Captain Stud Muffin (BLM)
FANatic
You can either sink, swim, or be the captain....Long live the cheif
Posts: 113,610
Member is Online
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Apr 23, 2018 20:02:00 GMT -5
Right, I mean even Batman and Robin which was sposed to 'kill' em, very next year Blade came out. Yeah the biggest difference is with these movies now, it's not looked as a joke per se and their is profit to be made. Now we have concrete story lines and their is a satisfaction to following this long term story line
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Apr 23, 2018 20:07:37 GMT -5
Eh, I'm going to play a bit of devil's advocate here.
Preface: Cameron has a horrid habit of making an ass of himself in his public comments. He has a history of being a terror on set to his performers, he has a skewed view of what constitutes empowerment in media for women, and he seems to think he's a good deal more clever about a number of things than he actually is. That all said, he's also a really, really good, often great filmmaker.
But on this topic, I kind of get what he's saying, and I think people are being jumpy due to Cameron's previous history of strange or ignorant comments. He's not saying he wants superhero movies to vanish, just that he wants a sense of "fatigue" to set in. That's not the same thing.
-The "hypergonadal" part is a bit much, but, eh, guess it comes with the superhero territory, I suppose. I can agree the the "keep raising the stakes" formula is a tired one; the fact that Guardians 2 turned into a "save the universe" conclusion was kind of a let down for me, and the lower stakes were, to me, one of the better aspects of the most recent Spider-man.
-I think some people are taking the "without a family" line too literally. I think he's just referring to how so many superheroes come from an origin story where they lose a father/mother/uncle/entire family/entire planet/etc., and how that ends up playing into just about everybody's motivations.
-The biggest key here, though, is that Cameron is in show business, and the movie industry is infamous for being reactionary with regards to studios seeing what works elsewhere and then wanting to copy it. If you're on the creative side in Hollywood these days and take part in making blockbusters, I have to imagine there's a good chance there might be some exhaustion right now with executives and other office types telling you to change a script idea or something you have to "be more like Marvel", or say "we want superhero stuff now", or something else along those lines.
It's easy for us to say "if you don't like them, don't watch them", but the reality is that when a big type of blockbuster comes along it generates a lot of copycats, and those copycats usually fill up the multiplex, often muscling away other, potentially more interesting movies, either limiting their theatrical runs or relegating them to the more small scale/art house scene. Not that it means those movies are entirely unavailable, obviously, just that they become less accessible to a lot of people. Not for nothing, but one of my local multiplexes is running Infinity War on seemingly just about every screen this Friday, at the expense of a lot of films that might've just come out recently. And then it just gets magnified if you're working in Hollywood trying to get other types of movies made, but that's what the studios are ordering at the moment. I at least get that frustration.
Doesn't change that Cameron's made an ass of himself enough with public comments that it makes sense for people to roll their eyes at him, but I feel like this is a situation that's existed before in Hollywood (e.g. people having to mimic Star Wars after '77, etc.) and it probably frustrates some people.
|
|
Mochi Lone Wolf
Fry's dog Seymour
Development through Destruction.
Posts: 24,047
|
Post by Mochi Lone Wolf on Apr 23, 2018 21:41:24 GMT -5
As I said in the other thread about James Cameron and his Wonder Woman comments: he's a fantastic filmmaker, but he has little self-awareness.
|
|
|
Post by BrodietheSlayer on Apr 23, 2018 22:47:36 GMT -5
Eh, whenever I hear filmmakers like Cameron, Spielberg, or Lucas (especially the last two) bemoaning how those horrible super hero movies have ruined Hollywood/movies, all I can imagine is Dr. Frankenstein bitching about his monster going out and killing various villagers.
And by that, I'm not saying that Spielberg, Lucas, or Cameron created superhero movies, but they did help create the blockbuster system that led to corporations buying up the movie studios, and pushing the budgets of the movies they produced higher and higher until it reached the point where proven commodities like superhero movies and the like were relied on to get the returns that these companies desire.
|
|
Welfare Willis
Crow T. Robot
Pornomancer 555-BONE FDIC Bonsured
Game Center CX Kacho on!
Posts: 44,259
|
Post by Welfare Willis on Apr 23, 2018 23:07:21 GMT -5
Am I missing something or is James Cameron now old man who yells at Avengers?
|
|
Captain Stud Muffin (BLM)
FANatic
You can either sink, swim, or be the captain....Long live the cheif
Posts: 113,610
Member is Online
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Apr 23, 2018 23:11:19 GMT -5
Am I missing something or is James Cameron now old man who yells at Avengers? James Cameron is old man who yells at current things He did with Wonder Woman to "prove a point" and now doing it with Avengers
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Apr 24, 2018 14:11:36 GMT -5
Eh, whenever I hear filmmakers like Cameron, Spielberg, or Lucas (especially the last two) bemoaning how those horrible super hero movies have ruined Hollywood/movies, all I can imagine is Dr. Frankenstein bitching about his monster going out and killing various villagers. And by that, I'm not saying that Spielberg, Lucas, or Cameron created superhero movies, but they did help create the blockbuster system that led to corporations buying up the movie studios, and pushing the budgets of the movies they produced higher and higher until it reached the point where proven commodities like superhero movies and the like were relied on to get the returns that these companies desire. This I can definitely agree with, though there's an element of tragedy (well, not literal tragedy, but you know what I mean) to it sometimes. A lot of these guys came from a Hollywood that celebrated the auteur director, something discussed heavily in the great book Easy Riders, Raging Bulls. It was the Hollywood that let Warren Beatty handle Bonnie and Clyde, that let Coppola almost literally go nuts doing Apocalypse Now, that allowed Scorcese to exist as a huge money maker, etc. Spielberg introduced the modern blockbuster with Jaws and Lucas put it on steroids with Star Wars, but despite the fact that Lucas focused so heavily on merchandising and other issues, the fact remained that those guys were also auteurs in their own way, down to the way they despised and wanted little to do with the traditional studio system. Put another way, there's a lot about the original Star Wars that involve cynicism and cash grabbing, but, deep down, it was Lucas's own possession that he could shape and dictate over, not one that was cooked up in a lab by the studio executives. And that's the tragedy of it: guys like Lucas and Cameron want it both ways. They want to be able to create art that they have a vision and control over, but they also want it to make ungodly sums of money in the box office and through merchandising. However, if a studio is going to release something that expensive then they'll want a guaranteed return on investment, so of course Disney, Fox, or whomever is going to demand that care be taken that the films be "less risky", "more formulaic", or whatever, to ensure that the most money is made by reaching the widest audience. Meantime, these guys who come from the auteur-heavy era are watching as the biggest franchises are being given to rookie/less experienced directors who, it feels, are there to carry out the office's orders more than enacting their own vision (though how true that is certainly varies from case to case). Basically, I agree with what you're saying, but I just imagine it has to feel weird for the guys who didn't realize how far this would all go when they were cooking up the original modern blockbusters during the 70s and 80s.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Apr 24, 2018 14:22:18 GMT -5
His ex wives eventually developed James Cameron fatigue.
|
|
mcstoklasa
Hank Scorpio
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 6,945
|
Post by mcstoklasa on Apr 24, 2018 15:06:44 GMT -5
How and why are there four guaranteed sequels to an ok movie from ten years ago
|
|
mcstoklasa
Hank Scorpio
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 6,945
|
Post by mcstoklasa on Apr 24, 2018 15:07:15 GMT -5
When was the last time he even made a good movie? Terminator 2 maybe True lies and I like titanic too
|
|
mcstoklasa
Hank Scorpio
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 6,945
|
Post by mcstoklasa on Apr 24, 2018 15:09:22 GMT -5
Cameron made Terminator 1 & 2 so hell always be great to me
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Apr 24, 2018 16:13:49 GMT -5
He is a great director, but he needs to stop whining about superhero movies.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Apr 24, 2018 16:36:58 GMT -5
I have way more positive than negative to say about Cameron just as a creative force. He has plenty of goodwill from me over the first two Terminators, Titanic, True Lies and Aliens.
If he wants to do more Avatar films, sure fine, it's his money. But the Terminator franchise needs to stay dead. I don't know how much more can really be done with it, barring a flat out reboot.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Apr 24, 2018 17:22:15 GMT -5
How and why are there four guaranteed sequels to an ok movie from ten years ago it made all the money, that's why.
|
|
|
Post by BrodietheSlayer on Apr 24, 2018 21:03:41 GMT -5
Eh, whenever I hear filmmakers like Cameron, Spielberg, or Lucas (especially the last two) bemoaning how those horrible super hero movies have ruined Hollywood/movies, all I can imagine is Dr. Frankenstein bitching about his monster going out and killing various villagers. And by that, I'm not saying that Spielberg, Lucas, or Cameron created superhero movies, but they did help create the blockbuster system that led to corporations buying up the movie studios, and pushing the budgets of the movies they produced higher and higher until it reached the point where proven commodities like superhero movies and the like were relied on to get the returns that these companies desire. This I can definitely agree with, though there's an element of tragedy (well, not literal tragedy, but you know what I mean) to it sometimes. A lot of these guys came from a Hollywood that celebrated the auteur director, something discussed heavily in the great book Easy Riders, Raging Bulls. It was the Hollywood that let Warren Beatty handle Bonnie and Clyde, that let Coppola almost literally go nuts doing Apocalypse Now, that allowed Scorcese to exist as a huge money maker, etc. Spielberg introduced the modern blockbuster with Jaws and Lucas put it on steroids with Star Wars, but despite the fact that Lucas focused so heavily on merchandising and other issues, the fact remained that those guys were also auteurs in their own way, down to the way they despised and wanted little to do with the traditional studio system. Put another way, there's a lot about the original Star Wars that involve cynicism and cash grabbing, but, deep down, it was Lucas's own possession that he could shape and dictate over, not one that was cooked up in a lab by the studio executives. And that's the tragedy of it: guys like Lucas and Cameron want it both ways. They want to be able to create art that they have a vision and control over, but they also want it to make ungodly sums of money in the box office and through merchandising. However, if a studio is going to release something that expensive then they'll want a guaranteed return on investment, so of course Disney, Fox, or whomever is going to demand that care be taken that the films be "less risky", "more formulaic", or whatever, to ensure that the most money is made by reaching the widest audience. Meantime, these guys who come from the auteur-heavy era are watching as the biggest franchises are being given to rookie/less experienced directors who, it feels, are there to carry out the office's orders more than enacting their own vision (though how true that is certainly varies from case to case). Basically, I agree with what you're saying, but I just imagine it has to feel weird for the guys who didn't realize how far this would all go when they were cooking up the original modern blockbusters during the 70s and 80s. I agree with the fact that they, Spielberg (and somewhat Cameron) especially, are auteurs in their own way, but make no mistake that back in the mid 70's, Spielberg and Lucas were, in their own ways, trying to drive a stake through the cynicism/super auteur-ness of the late 60's/mid 70's films and filmmakers. I don't think they could image how huge it would get, but they knew that American audiences, at the time, were kind of looking to turn their brains off after the events of that period, and Spielberg and Lucas were at the ready with optimistic/check your brain at the door/feel good movies, because they knew the audiences were ready for them. Of course, once they started making HUGE profits, the studios kind of caught on to that fact (as, yes, many of the "super auteurs" of that period were kind of crashing back to Earth during that late 70's/early 80's period), and they took back the reigns. However, Spielberg and Lucas (and Cameron) certainly were willing to cash in on all of that, as their movies showed them "the way," which is why their protests ring pretty hollow to me.
|
|
|
Post by Evilution E5150 on Apr 24, 2018 22:42:01 GMT -5
I've got Avatar fatigue and those sequels arent even out yet
|
|
riseofsetian1981
King Koopa
"I met him fifteen years ago. I was told there was nothing left."
Posts: 10,323
|
Post by riseofsetian1981 on Apr 25, 2018 0:41:06 GMT -5
I have way more positive than negative to say about Cameron just as a creative force. He has plenty of goodwill from me over the first two Terminators, Titanic, True Lies and Aliens. If he wants to do more Avatar films, sure fine, it's his money. But the Terminator franchise needs to stay dead. I don't know how much more can really be done with it, barring a flat out reboot. Just get him to do a Terminator film that's exactly like the intro of Terminator 2. A post apocalyptic scenario where it's endless darkness, practical models/effects of T-800 Models, and a great story where it ends with Skynet sending their Terminator to 1984 to kill Sarah Connor. I've always wanted to see a James Cameron future war directed film.
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on Apr 25, 2018 7:34:23 GMT -5
One thing that irks me about guys like Cameron hoping for the genre to fail is that they're basically hoping for something that will cut off a route for the next James Cameron or whoever to take the step up from low budget or cult classic directors to trusted hands in Hollywood. Would James Gunn or the Russo brothers be where they are now had marvel not given them a shot? Heck, even Whedon was known for cult classic commercial failures and his pitches were turned down.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Schlapowitz on Apr 25, 2018 9:47:46 GMT -5
I don't get the idea of wanting something to fail because you are tired of it/don't like it.
If you don't like it that's all well and good. Don't watch it, and f*** off!
|
|
Gus Richlen Was Wrong
Patti Mayonnaise
Metal Maestro: Co-winner of the FAN Idol Throwdown!
Fun while it lasted
Posts: 38,655
|
Post by Gus Richlen Was Wrong on Apr 25, 2018 10:08:31 GMT -5
Hey Cameron, remember when you and your big CGI overdose lost to your ex-wife and her war movie at the Oscars?
That was good.
|
|