.

I just didn't find the people in Green Inferno interesting. I wanted them to die, just so they would shut up and I wouldn't have to see them anymore.

Quentin Tarantino's characters are rarely good people, but when his movies work, the characters are interesting (eg. Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction). They aren't just a collection of annoying people you want to go away.

I won't argue if you say an anti-SJW statement was Eli Roth's message and he says it too. I can certainly see how that is the case. But to me, he just made that message by writing a bunch of annoying people I wanted off the screen and then having them die, but not before dumb dialogue, a one-minute diarrhea fit, etc.

I would have loved the film if it had been the SJW equivalent of Patrick Bateman. But it was just boring and vapid morons, all pretty much the same as each other (minus the evil guy) with the main girl a little more likable because she wasn't AS stupid and annoying.

Here's the thing...this was an Eli Roth satire film. But he doesn't have a particularly deft and subtle hand. How was this any different from an Eli Roth film that wasn't satire? Cabin Fever and both Hostel Films weren't satire and they were also filled with empty and/or annoying groups of protagonists.

I didn't hate the movie. I just didn't really like it. To me, it was typical Eli Roth writing, which is lousy annoying characters because he doesn't know what to make them say other than (a) bickering, or (b) inane faux-Tarantino conversations about minutiae (eg. Jewish identity).

The movie was somewhat entertaining as torture-porn horror goes.

But I think a fair comparison piece is something like Bone Tomahawk, which is a rather similar plot, with the benefit of rich characters and good dialogue.

 

[Pixelated Porn]

The thing with Patrick Bateman is that he was interesting, and well written. That's what made it work as a piece of satire. You wanted to see Patrick Bateman do everything, from select business cards to get his laundry done. He was interesting, not annoying.

If you aren't going to have a likable or heroic protagonist, he or she should be interesting.

I just didn't find the people in Green Inferno interesting. I wanted them to die, just so they would shut up and I wouldn't have to see them anymore.

Quentin Tarantino's characters are rarely good people, but when his movies work, the characters are interesting (eg. Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction). They aren't just a collection of annoying people you want to go away.

I won't argue if you say an anti-SJW statement was Eli Roth's message and he says it too. I can certainly see how that is the case. But to me, he just made that message by writing a bunch of annoying people I wanted off the screen and then having them die, but not before dumb dialogue, a one-minute diarrhea fit, etc.

I would have loved the film if it had been the SJW equivalent of Patrick Bateman. But it was just boring and vapid morons, all pretty much the same as each other (minus the evil guy) with the main girl a little more likable because she wasn't AS stupid and annoying.

Here's the thing...this was an Eli Roth satire film. But he doesn't have a particularly deft and subtle hand. How was this any different from an Eli Roth film that wasn't satire? Cabin Fever and both Hostel Films weren't satire and they were also filled with empty and/or annoying groups of protagonists.

I didn't hate the movie. I just didn't really like it. To me, it was typical Eli Roth writing, which is lousy annoying characters because he doesn't know what to make them say other than (a) bickering, or (b) inane faux-Tarantino conversations about minutiae (eg. Jewish identity).

The movie was somewhat entertaining as torture-porn horror goes.

But I think a fair comparison piece is something like Bone Tomahawk, which is a rather similar plot, with the benefit of rich characters and good dialogue.

Well, Bret Easton Elllis (AP) is the best writer ever and basically all the dialogue is taken from the book. I do think a lot of people hold Bateman up as a hero which is not the intent of the author.

I would put Green Inferno in the same league as Salo. I would say where American Pyscho differs is that is it a satire but also a black comedy--- it is fucking hilarious. It it fucking funny. In Salo, you can't make the nazis likeable and sympathetic.

Bone tomahawk I thought the hipster character was awful. They did not have hipsters back then.

"Roth attempts to toe the line between preachy and satirical, but The Green Inferno is all about deaths, and each character’s reaction to the carnivorous, unfiltered horrors before them."

But again, I liked the final girl until the very end when she lies. It is a message movie and a message I agree with and without it green inferno is just torture porn which is boring.

EDIT: The thing is in AP you can come out of the movie and love bateman and want to be just like him and the yuppies so it takes a more intelligent person to even realize it is satire

While GI and Salo are heavy handed satire which is kind of preachy and you cannot come out liking the villains.