Your readers demand to know why you watched this movie. It looks a little too violent for a Charlotte pick, and a little too fucking shit for an Al pick.
It's now been two weeks since I've been able to use my Cineworld card. And I'll watch pretty much anything except romcoms and Johnny English Reborn. And retarded fucking muskateer and giant robot boxing films. Jesus Christ, this really does feel like the death of cinema.
It's an Al pick. I was digging around the Horror channel and the info blurb promised something along the lines of Sorority Row (as pleasures go, one of the guiltiest i've ever indulged in). It's not even close but I started it, so I finished it.
When you watch something as bad as this but shrug your shoulders and think 'at least I'm not watching "I Don't Know How She Does It"' then you know you are a part of 2011: The Death Of Cinema.
Through the fug of lack of sleep and manflu I watched the latest Woody Allen last night, Midnight In Paris. Not only was it his best film for quite some time it also touched on themes related to the ludicrous "US cinema is worse than ever" theories that have circled of late as it was about a grown man constantly looking back at how much better things used to be in the past (in this case 1920's Paris) on to discover that the same cycle repeats constantly and essentially everything is always the same, we just grow up and life disappoints.
Tinker Tailer is another fine example of this. During the great era of mid-late 90's cinema when we got the likes of Seven, Usual Suspects, Shawshank, Pulp Fiction, Leon, Jurassic Park, Schindler's List etc etc (movies who's roots were in the greatest era of US cinema, the 70's, and we nopw think of as a second great age) I would likely have found it dull. Now that I've grown up into something of an adult it's understatement and complexity make it stand up high as the fuckin' awesomeness it is.
Oh my god, you're right: Because there has always been shit films, three musketeers is actually pretty ace. I'm amazed I haven't thought about it this way before.
Woody Allen claims films aren't getting worse? I'd suggest he has a vested interest in that argument.
I think it's perverse to claim that Hollywood in general hasn't dropped in quality since the late nineties. As pervese as it would be to claim US television hasn't got better over the same period. Yes, 90% of everything is shit - always has been, always will be - but to say that means quality in general doesn't wax and wane is to misunderstand statistics.
2011 - the death of cinema - a year where Tinker Tailer, Attack The Block, Source Code and Super 8, to name just 4, don't make the top 10 (Rise of Apes currently stands at 9); plus there's still 2+ months to go and I'm still to see Melancholia, Warrior, Tyrannosaur, Tree of Life, The Guard, Kill List that have been released. Terrible year!
This is a discussion I've had a few times with James and he constantly misses my point, frustratingly he will then try and put his 'ludicrous theories' into my mouth and disprove those instead. But in the spirit of Daft Punk, one more time:
The issue here is not the waning quality of film (this would require the slogan "2011: The Death Of Film"), film is in rude health this year, as James ably demonstrates. Besides, film quality is subjective and to argue any year (or decade) is better than another is futile and meaningless.
The issue is this; James in support of 2011 lists a bunch of films he has not seen yet that he feels he will likely find are very good. The reason he has not seen these is that (with the exception of "Warrior") none of them have been shown at our local cinema, nor has the Woody Allen film that started this. The films Joe lists and the one I mentioned before pithily sloganeering have all been shown locally, and in the case of "Johnny English: Reborn" across multiple screens every half hour. "2011: The Death Of Cinema" refers to a narrowing of choice on offer at cinemas.
I should point out that this is an over-simplification of a very complex discussion and there are many factors at work here (the biggest, most obvious being money). I should also point out that although I'm having to work harder and harder to see interesting films in a cinema, it is foolish to take "2011: The Death Of Cinema" as a definitive statement and there are plenty of counter examples (James names 5).
As James points out this is something that can be perceived as cyclical but "2011: The slight lull in cinema until there is a change in general opinion" is neither as catchy nor as caustically funny which I reckon was the original intention.
I'm not trying to wind anyone up here or start an argument, just trying to get some thoughts out there. Now, given this is a blog that focusses largely on shitty horror films and weird nonsense I suggest all of us get off our high horses and go back to throwaway flippancy such as:
Why the fuck is James defending a Paul WS Anderson film? What is happening in the world??
But in all seriousness the death of cinema statement here seemed to be saying that the quality of films out this year was poor. I actually think that on the whole it's been a strong year for movies and I was trying to give examples that show this. This debate has also included the argument that "American cinema is the worst it's ever been" and, again, I feel the films released this year don't support that. But if the death of cinema in 2011 means that there aren't any good films on in the cinema it is also not true, this same selection of films has had cinematic releases.
The problem is that not enough of the less commercial films are shown at our local Cineworld, which tends to fill it's schedule with mass appeal movies, or our art cinema which tends to have a schedule aimed at middle class 50+'s who won't go to a multiplex or watching anything "edgy". Even the likes of Drive (which opened #3 in the US and has consistent raves) won't show there. So the problem isn't that the films are worse or cinemas are dead, it's that our shitty town doesn't have a diverse enough audience.
Your readers demand to know why you watched this movie. It looks a little too violent for a Charlotte pick, and a little too fucking shit for an Al pick.
ReplyDeleteIt's now been two weeks since I've been able to use my Cineworld card. And I'll watch pretty much anything except romcoms and Johnny English Reborn. And retarded fucking muskateer and giant robot boxing films. Jesus Christ, this really does feel like the death of cinema.
What's the point of a Cineworld card if you refuse to watch giant robot boxing movies?
ReplyDeleteIt's an Al pick. I was digging around the Horror channel and the info blurb promised something along the lines of Sorority Row (as pleasures go, one of the guiltiest i've ever indulged in). It's not even close but I started it, so I finished it.
ReplyDeleteWhen you watch something as bad as this but shrug your shoulders and think 'at least I'm not watching "I Don't Know How She Does It"' then you know you are a part of 2011: The Death Of Cinema.
Well, count me among the pallbearers.
ReplyDeleteAli, for some reason when I see two giant robots fighting I throw up in my mouth a little bit. Almost like a pavlovian response...
Ok I did enjoy real steel this weekend. And the footloose remake.
ReplyDeleteCinema has been saved!
Through the fug of lack of sleep and manflu I watched the latest Woody Allen last night, Midnight In Paris. Not only was it his best film for quite some time it also touched on themes related to the ludicrous "US cinema is worse than ever" theories that have circled of late as it was about a grown man constantly looking back at how much better things used to be in the past (in this case 1920's Paris) on to discover that the same cycle repeats constantly and essentially everything is always the same, we just grow up and life disappoints.
ReplyDeleteTinker Tailer is another fine example of this. During the great era of mid-late 90's cinema when we got the likes of Seven, Usual Suspects, Shawshank, Pulp Fiction, Leon, Jurassic Park, Schindler's List etc etc (movies who's roots were in the greatest era of US cinema, the 70's, and we nopw think of as a second great age) I would likely have found it dull. Now that I've grown up into something of an adult it's understatement and complexity make it stand up high as the fuckin' awesomeness it is.
Oh my god, you're right: Because there has always been shit films, three musketeers is actually pretty ace. I'm amazed I haven't thought about it this way before.
ReplyDeleteWoody Allen claims films aren't getting worse? I'd suggest he has a vested interest in that argument.
ReplyDeleteI think it's perverse to claim that Hollywood in general hasn't dropped in quality since the late nineties. As pervese as it would be to claim US television hasn't got better over the same period. Yes, 90% of everything is shit - always has been, always will be - but to say that means quality in general doesn't wax and wane is to misunderstand statistics.
2011 - the death of cinema - a year where Tinker Tailer, Attack The Block, Source Code and Super 8, to name just 4, don't make the top 10 (Rise of Apes currently stands at 9); plus there's still 2+ months to go and I'm still to see Melancholia, Warrior, Tyrannosaur, Tree of Life, The Guard, Kill List that have been released. Terrible year!
ReplyDeleteAnd while the trailer for 3 Musketeers looks awful I will reserve judgement unless I see it (see Rise of the Apes).
ReplyDelete"2011: The Death Of Cinema"
ReplyDeleteThis is a discussion I've had a few times with James and he constantly misses my point, frustratingly he will then try and put his 'ludicrous theories' into my mouth and disprove those instead. But in the spirit of Daft Punk, one more time:
The issue here is not the waning quality of film (this would require the slogan "2011: The Death Of Film"), film is in rude health this year, as James ably demonstrates. Besides, film quality is subjective and to argue any year (or decade) is better than another is futile and meaningless.
The issue is this; James in support of 2011 lists a bunch of films he has not seen yet that he feels he will likely find are very good. The reason he has not seen these is that (with the exception of "Warrior") none of them have been shown at our local cinema, nor has the Woody Allen film that started this.
The films Joe lists and the one I mentioned before pithily sloganeering have all been shown locally, and in the case of "Johnny English: Reborn" across multiple screens every half hour.
"2011: The Death Of Cinema" refers to a narrowing of choice on offer at cinemas.
I should point out that this is an over-simplification of a very complex discussion and there are many factors at work here (the biggest, most obvious being money). I should also point out that although I'm having to work harder and harder to see interesting films in a cinema, it is foolish to take "2011: The Death Of Cinema" as a definitive statement and there are plenty of counter examples (James names 5).
As James points out this is something that can be perceived as cyclical but "2011: The slight lull in cinema until there is a change in general opinion" is neither as catchy nor as caustically funny which I reckon was the original intention.
I'm not trying to wind anyone up here or start an argument, just trying to get some thoughts out there. Now, given this is a blog that focusses largely on shitty horror films and weird nonsense I suggest all of us get off our high horses and go back to throwaway flippancy such as:
Why the fuck is James defending a Paul WS Anderson film? What is happening in the world??
Event Horizon is awful!
ReplyDeleteAnd Mortal Kombat... sheesh!
ReplyDeleteBut in all seriousness the death of cinema statement here seemed to be saying that the quality of films out this year was poor. I actually think that on the whole it's been a strong year for movies and I was trying to give examples that show this. This debate has also included the argument that "American cinema is the worst it's ever been" and, again, I feel the films released this year don't support that. But if the death of cinema in 2011 means that there aren't any good films on in the cinema it is also not true, this same selection of films has had cinematic releases.
The problem is that not enough of the less commercial films are shown at our local Cineworld, which tends to fill it's schedule with mass appeal movies, or our art cinema which tends to have a schedule aimed at middle class 50+'s who won't go to a multiplex or watching anything "edgy". Even the likes of Drive (which opened #3 in the US and has consistent raves) won't show there. So the problem isn't that the films are worse or cinemas are dead, it's that our shitty town doesn't have a diverse enough audience.
Oh for fuck's sake.
ReplyDeleteAm I accidentally typing in Dutch or something?
Just not reading in English
ReplyDelete"I can't wait to see the Footloose remake!" - No one
ReplyDelete"I can't wait to see the 3 Musketeers remake!" - No one
"I can't wait to see the Smurfs movie!" - No one
To be fair despite loving movies, I have long stopped caring about the 'Movie Industry' and going to the cinema.
- Bryce