Annoying things about Movies these days

[Mudface]

Some cliches- https://www.theguardian.com/film/2021/oct/28/oh-no-not-another-killer-in-a-cage-the-10-movie-cliches-i-cant-watch-again

[Mudface]

12 minutes ago, grazywalker said:

The fact they are too fuckin scared to offend.

Not entirely sure what you mean by that. There's far more graphic sex and violence in films these days than there was in previous decades and films deal with more controversial topics than they have done. The 'diversity' campaigns to seemingly try and restrict actors of only certain races or sexual orientations to play their own 'types' is tedious as fuck, particularly when the 'reverse' is celebrated, but that's a mainstream thing really. 

[johnsusername]

5 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

Movie franchises are nothing new. One of the earliest was Universal's The Mummy, featured in five movies between 1932 and 1944.

 

And not one franchise these days is as prolific as the various western series from the first half of the 20th century. They made 64 Durango Kid movies between 1940 and 1952, and 66 Hopalong Cassidy movies between 1935 and 1948.

 

Where's the originality? Well you won't find any if you look in the wrong places, that's for sure.

 

[Trumo]

Films that don't have an actual conclusion and instead introduce a new character and/or plot twist very late on, just so people who are invested in the story will go and watch the next ones.

 

I can understand this when the films are based on a series of books (Harry Potter, LOTR and The Hobbit being obvious examples) but when it is a standalone idea that gets good pre-release buzz, studio execs usually wade in and demand a change to the ending in order to cash in with sequels.

[Babb'sBurstNad]

Gonna sound like a proper prude here, but gratuitous stuff that bumps up the age rating. Loads of films could probably pass for afternoon fare, but they'll have a flash of norks or some effing and jeffing in key moments. Even the modern adaptation of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy has a character saying she feels "under-fucked".

 

/marywhitehouse

[sir roger]

5 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

 

If you can't muster up a bit of enthusiasm at a time when people like Guillermo del Toro, Paul Thomas Anderson, Spike Lee, Christopher Nolan, Sam Mendes, David Fincher, Steve McQueen, Alejandro Inarritu, Darren Aronofsky, the Coen brothers, Wes Anderson, Denis Villeneuve, Alfonso Cuaron - I could go on but I'm boring myself at this point - are churning out movies like there's no tomorrow, then there is. No. Hope. For. 

Pah , Alec Baldwin could shoot them all tomorrow for all I care.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

5 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

The worst thing about movies these days is people who complain about movies these days, as if we don't live in a supremely exciting era for film.

 

If you can't muster up a bit of enthusiasm at a time when people like Guillermo del Toro, Paul Thomas Anderson, Spike Lee, Christopher Nolan, Sam Mendes, David Fincher, Steve McQueen, Alejandro Inarritu, Darren Aronofsky, the Coen brothers, Wes Anderson, Denis Villeneuve, Alfonso Cuaron - I could go on but I'm boring myself at this point - are churning out movies like there's no tomorrow, then there is. No. Hope. For. You.

 

Name a better cohort of directors at any period in time. I'll wait.

Most of the things people are saying they hate about modern films are things that are clearly signalled in the trailers, the posters or even the title.

 

If you went to a sarnie shop and they said "that counter over there has all the usual sarnie fillings and this counter here has just got dogshit" you can't really complain about the taste when you buy a shite baguette - WHAT DO YOU EXPECT???

 

I've not watched many new films in the last few years, but Joker, The Death of Stalin and Jojo Rabbit are up there with the best films I've ever seen.

[mars]

Films that confuse creating a great character with diversity.

[Chip Butty]

Being asked to book any potential drinks, snacks and sweets I may want, 3,4,5 days in advance. How the fuck will I know what tickles my fancy in 5 fucking days time and, when you get there, you have to order on a screen and get a ticket, just like those who may have ordered 4,5 days prior and then wait till you get your number called out like a fucking doctors surgery, I’m meant to being out for a night of fun and entertainment, not feel like I’m in the queue to have me colon scratched or a boil lanced. Garbage, no wonder everyone downloads movies from torrent sites.

 

 

[VladimirIlyich]

32 minutes ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

Gonna sound like a proper prude here, but gratuitous stuff that bumps up the age rating. Loads of films could probably pass for afternoon fare, but they'll have a flash of norks or some effing and jeffing in key moments. Even the modern adaptation of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy has a character saying she feels "under-fucked".

 

/marywhitehouse

I agree. It's like explosions and gunfights try to make up for a shit script and they use nudity and sex scenes in the same way. With so much porn available you can watch real sex any time you like so why even bother with the fake stuff?

[Arniepie]

2 hours ago, Mook said:

I agree with SD that there is plenty of choice and we've never had such easy access to films. The notion that everything is a superhero film is a bit of a myth too, there are a lot of them though & they are heavily advertised.

 

Most of my gripes have been covered in here, mumbling, style over substance & I don't agree with SD this is the golden age of cinema, that was the 70s. Can't remember the last film I saw that completely blew me away, there certainly haven't been many in the last 20 years. Maybe it's because I'm getting old & grumpy.

Personally d say the 90s even upto the period of the early.2000s produced many.outsrding.films

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

1 hour ago, Babb'sBurstNad said:

Gonna sound like a proper fucking prude here, but gratuitous cunty stuff that bumps up the shitty age rating. Loads of wank films could probably pass for cockrot afternoon fare, but they'll twatting well have a flash of norks or some bastard effing and jeffing in key moments. Even the modern adaptation of Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Ballbag has a character saying she feels "under-fucked". Flange.

 

/marywhitehouse

.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

2 hours ago, TD_LFC said:

Quick edits and not letting a shot breathe, one of the most infamous is the Liam Neeson jumping over a fence, 6 seconds 15 cuts.

 

 

or Bohemian Rhapsody

 

 

By way of contrast.

 

 

[Kevin D]

3 hours ago, Mook said:

I agree with SD that there is plenty of choice and we've never had such easy access to films. The notion that everything is a superhero film is a bit of a myth too, there are a lot of them though & they are heavily advertised.

 

Most of my gripes have been covered in here, mumbling, style over substance & I don't agree with SD this is the golden age of cinema, that was the 70s. Can't remember the last film I saw that completely blew me away, there certainly haven't been many in the last 20 years. Maybe it's because I'm getting old & grumpy.

 

I think the last time I was wowed by a movie was The Dark Knight, which was 13 years ago.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

3 hours ago, TD_LFC said:

Quick edits and not letting a shot breathe, one of the most infamous is the Liam Neeson jumping over a fence, 6 seconds 15 cuts.

 

 

or Bohemian Rhapsody

 

 

If you'll pardon my unmentionables, Sky and other cunts also think that this is a suitable way to show highlights of the round ball game.

 

It isn't.

[Mudface]

Just now, AngryOfTuebrook said:

If you'll pardon my unmentionables, Sky and other cunts also think that this is a suitable way to show highlights of the round ball game.

 

It isn't.

Replays with multiple shit angles that take 30 seconds to a few minutes to show something that took barely 5. So you get absolutely zero impression of what actually happened. Stick some 'epic' music over it and maybe a talking head or two incoherently saying what happened with the benefit of a decade of hindsight and some bullshit psychology, and you're a YouTube 'content creator' or a Sky retrospective.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

8 hours ago, Strontium Dog™ said:

Movie franchises are nothing new. One of the earliest was Universal's The Mummy, featured in five movies between 1932 and 1944.

 

And not one franchise these days is as prolific as the various western series from the first half of the 20th century. They made 64 Durango Kid movies between 1940 and 1952, and 66 Hopalong Cassidy movies between 1935 and 1948.

I'm not sure I'd compare those to modern movie franchises. Given the way stuff like that was intended to be consumed, I'd argue that a telly series would be a closer comparison.

[JagSquared]

6 hours ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Most of the things people are saying they hate about modern films are things that are clearly signalled in the trailers, the posters or even the title.

 

If you went to a sarnie shop and they said "that counter over there has all the usual sarnie fillings and this counter here has just got dogshit" you can't really complain about the taste when you buy a shite baguette - WHAT DO YOU EXPECT???

 

I've not watched many new films in the last few years, but Joker, The Death of Stalin and Jojo Rabbit are up there with the best films I've ever seen.

That’s the point though, there seems to be so many of these or at least they are the ones pushed the most by studios much to the disservice of other films. There are always gems out there though it’s just sitting through the weeds.

 

another thing that bugs me, which isn’t about the films themselves and can actually be applied to many things in life is the over availability of info, it’s hard to go in completely blind to movies these days and be surprised the over saturation of media around films takes so much away and it’s harder to avoid (not impossible). 

[TD_LFC]

It's chicken and the egg though, is there proliferation of the same kinds of movies because cinemas/studios push them or do studios/cinema's push them because they're the films the majority of the public want to see?

 

The number of films that flop at the box office but go on to do well after home release suggests the appetite for good films is there but people aren't willing to take a risk at the cinema for it and would prefer to watch it when it's cheaper to do so.

 

If you're shelling out £75-£100 to take the family out for the night to the cinema then (age permitting) a Marvel film is pretty much the safest bet there is to guarantee everyone is going to enjoy themselves.

 

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

4 hours ago, JagSquared said:

another thing that bugs me, which isn’t about the films themselves and can actually be applied to many things in life is the over availability of info, it’s hard to go in completely blind to movies these days and be surprised the over saturation of media around films takes so much away and it’s harder to avoid (not impossible). 

I still remember being on a bus in 1984 and driving past a poster with just a black background, a cartoon ghost peeking through a red circle with a stripe across it, and the words "Coming soon to save the world".

 

To say I was hooked would be an understatement.

[TD_LFC]

The marketing for The Matrix was brilliant as well.

[RedKnight]

The Force Awakens trick of a sequel/reboot that ends up rehashing the story of the older film. I'm getting the distinct whiff of that from the Ghostbusters: Afterlife trailers. I don't mind the idea of sequels and reboots being the same theme and casts but don't do the same plot beats, that's lazy.

 

Films that begin in media res have always annoyed me too. TV shows that do it are the absolute shit pits as well, it's especially a lazy TV gimmick right now.

 

People who complain about superhero movies. Just don't watch them, no one wants to hear you moan. I don't like most musicals so you know what? I don't watch them and offer no opinion on them.

 

People who say they're big film fans but never put their hand in their pocket to watch them.

 

Directors mistaking runtime for depth and seriousness of story.

[JagSquared]

Perhaps not just limited to modern films but I hate it when films claim to be based on a true story only for you to find out that is total bollocks, or it is so far removed from the truth that may as well not even have bothered.

 

in a similar vein films that deviate from their source material. I Am Legend is a classic example of this, I mean the ending was changed so much from the book that the whole point of it being called “I Am Legend” Was lost. I was fuming, on its own it’s not a bad film but what were they thinking. Just call it vampire apocalypse or some shit no need to ruin a great book.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

1 hour ago, RedKnight said:

Directors mistaking runtime for depth and seriousness of story.

That might be an idea for a thread: best film under 100 minutes.

[Strontium]

2 hours ago, RedKnight said:

People who complain about superhero movies. Just don't watch them, no one wants to hear you moan. I don't like most musicals so you know what? I don't watch them and offer no opinion on them.

 

It's nice that some people are allowed to complain about moaning bastards.