Things you're tired of seeing in movies

Honestly, modern movies in general bore me more and more.
I used to go to the movies alot more. Nowadays I find myself rewatching movies of the past with greater enjoyment than what we get nowadays. Perhaps I'm turning more and more into my father. I suppose that's not a bad thing!
 
Same here. I haven't stepped foot in a theater in over 20 years, but where I used to buy a ton of DVDs the second they came out, now... eh... I get them when I get them, if I get them at all. I just don't care. There's nothing exciting out there.
 
Same here. I haven't stepped foot in a theater in over 20 years, but where I used to buy a ton of DVDs the second they came out, now... eh... I get them when I get them, if I get them at all. I just don't care. There's nothing exciting out there.

Am I the only one who read this in the voice of Cameron Fry from Ferris Bueller's Day Off, like in the same tone in the cab scene where Cameron says they didn't do anything good today? XD
 
Honestly, modern movies in general bore me more and more.
I used to go to the movies alot more. Nowadays I find myself rewatching movies of the past with greater enjoyment than what we get nowadays. Perhaps I'm turning more and more into my father. I suppose that's not a bad thing!

I don't think that it's so much that movies now a days suck as much as your tastes haven't really changed much over the years. So as people's taste in movies change with the years the movies change to adapt, but since your tastes haven't really changed you find it hard to enjoy new movies. That's not a bad thing necessarily, it is what it is. I'm kind of like that with music, I listen mainly to '80s and '90s music because that's what I grew up with and so I really don't enjoy a lot of music that's out now a days.
 
That's because modern music sucks too.
It doesn't suck any more than old music did. We just haven't gotten 20 years into the future, and only listen to the top 200 songs from each decade like we do for the '70s '80s and '90s; and ignore the 10,000 other terrible songs from each time period.
 
Honestly, modern movies in general bore me more and more.
I used to go to the movies alot more. Nowadays I find myself rewatching movies of the past with greater enjoyment than what we get nowadays. Perhaps I'm turning more and more into my father. I suppose that's not a bad thing!
I go on average to the theater about once every couple weeks, sometimes more and 80% of the time it's to watch a Fathom Events screening of an older movie that I never got to see on the big screen growing up. Best thing about these is the crowds are usually very quiet. Except for the time I watched the Dark Knight. Heath Ledger fanboys were well represented that night.

To get back on topic though, I'm sick of trailers that show too much of the movie. I remember people used to complain about it when I was a kid but I swear it's gotten worse. I feel like I've already seen Spider-Man FFH:(. A trailer should just be a basic synopsis of the movie and that's it. Should never be more than a minute long if that. Especially for a well-known franchise.
 
I go on average to the theater about once every couple weeks, sometimes more and 80% of the time it's to watch a Fathom Events screening of an older movie that I never got to see on the big screen growing up. Best thing about these is the crowds are usually very quiet. Except for the time I watched the Dark Knight. Heath Ledger fanboys were well represented that night.

To get back on topic though, I'm sick of trailers that show too much of the movie. I remember people used to complain about it when I was a kid but I swear it's gotten worse. I feel like I've already seen Spider-Man FFH:(. A trailer should just be a basic synopsis of the movie and that's it. Should never be more than a minute long if that. Especially for a well-known franchise.
Trailers have really gotten out of hand- I think in part due to the fear there might not be enough interest in an upcoming film to get any traction at the initial box office. My two biggest gripes is often EVERY cool scene is in a trailer, when you see the movie the rest of the film just exists to take you to the next bit you have seen before in the trailer. Ken Russell's 'Gothic' did exactly that.
One of the biggest sins though is for a trailer to reveal the huge surprise twist in a film. Terminator Genisys did that with it's trailer, showing John Conner had become a Terminator. If we had not already known for months about this twist it would have been incredible.
As far as I know, most trailers are produced mostly by people working for the studio but independent from the producers. Their job is to make a film seem as exciting as possible, to create a viral buzz about it and so when it does release in theaters there is a big initial audience. I have read many an interview with the directors & such hating what a trailer has spoiled in their new film. When Hitchcock bought the rights to the book which became his landmark film 'Psycho', he bought up every available printed edition of the book to prevent people from knowing the surprise ending.
It is a different world today and studios are very short sighted about what really makes a film enjoyable. I generally don't mind spoilers (oh man, why did you have to tell me that the Titanic sunk?), but when I watch a movie I would like to see something new, not just filler in between what has been in the trailers for the past couple of months...
 
Tired of the Eiffel Tower being visible from every position in Paris, France (not Texas!). Last used (at least seen by me), in X-men: dark Phoenix. Having just come back from that very street I can confirm it’s old town, Montreal and the tower was nowhere in sight!
 
Along the same lines, every terrorist bomb that has a bright red LED countdown clock on it so the heroes know exactly how long they have to diffuse it and can stop it with only 1 or 2 seconds left..........yeah you LL Cool J, Agent Sam Hanna, I am talking to you!! lol
 
This is a Rom-Com nitpick (one of many)...

The Depiction of the “Workplace”.

In The Land of Rom-Com, the “workplace” is only a “setting”—where no “work” is actually done—and characters spend their work day wandering around, holding obviously empty coffee cups, and generally revolving around the life of the main character as their reason for showing up at work, or even existing.

26897A65-B615-4946-8D2C-882DE9405680.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Picture the scene. The detectives walk into the murder scene. There’s a body lying face down. They’ve been deemed dead. CSI are all over the room, dusting, fingerprinting. What, no one thought to call paramedics, roll them over, try cpr, feel for a pulse, try first aid? ‘Yup, he’s obviously dead. No need to check for signs of life’! It seems ludicrous that a body would be left in situ, as found, left for the police, but I see it time and time again. Why?
 
Picture the scene. The detectives walk into the murder scene. There’s a body lying face down. They’ve been deemed dead. CSI are all over the room, dusting, fingerprinting. What, no one thought to call paramedics, roll them over, try cpr, feel for a pulse, try first aid? ‘Yup, he’s obviously dead. No need to check for signs of life’! It seems ludicrous that a body would be left in situ, as found, left for the police, but I see it time and time again. Why?
If the victim is clearly dead, like head an body seperated, paramedics will call it just feo. Glancing theough door. Anything else they will check for pulses etc and be out pretty quick. It's only when there is a possibility, however slim, that they can be saved will the body be removed to hospital. If the body is left at scene it is much more vauable evidentially. That's U.K anyway, cant speak for anywhere else as theyre not as good as us.
 
If the victim is clearly dead, like head an body seperated, paramedics will call it just feo. Glancing theough door. Anything else they will check for pulses etc and be out pretty quick. It's only when there is a possibility, however slim, that they can be saved will the body be removed to hospital. If the body is left at scene it is much more vauable evidentially. That's U.K anyway, cant speak for anywhere else as theyre not as good as us.
I strongly suspect that it's the same in the US, or at least very close to the same.

One thing to consider in this particular scenario that's been described is that if there's detectives and CSI types crawling all over the crime scene then chances are quite good that paramedics had already been called, declared the victim dead, and has since left the scene. It's not like forensic investigators and MEs are exactly the first people on a crime scene or are the ones a 911 operator calls when they receive a 911 call about a possible dead person.
 
I strongly suspect that it's the same in the US, or at least very close to the same.

One thing to consider in this particular scenario that's been described is that if there's detectives and CSI types crawling all over the crime scene then chances are quite good that paramedics had already been called, declared the victim dead, and has since left the scene. It's not like forensic investigators and MEs are exactly the first people on a crime scene or are the ones a 911 operator calls when they receive a 911 call about a possible dead person.
It probably is very similar in all honesty, when you consider how those emergency calls come in it's the most sensible way of going about things without total chaos.

We not usually the first on scene as we like to gather as much info from breifings so we know what we're looking for. We can sometimes be there early to maximise the preservation of evidence. Cops generally dont think forensically. Every incident has it's own requirements.
For the most part, TV and movies get it woefully wrong and do create unrealistic expectations in the public.
 
Back
Top