Ghostbusters shoes
GHOSTBUSTERS Pre-Release - film discussion only, no social commentary please!
- Thread starter Westies14
- Start date
KrangPrime
Master Member
how long till westies gets to see a rough cut? or gets a report? ;o) January? 
- browsing the latest crap storm of news related to this movie in internet comments ( I know, but i'm a sucker for punishment)...and came across this comment..
"I got to be an extra in the movie and dialogue I heard/saw in the concert scene is absolutely atrocious and not funny whatsoever. If the whole movie is similar to what I saw, this garbage movie will bomb."...
please movie reboot gods, please deliver on a bomb! ;o).
- browsing the latest crap storm of news related to this movie in internet comments ( I know, but i'm a sucker for punishment)...and came across this comment..
"I got to be an extra in the movie and dialogue I heard/saw in the concert scene is absolutely atrocious and not funny whatsoever. If the whole movie is similar to what I saw, this garbage movie will bomb."...
please movie reboot gods, please deliver on a bomb! ;o).
Last edited:
KrangPrime
Master Member
KrangPrime
Master Member
sorry for keeping this thread alive....but at this point, I don't believe any press done about this movie. I'm morel ikely to believe the guy who posted that ivan reitman looked worried during his sony studio tour ;o)
http://www.salon.com/2015/10/27/iva...the_female_centric_reboot/?curator=MediaREDEF
I'm also willing to believe that feig listened to nothing reitman said, considering he didn't want dan or ivan around in the leaked emails.
http://www.salon.com/2015/10/27/iva...the_female_centric_reboot/?curator=MediaREDEF
I'm also willing to believe that feig listened to nothing reitman said, considering he didn't want dan or ivan around in the leaked emails.
KrangPrime
Master Member
again, sorry for keeping this thread going as a lone wolf...but some things of interest...
http://www.toynews-online.biz/news/...or-ghostbusters-jumanji-and-get-smurfy/045530
Mattel supposedly making a proton pack. Probably the original pack as they had the wand attachment for it on the gun released a while back. I just hope with that idiot Toy Guru gone, we see some actual quality come out. not a 'please buy the subscription or this card board photo of an ecto 1 doesn't get made!' crap.
also,Paul Feig doing press rounds for peanuts.
http://www.mtv.com/news/2369533/paul-feig-peanuts-ghostbusters-childhood/
it absolutely amazes me. How can this guy get Peanuts so RIGHT looking, even using child actors... and mess up ghostbusters so badly? other than the fact that he didn't even care to do the latter? it makes me wonder just how much control he had over the whole thing. it's nothing like his previous movies that all follow the same exact formula of starring mellisa mcarthy. unless she is lucy in this. i'm actually looking forward to peanuts.
http://www.toynews-online.biz/news/...or-ghostbusters-jumanji-and-get-smurfy/045530
Mattel supposedly making a proton pack. Probably the original pack as they had the wand attachment for it on the gun released a while back. I just hope with that idiot Toy Guru gone, we see some actual quality come out. not a 'please buy the subscription or this card board photo of an ecto 1 doesn't get made!' crap.
also,Paul Feig doing press rounds for peanuts.
http://www.mtv.com/news/2369533/paul-feig-peanuts-ghostbusters-childhood/
it absolutely amazes me. How can this guy get Peanuts so RIGHT looking, even using child actors... and mess up ghostbusters so badly? other than the fact that he didn't even care to do the latter? it makes me wonder just how much control he had over the whole thing. it's nothing like his previous movies that all follow the same exact formula of starring mellisa mcarthy. unless she is lucy in this. i'm actually looking forward to peanuts.
I think you answered your own question there.
Filmmakers who don't really want to be doing something will usually not do a very good job at it. Even if they want to do a good job (and often times they don't really), people's creativity just doesn't respond very well to that.
It's a simple principle. But the studios have lost billions over the years by ignoring it.
Last edited:
KrangPrime
Master Member
true. even if he's convinced himself that he's enjoying an idea he totally changed around to fit his needs.
that's the odd thing about this whole project. and dan aykroyd piping up the 'support' by saying this film might be better than the first two isn't helping matters either. I love dan, but he gets in his own way when he talks sometime.
Feig is making the press rounds. wish I could talk about some of those articles here, but the byline of this thread specifically forbids it. I'd revive the old thread, but with the last 4 replies being from people on my ban list... it's probably not worth it. I'd start a new thread if I thought it would do any good...
also, cue sony for trying to cram in as MANY NODS TO THE ORIGINAL AS POSSIBLE! so much for faith in feigs idea that this thing be so far removed from the first films that nothing will seem right. this thing has mess written all over it. http://www.denofgeek.us/250301/ghostbusters-new-film-bringing-in-more-hat-tips-to-original
that's the odd thing about this whole project. and dan aykroyd piping up the 'support' by saying this film might be better than the first two isn't helping matters either. I love dan, but he gets in his own way when he talks sometime.
Feig is making the press rounds. wish I could talk about some of those articles here, but the byline of this thread specifically forbids it. I'd revive the old thread, but with the last 4 replies being from people on my ban list... it's probably not worth it. I'd start a new thread if I thought it would do any good...
also, cue sony for trying to cram in as MANY NODS TO THE ORIGINAL AS POSSIBLE! so much for faith in feigs idea that this thing be so far removed from the first films that nothing will seem right. this thing has mess written all over it. http://www.denofgeek.us/250301/ghostbusters-new-film-bringing-in-more-hat-tips-to-original
Last edited:
KrangPrime
Master Member
Jem and the holograms does so poorly, universal yanks it from theaters after only two weeks. this, then Fantastic Four. can movie audiences FINALLY be standing their ground against terrible remakes? not that I thought Jem was high art to begin with ;o).
can only hope ghostbuster fans stand their ground. even if it's halfway decent.
can only hope ghostbuster fans stand their ground. even if it's halfway decent.
It's no wonder the Blair Witch found footage movies are so abundant. You can film them in total secrecy and only use a couple of actors to get the job done in a couple of days. Then you don't have to worry about as many grips and extra cameramen, and all the extras that can potentially leak footage or photos. I tell you what. If I were a director, I would place a geo-tracking system in everyone's name badge and make everyone sign a NDA that would be iron clad. Track every single name badge throughout the filming process. Then if a photo ever leaks, you could pretty much tell who did it and when based on the photo orientation and position as well as approximate time of day, etc. You could cross reference that info with the tracking data and be able to pretty much tell who took the photo and suit/fire/chastise/burn/torture/disembowel/etc the first person that leaked such information, and put the fear of God into anyone else who even thinks about doing the same thing. Would cut down on the number of leaked images from a set wouldn't it?
Solo4114
Master Member
I rather doubt people are giving up on remakes/reboots. I think, rather, that truly abysmal movies are being rejected by key demographics, and what you may see is that the studios may be a bit more discerning about how they do remakes/reboots/rebrandings.
Neither Jem nor the FF are particularly strong brands. Jem was a kinda popular mid-80s cartoon that was part of a Saturday morning lineup that also feature Inhumanoids and Big Foot and the Muscle Machines. It was popular among girls (now women) of a certain age, and boys (now men) who might have happened to sit through it before Inhumanoids came on (or whatever). Jem was apparently targeted at tweens/teens and their moms, but typically, that's not the demographic (as far as I know) that fuels the film marketplace. Moreover, everything I've heard is that the film was utter garbage. So, it's not like there was a good film lurking behind the brand. All it had going for it was the brand, and the brand itself...wasn't that strong to begin with.
FF are another weak brand. While they've been reasonably popular among comics readers, they were never really the title that drew people in. You had so many other titles that are bigger names, like Spider-Man, Avengers, and especially the X-Men. FF is a tough sell. It's much campier than any of the other films. Marvel managed to get Thor to work, but it's one of their weaker series, at least as compared to, say, Cap, or Iron Man. FF also was coming off of three prior bad films. The 90s Corman atrocity, and the two weaker early '00s entries. Suffice to say, this last FF film had...rather a long way to go to convince an already dubious public to give it a chance. So, it didn't help that the underlying product was garbage.
Compare this to, say, the first G.I. Joe film, which is total crap BUT bears the name of a highly successful, beloved franchise of toys, cartoons, and comic books. It managed to do well because the brand was strong...and that's it. Seriously. I don't know anyone who thought that film was good. At best, I get an "Oh, it was ok" or "Oh come on. It was fun." But literally, if you strip out the branding, nobody would give a crap about that film.
Take a look at Battleship, too. Not that well received. Why? Weak brand and a crappy underlying film.
I think what you'll see is that Hollywood will slooooooowly come to realize they can't just grab literally any brand name and slap it on top of a turd of a film to get people to go see it. You need either a decently strong brand, or a pretty good film that isn't relying on the brand to carry the weight.
As for what this means for Ghostbusters...I'd say not much. Ghostbusters is a pretty solid brand, and Feig's approach to comedy is generally well received albeit not universally acclaimed. I expect it'll do fine. Well enough to get a sequel, maybe two.
Neither Jem nor the FF are particularly strong brands. Jem was a kinda popular mid-80s cartoon that was part of a Saturday morning lineup that also feature Inhumanoids and Big Foot and the Muscle Machines. It was popular among girls (now women) of a certain age, and boys (now men) who might have happened to sit through it before Inhumanoids came on (or whatever). Jem was apparently targeted at tweens/teens and their moms, but typically, that's not the demographic (as far as I know) that fuels the film marketplace. Moreover, everything I've heard is that the film was utter garbage. So, it's not like there was a good film lurking behind the brand. All it had going for it was the brand, and the brand itself...wasn't that strong to begin with.
FF are another weak brand. While they've been reasonably popular among comics readers, they were never really the title that drew people in. You had so many other titles that are bigger names, like Spider-Man, Avengers, and especially the X-Men. FF is a tough sell. It's much campier than any of the other films. Marvel managed to get Thor to work, but it's one of their weaker series, at least as compared to, say, Cap, or Iron Man. FF also was coming off of three prior bad films. The 90s Corman atrocity, and the two weaker early '00s entries. Suffice to say, this last FF film had...rather a long way to go to convince an already dubious public to give it a chance. So, it didn't help that the underlying product was garbage.
Compare this to, say, the first G.I. Joe film, which is total crap BUT bears the name of a highly successful, beloved franchise of toys, cartoons, and comic books. It managed to do well because the brand was strong...and that's it. Seriously. I don't know anyone who thought that film was good. At best, I get an "Oh, it was ok" or "Oh come on. It was fun." But literally, if you strip out the branding, nobody would give a crap about that film.
Take a look at Battleship, too. Not that well received. Why? Weak brand and a crappy underlying film.
I think what you'll see is that Hollywood will slooooooowly come to realize they can't just grab literally any brand name and slap it on top of a turd of a film to get people to go see it. You need either a decently strong brand, or a pretty good film that isn't relying on the brand to carry the weight.
As for what this means for Ghostbusters...I'd say not much. Ghostbusters is a pretty solid brand, and Feig's approach to comedy is generally well received albeit not universally acclaimed. I expect it'll do fine. Well enough to get a sequel, maybe two.
I dunno. The remake trend is 15+ years old. It's been worsening along the way but that's a long time in the movie biz. 15-20 years ago Hugh Jackman wasn't the first choice to play Wolverine and we were excited to see George Lucas make more SW movies.
My point is they still haven't learned not to do stupid things with their remakes. Between this recent FF movie, the GB movie, the Michael Bay crap with TF and TMNT . . . this is dog-poop-in-a-burning-paper-bag level stuff here.
I'm not convinced they ever will learn. If they change their bad habits then I think will only be because the climate has changed. The same stuff is getting remade so often that eventually there may not be ANY assumption of a built-in audience for an old property. Even the diehards may quit going to Spiderman or FF movies at the rate they're going. If George Lucas was the one doing this next batch of SW movies (and it didn't bring back the OT cast), I don't see it having the built-in draw like his last five SW movies.
My point is they still haven't learned not to do stupid things with their remakes. Between this recent FF movie, the GB movie, the Michael Bay crap with TF and TMNT . . . this is dog-poop-in-a-burning-paper-bag level stuff here.
I'm not convinced they ever will learn. If they change their bad habits then I think will only be because the climate has changed. The same stuff is getting remade so often that eventually there may not be ANY assumption of a built-in audience for an old property. Even the diehards may quit going to Spiderman or FF movies at the rate they're going. If George Lucas was the one doing this next batch of SW movies (and it didn't bring back the OT cast), I don't see it having the built-in draw like his last five SW movies.
Solo4114
Master Member
Well, if your idea of an object lesson in how not to do a remake/reboot/rebrand is Bayformers...I doubt Hollywood will learn any time soon. But that's because those movies basically print money. They're pure excrement, of course, but they make boatloads of cash both domestically and overseas. Actually, I'd say that's the real trick to branding: what brands were popular/well known enough to be recognizable overseas. Jem? FF? Not so much. But Spider-Man? Hey, even a piece-of-**** version of that film will still have a decent opening weekend overseas.
Anyway, the key here is not the subjective (or even objective) quality of the film, per se. That's part of the equation, but the branding and the strength of the branding is what really matters. Kids who grew up in 1980s China probably didn't play a ton of Battleship. Hell, I wouldn't expect too many kids who grew up outside the U.S. to have played it all that much. What seems ubiquitous to us may not necessarily translate across borders. But you have to remember that the Transformers were also their own Japanese toyline which was HEAVILY imitated overseas, and which undoubtedly made its way even into Communist China in one form or another. The U.S. cartoon? Meh. Not so much. But the concept of giant transforming ass-kicking robots? You bet!
As far as branding generally goes as a strategy, if you're going to have a film be carried by the strength of its brand, that brand has to be really strong. The Transformers are an incredibly strong brand. Jem isn't. So, I'd expect that strong brands will be used with otherwise lazy films, but to sell a brand like Jem, you basically have to make a good movie and figure the brand is just the icing to help people give it a chance.
KrangPrime
Master Member
as solo pointed out, the problem with tmnt and TF is the brands are still strong. people will convince themselves crap is good if they love the property enough, and just be glad that it's back on the big screen. meanwhile, people like you and I will see it for the crap it is and bash it to the end of eternity because it deserves it ;o).
and I agree about things being rebooted too much. Turtles has already hit this point. I've seen leo get thrown through the glass plate window by a foot soldier four times now. done better twice before. I can't get excited by it anymore. that's why I've been burned out on this new nick turtles show. however, the new IDW series has been treading new ground while bringing back classic characters like hun PROPERLY. re, not turning him into a jackie chan caricature and having him be beat easily by a teenage casey jones in his first outing.
at this point, the older, more cynical crowd that think they can do the show better is learning to stay away from the bad stuff, I think. but sadly, the newer generation who is getting exposed to the bad stuff the first time around doesn't have anything to judge it against. so when they see the older, good stuff...they automatically think it's crap. just like we do with the new stuff..
ugh..my brain hurts ;o)..
You guys are kinda right about brand-some brands,some things will only be remembered by people "who were there" so to speak like this JEM remake...umm yes I remember it (hey I was just noticing girls were different in a nice way when that was on the air :lol) but the show was D-E-A-D by about 1990 and I doubt if you asked someone who turned five in say 1992 who that was would know,maybe for reruns MAYBE.
I think what Hollywood's next lesson is is that somethings you CANNOT remake and expect a cash out with whatever you toss out,and you take something unknown from thirty years ago and make it the political flavor of the week AND just half arse it and well...you get a recreation of the Hindenburg.
But you take even a semi well known property and you could just about make a turd shine...and in fact that's what they do.
For example GI Joe? Transformers? ummm....people I cannot go back and watch the old show anymore,it was garbage then and if you take that and try to redo it you may actually make something better,or something worse,or something in between which is what they did with those two-face it if they copied either and shoved it out the door they would have FLOPPED but they took it,shined it up,made changes and...well they made a film them fulfills most people's need for entertainment,people are mostly simple and both GI Joe and Transformers makes the average guy or gal who are the equivalent of drooling on themselves retard happy,and it puts money in the studio's pocket and they too are..happy.
And since that worked with those two then,why not try everything else from back then? like I said the next lesson is it doesn't always work,the show/item needs to be well known and well loved first and that it sold gangbusters to the drooling retards of that era second,my era unfortunately,but even before that-America has become a very shallow place since the 1950's so all you need to do is find what made the masses happy and made them feel warm and copy it,sometimes it'll flop but for the most part the oldsters who remember it "HEY I played with GI Joes in the 80's!!" or even before that and then drag their grandkids to see it and as dumb as the original was they get struck dumb with happiness with the stupidness of this new version and it's like piggies in the trough.
So what will be Ghostbusters fate? I suspect it'll do at least well,probably better then well since the guy is gonna attract the dumb women and their equally dumb little princesses in the door and not just the fat male pigs and their stupid sons with their warm memories of the old film or the TV cartoon.
So my point? either way it's gonna happen,and it's gonna keep happening because people,our culture,breeds this and you have to be willing to dredge around the muck and find what's good and leave what's raw sewage.
Me personally? I watched Transformers,all of them and I think it's dumb;I watched both GI Joe movies and while dumb it was better then the cartoon/comic by a long shot but it's still stupid-and you know what? I even think Star Wars is stupid at times but it's miles better then ANY cartoon I watched as a kid except for the Americanized Japanese crap,which WAS crap but way better then any half hour toy commercial that is now called "classic" and if you bother to dig up the original Japanese version I can sit and watch them to this day unlike most of the stuff the US put out back then,it's silly but not stupid.
I'll wait and see with Ghostbusters 0.2 and watch some clips on youtube when it comes out next year and see if I want to waste time and watch it on Netflix or maybe the $5 bin at Walmart if Netflix skips it.
And this was harsh and it was meant to be,most entertainment is garbage in this land since the first days of film a century ago,but it's become worst since about the 1930's if you have a brain you have to pick and choose not all is good and not all is worth wasting time on.
I think what Hollywood's next lesson is is that somethings you CANNOT remake and expect a cash out with whatever you toss out,and you take something unknown from thirty years ago and make it the political flavor of the week AND just half arse it and well...you get a recreation of the Hindenburg.
But you take even a semi well known property and you could just about make a turd shine...and in fact that's what they do.
For example GI Joe? Transformers? ummm....people I cannot go back and watch the old show anymore,it was garbage then and if you take that and try to redo it you may actually make something better,or something worse,or something in between which is what they did with those two-face it if they copied either and shoved it out the door they would have FLOPPED but they took it,shined it up,made changes and...well they made a film them fulfills most people's need for entertainment,people are mostly simple and both GI Joe and Transformers makes the average guy or gal who are the equivalent of drooling on themselves retard happy,and it puts money in the studio's pocket and they too are..happy.
And since that worked with those two then,why not try everything else from back then? like I said the next lesson is it doesn't always work,the show/item needs to be well known and well loved first and that it sold gangbusters to the drooling retards of that era second,my era unfortunately,but even before that-America has become a very shallow place since the 1950's so all you need to do is find what made the masses happy and made them feel warm and copy it,sometimes it'll flop but for the most part the oldsters who remember it "HEY I played with GI Joes in the 80's!!" or even before that and then drag their grandkids to see it and as dumb as the original was they get struck dumb with happiness with the stupidness of this new version and it's like piggies in the trough.
So what will be Ghostbusters fate? I suspect it'll do at least well,probably better then well since the guy is gonna attract the dumb women and their equally dumb little princesses in the door and not just the fat male pigs and their stupid sons with their warm memories of the old film or the TV cartoon.
So my point? either way it's gonna happen,and it's gonna keep happening because people,our culture,breeds this and you have to be willing to dredge around the muck and find what's good and leave what's raw sewage.
Me personally? I watched Transformers,all of them and I think it's dumb;I watched both GI Joe movies and while dumb it was better then the cartoon/comic by a long shot but it's still stupid-and you know what? I even think Star Wars is stupid at times but it's miles better then ANY cartoon I watched as a kid except for the Americanized Japanese crap,which WAS crap but way better then any half hour toy commercial that is now called "classic" and if you bother to dig up the original Japanese version I can sit and watch them to this day unlike most of the stuff the US put out back then,it's silly but not stupid.
I'll wait and see with Ghostbusters 0.2 and watch some clips on youtube when it comes out next year and see if I want to waste time and watch it on Netflix or maybe the $5 bin at Walmart if Netflix skips it.
And this was harsh and it was meant to be,most entertainment is garbage in this land since the first days of film a century ago,but it's become worst since about the 1930's if you have a brain you have to pick and choose not all is good and not all is worth wasting time on.
KrangPrime
Master Member
how dare you insult the integrity of the super mario brothers super show, and it's lazy movie of the week spoofs. that was pure garb...err..gold!
:lol
Seriously I dare anyone to grab a copy of any kids show they may have grown up with and try to watch it again,I have and it's impossible the only way I can see it is if you still have the mind of a five year old.
Now go grab an Americanized Japanese anime,true the english version is cringe worthy but the original versions are tolerable,silly yes,but not as bad as the drivel that the west spoon fed children.
Now realize a large portion of American adults DO have the mind of a five year old and you'll see why things like transformers is such a money maker....
KrangPrime
Master Member
What's wrong with having the mind of a five year old? far better than that of an adult, focused on screwing you, screwing you over, finding ways to rob you...did I mention finding ways to screw you? I'd rather think like a kid any day of the week. more fun ;o)
Once I got used to the theater style over acting, I found thundercats far more enjoyable as an adult. Real Ghostbusters, syndicated, is the best movie to toon adaption ever done. the ABC episodes are crap. Transformers to me looked like crap from the start, so I never got into it. same goes for GI Joe. He-man may have been crap, but it was fun crap (also the last toon to be animated in america, apparently)...
Dragonball Z english adaption got much better over time. now it's pretty indistuingishable.
the only reason we think the older stuff is crap now, is because the newer crap is done better and animated better. or there are types of people who just hate older stuff and think anything older than 1990 isn't worth watching.
Once I got used to the theater style over acting, I found thundercats far more enjoyable as an adult. Real Ghostbusters, syndicated, is the best movie to toon adaption ever done. the ABC episodes are crap. Transformers to me looked like crap from the start, so I never got into it. same goes for GI Joe. He-man may have been crap, but it was fun crap (also the last toon to be animated in america, apparently)...
Dragonball Z english adaption got much better over time. now it's pretty indistuingishable.
the only reason we think the older stuff is crap now, is because the newer crap is done better and animated better. or there are types of people who just hate older stuff and think anything older than 1990 isn't worth watching.
Honestly I can't watch ANYTHING from the 80's and not get a case of the hives,and the stuff now? trust me I have a friend with two daughters and I see a good bit of the new stuff and if anything it's gotten worst much,much worst I shudder to think what this new generation will grow up to be.
And there's no problem with being child like,but like emotion it's a matter of control and knowing when and when not to do it,I collect both anime and certain film figures (Star Wars,Batman et cetera I have a Japnese Drossel I like) and I mess with them change the poses I have them in every so often so I can't and won't say I'm not a little playful myself just that I'm not controlled by it like what seems like 99% of Americans look at the jokes on TV shows men can be easily tricked by things like beer and sex? American Dad,The Simpson's,Everybody loves Raymond if I was like how they portray the average male I'd kill myself,no different for women.
That's why Ghostbusters 2.0 is gonna do well-people are simpletons.
And there's no problem with being child like,but like emotion it's a matter of control and knowing when and when not to do it,I collect both anime and certain film figures (Star Wars,Batman et cetera I have a Japnese Drossel I like) and I mess with them change the poses I have them in every so often so I can't and won't say I'm not a little playful myself just that I'm not controlled by it like what seems like 99% of Americans look at the jokes on TV shows men can be easily tricked by things like beer and sex? American Dad,The Simpson's,Everybody loves Raymond if I was like how they portray the average male I'd kill myself,no different for women.
That's why Ghostbusters 2.0 is gonna do well-people are simpletons.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood. And unless something screws a person up, or they've got mental issues to start with, people never get over having fun and playing -- the nature of the play just gets more complex... and usually more expensive. This site is a testament to that.
That said, as the target demographic of G.I. Joe and Transformers (I was 9 at the time the latter premiered), it was only partly the cartoons. It was also the toys and the comics. Marvel's G.I. Joe comic was orders of magnitude more complex and compelling than the show. Transformers went off into some weird territory, but it also introduced much deeper concepts than the cartoon did. G.I. Joe #21 has won awards -- the issue had no narrative slugs, no dialogue. Snake Eyes was breaking into a Cobra installation to rescue Scarlett. He'd had his vocal cords cut as a P.O.W. in VietNam (which is already pretty hardcore for something for kids), so he has nothing to say. He kills the guards in silence, gets Scarlett, gets out again. It was brilliantly done. The whole series got into serious psychology -- the nature of leadership, the pathologies of Cobra Commander, Destro wearing the mask so as to maintain anonymity and not bring dishonor on his family, and so on.
Over in Transformers, they only tackled the dualistic, taoist nature of good and evil (Primus and Unicron), Megatron was much smarter than his cartoon self, there was much examination of the semi-religious weight being a Prime carries, there was a lot of X-Men type bigotry the Autobots were trying to overcome, what with segments of the human population who couldn't see -- or didn't want to see -- the distinction between the factions.
The problem lies in the movie studios only seeing the superficial, banal stuff, and not the deeper stuff that kept us engaged beyond the initial novelty. That's been the problem with all the Star Trek movies (not just the JJ ones). Star Trek at its best has been deep, philosophical, cerebral. Hard to do that with 90-120 minutes, part of which has to be devoted to establishing the setting for all those who are new to the universe, and part of which has to be devoted to enough action to make things exciting. With a TV series, you can tell much more taut stories. On a big screen, we've come to expect larger-than-life and sweeping -- stuff you can't get at home. And the people who succeed in business and run movie studios tend to not be very empathic... which is what's required for writing that engages the audience and pulls them in. If the people in charge of the way the film turns out don't care... *waves a hand at this thread*
--Jonah
That said, as the target demographic of G.I. Joe and Transformers (I was 9 at the time the latter premiered), it was only partly the cartoons. It was also the toys and the comics. Marvel's G.I. Joe comic was orders of magnitude more complex and compelling than the show. Transformers went off into some weird territory, but it also introduced much deeper concepts than the cartoon did. G.I. Joe #21 has won awards -- the issue had no narrative slugs, no dialogue. Snake Eyes was breaking into a Cobra installation to rescue Scarlett. He'd had his vocal cords cut as a P.O.W. in VietNam (which is already pretty hardcore for something for kids), so he has nothing to say. He kills the guards in silence, gets Scarlett, gets out again. It was brilliantly done. The whole series got into serious psychology -- the nature of leadership, the pathologies of Cobra Commander, Destro wearing the mask so as to maintain anonymity and not bring dishonor on his family, and so on.
Over in Transformers, they only tackled the dualistic, taoist nature of good and evil (Primus and Unicron), Megatron was much smarter than his cartoon self, there was much examination of the semi-religious weight being a Prime carries, there was a lot of X-Men type bigotry the Autobots were trying to overcome, what with segments of the human population who couldn't see -- or didn't want to see -- the distinction between the factions.
The problem lies in the movie studios only seeing the superficial, banal stuff, and not the deeper stuff that kept us engaged beyond the initial novelty. That's been the problem with all the Star Trek movies (not just the JJ ones). Star Trek at its best has been deep, philosophical, cerebral. Hard to do that with 90-120 minutes, part of which has to be devoted to establishing the setting for all those who are new to the universe, and part of which has to be devoted to enough action to make things exciting. With a TV series, you can tell much more taut stories. On a big screen, we've come to expect larger-than-life and sweeping -- stuff you can't get at home. And the people who succeed in business and run movie studios tend to not be very empathic... which is what's required for writing that engages the audience and pulls them in. If the people in charge of the way the film turns out don't care... *waves a hand at this thread*
--Jonah
Similar threads
