SneakMan
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,991
Member is Online
|
Post by SneakMan on Nov 23, 2022 9:20:56 GMT -5
Ultimately, as was said earlier in the thread, I think the MCU is the symptom rather than the cause. Most mainstream entertainment fields these days are not passion projects, they're content initiatives designed to push brand awareness and maximize profit; we see this with everything from movies to video games to music. That doesn't mean they're without merit - I've enjoyed pretty much every Marvel movie I've seen with a few exceptions, I play Call of Duty regularly, and Taylor Swift is my f***ing girl. But it's not enough for a film or video game or album to be a hit, even a blockbuster hit; in order to be successful it needs to be omnipresent in the culture, and that approach gets utterly exhausting sometimes.
|
|
The Ichi
Patti Mayonnaise
AGGRESSIVE Executive Janitor of the Third Floor Manager's Bathroom
Posts: 37,281
|
Post by The Ichi on Nov 23, 2022 9:26:17 GMT -5
Aren't Tarantino films largely "character" ones? Nobody went to see Kill Bill thinking "f*** yes, Uma Thurman!". They wanted to see The Bride. Even Django Unchained, as big a draw as Leo is, the appeal was in seeing him play an asshole villian. His movies aren't different to the MCU in that regard.
Unless I'm missing the point he's making.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2022 9:27:53 GMT -5
Movies today are in that Vince ideology.
Atleast right now it longer is about the individuals (atleast on the scale) like it used to be where you went to see a movie based on the stars whether it was because you just liked the individual or their other movies etc but now it is about the branding.
MARVEL DC DISNEY
If those are not on the marquee it becomes damn nere impossible to really grab that larger audience and more studios are falling into the thought process that if it aint making Marvel level money they just send it straight to streaming.
Which is why Terrifier 2's success really makes me happy because it was something completely under the radar but made alot of noise amongst movie goers and maybe just maybe it is the beginning of something where this really creative smaller budgeted movies can start kind of slowly chipping away the dominance of the branded movies and get attention back to original creative movies.
So while alot wont agree with him (clearly) IMO Tarantino is not wrong.
|
|
SneakMan
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,991
Member is Online
|
Post by SneakMan on Nov 23, 2022 9:34:05 GMT -5
Aren't Tarantino films largely "character" ones? Nobody went to see Kill Bill thinking "f*** yes, Uma Thurman!". They wanted to see The Bride. Even Django Unchained, as big a draw as Leo is, the appeal was in seeing him play an asshole villian. His movies aren't different to the MCU in that regard. Unless I'm missing the point he's making. Tarantino's films aren't really character-driven as much as they're auteur-driven. You see a Tarantino film because know you're getting a film that's 100% Tarantino's vision, and with that comes certain expectations - lots and lots of dialogue that's both comedic and profane, brutal violence, a long runtime, and there'll probably be a closeup of a woman's feet at some point.
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Nov 23, 2022 11:39:07 GMT -5
And this is a part of where there's an irony in his statement. Tarantino is very much his own franchise. People see his movies not because of who's acting in them, but who directed/produced it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2022 11:43:14 GMT -5
Aren't Tarantino films largely "character" ones? Nobody went to see Kill Bill thinking "f*** yes, Uma Thurman!". They wanted to see The Bride. Even Django Unchained, as big a draw as Leo is, the appeal was in seeing him play an asshole villian. His movies aren't different to the MCU in that regard. Unless I'm missing the point he's making. Tarantino's films aren't really character-driven as much as they're auteur-driven. You see a Tarantino film because know you're getting a film that's 100% Tarantino's vision, and with that comes certain expectations - lots and lots of dialogue that's both comedic and profane, brutal violence, a long runtime, and there'll probably be a closeup of a woman's feet at some point. All in Glorious 70mm film.
|
|
pinja
Unicron
Posts: 2,996
|
Post by pinja on Nov 23, 2022 12:02:19 GMT -5
The MCU is internationally successful, but I know at most a handful of the heroes. Spiderman, Captain America, X-Men, Hulk, the Fantastic Four. Others may have had cameos in animated series, but that's it. Without comic culture, the movies lose massive appeal. I, for instance, didn't know Thor until the first movie. The characterization in it is so thin that I get the feeling I should have prior knowledge to really appreciate the character. And that's what the few Marvel movies I've seen all suffer from. The actors aren't able or encouraged to fill out the characters, the scripts aren't either, and I have no history with the source material.
Same with the director's or writer's signature. If I don't like one of the films, the others are very likely not for me either. Sam Raimi's Dr. Strange feels like a Marvel movie and just not a Sam Raimi movie. And that's why I wouldn't compare the MCU as era-defining films to other eras where one genre and one type of film was particularly present, but the scripts and craft carried quite a few different signatures.
Every now and then I try with an MCU movie when I know and like a character or find the concept really, really interesting. And every time I'm getting disappointed. Then someone like Tarrantino offers his surprisingly mild thoughts and somehow his foot fetish gets brought up?
|
|
|
Post by Fade is a CodyCryBaby on Nov 23, 2022 12:57:59 GMT -5
At the end of the day, the studios aren't going to waste their time focusing on those kinds of movies if they don't draw money, and even if you don't like them, they do draw money. Fact of the matter is, the business has changed, and it's not going to change back to the way it was due to wishful thinking. It's not an MCU issue, it's a streaming issue. People aren't going to theaters to watch a movie that can easily be streamed on a service they're already paying for, so even if you got rid of every big comic movie, nothing is going to fill that void. Watching an MCU movie in theaters is more of an experience than your typical standard movie is, and again people aren't going to go to movies to have an experience they can have at home. This has been obvious for decades. When I was a child, a big reason that you went to see a movie in theaters is because you'd otherwise wait a year or longer to be able to rent it on VHS. The change to digital helped make that wait become shorter, many times being available within 6 months, or as I've seen in recent years 2 months. Now? We're in an age of streaming, and there is such a large amount of product available that people don't want to take a risk at the theater when they can do it from the convenience of their couch. The MCU movies are so harmless that people know what they're getting when they go into them. If any film maker has an issue with this, then it's up to you to make a quality product that people will talk about. I can't tell you the last time that happened for me, maybe The Lighthouse? Tarantino of all people should know this since his name still holds a lot of merit for filmgoers. I can say with honesty that a lot of movies anymore do not take chances, and usually are forgettable by the next day. So at the end of the day, if you want your movie in theaters that people are paying to see, then create a film that gets people taking, otherwise accept the fact that streaming services are the future. And you didn’t mention it (thought you were about to) but the change from DVD to streaming/digital has had a gigantic effect on it. Look up dudes like Matt Damon talk about it and suddenly the movie industry currently being what it is, makes a lot of sense.
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Nov 23, 2022 13:11:09 GMT -5
I feel like the problem with saying "streaming is the future" is that, well, it doesn't even seem like the future to a lot of these companies. Warner Bros Discovery's practically all but given up on it outside of core stuff, Disney's devalued Pixar's value by making it main Disney+ animated content and so many of these services (Disney+ especially) are losing so much money, we're one CEO change away from them being minimalized to the point everyone's going to have to sow their cable boxes back to their walls after cutting them.
That last part might be an exaggeration but the trouble with that none of that certain as it once was even two years ago when we were all locked down and watching this stuff because nothing else was on.
|
|
|
Post by Feyrhausen on Nov 23, 2022 13:49:12 GMT -5
Aren't Tarantino films largely "character" ones? Nobody went to see Kill Bill thinking "f*** yes, Uma Thurman!". They wanted to see The Bride. Even Django Unchained, as big a draw as Leo is, the appeal was in seeing him play an asshole villian. His movies aren't different to the MCU in that regard. Unless I'm missing the point he's making. Tarantino's films aren't really character-driven as much as they're auteur-driven. You see a Tarantino film because know you're getting a film that's 100% Tarantino's vision, and with that comes certain expectations - lots and lots of dialogue that's both comedic and profane, brutal violence, a long runtime, and there'll probably be a closeup of a woman's feet at some point. And Tarantino loves the 70s. And the 70s was when auteur films were huge. So the studios gave the auteurs free reign to make whatever they wanted. Until they ended up with massive failures like Heavens Gate. Then the game was over. Studios are businesses. They want to make lots of money. And now that they keep merging and getting bigger the money needs to get bigger. If auteur films could perform like spectacle films then there would be more of them.
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Nov 23, 2022 13:52:04 GMT -5
The biggest problem with streaming is that everything got so decentralized that instead of one or two affordable services that could get you literally everything, you have to get a whole bunch of services with less content each. Cord cutting isn't as economical when the costs of streaming subs start adding up to be as expensive as cable was.
These corporations also all underestimated how much of an expense it was to start up their own services, not to mention maintaining the infrastructure, designing a good GUI, etc.
Probably one of the only situations where a virtual monopoly or duopoly was more beneficial to the consumer than the oligopoly we have now.
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Nov 23, 2022 13:53:49 GMT -5
Tarantino's films aren't really character-driven as much as they're auteur-driven. You see a Tarantino film because know you're getting a film that's 100% Tarantino's vision, and with that comes certain expectations - lots and lots of dialogue that's both comedic and profane, brutal violence, a long runtime, and there'll probably be a closeup of a woman's feet at some point. And Tarantino loves the 70s. And the 70s was when auteur films were huge. So the studios gave the auteurs free reign to make whatever they wanted. Until they ended up with massive failures like Heavens Gate. Then the game was over. Studios are businesses. They want to make lots of money. And now that they keep merging and getting bigger the money needs to get bigger. If auteur films could perform like spectacle films then there would be more of them. The counterpoint to that, somewhat, would be that if companies listened to what their customers wanted, we wouldn't still be wondering why Crazy Rich Asians hasn't had a sequel yet and wondering what on Earth black filmmakers have to do to get more films made when the audience clearly wants them that doesn't have Marvel Studios in their starting credits. Like, I get what you're saying but even with the mergers, it isn't even Point A to Point B anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Nov 23, 2022 14:10:12 GMT -5
Every now and then I try with an MCU movie when I know and like a character or find the concept really, really interesting. And every time I'm getting disappointed. Then someone like Tarrantino offers his surprisingly mild thoughts and somehow his foot fetish gets brought up? Yeah, and that’s also getting into kink shaming territory that really doesn’t add anything at all to the discussion.
|
|
|
Post by BlackoutCreature on Nov 23, 2022 15:58:43 GMT -5
To take his comments to a logical conclusion, I wonder how Tarantino would feel if everybody left his movies saying "well that sucked, but it was nice to see Steve Buscemi again".
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Nov 23, 2022 17:33:59 GMT -5
Oh, forgot to say this earlier but considering he’s still getting dragged on Twitter for it;
Simu. Buddy. Pal.
You’re making millions right now and will continue to make millions from the future movies you’ll have. Like…you’ve won, man. You’re the winner.
You just need to remember that it’s a job and not everyone is going to like what you do. But they’re not making the money you are.
Like…do what Oscar Winner Brie Larson did and brag about liking a video game to get a VO role in it. Much better use of your time.
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Nov 23, 2022 18:04:50 GMT -5
The excessive use of the word "shite" in this thread makes me uncomfortable. Something someone posted in a thread made Banjo uncomfortable What
|
|
|
Post by AwamoriRock on Nov 24, 2022 10:27:35 GMT -5
Bold move of Simu Liu to make yourself look this bad.
|
|
|
Post by eJm on Nov 24, 2022 10:46:49 GMT -5
Bold move of Simu Liu to make yourself look this bad. It's like....dude....who cares? It's one thing for fans to have discussions (even if they go around and around in circles and blame the wrong people), it's another for the people doing their job caring about it. Like, look at what Robert Downey Jr's done afterwards; he starred in a bomb, co-produced a DC show and made a documentary about his Dad. He doesn't need to do anything else ever again in his entire life because he's rolling in it. He probably saw the video on the Avengers WhatsApp chat, rolled his eyes and went back to his 5th sauna of the day in his private spa.
|
|
|
Post by Non Banjoble Tokens on Nov 25, 2022 2:10:15 GMT -5
The excessive use of the word "shite" in this thread makes me uncomfortable. Something someone posted in a thread made Banjo uncomfortable What Why is there an E at the end of shit?! It scares me! GO AWAY UNNECESSARY EXTRA LETTER!!!
|
|
Scoops
ALF
Potato Clown
Posts: 1,116
|
Post by Scoops on Nov 25, 2022 2:52:36 GMT -5
Oh, forgot to say this earlier but considering he’s still getting dragged on Twitter for it; Simu. Buddy. Pal. You’re making millions right now and will continue to make millions from the future movies you’ll have. Like…you’ve won, man. You’re the winner. You just need to remember that it’s a job and not everyone is going to like what you do. But they’re not making the money you are. Like…do what Oscar Winner Brie Larson did and brag about liking a video game to get a VO role in it. Much better use of your time. The term is "sore winner". It's not enough to have money and power, everyone has to love you and tell you you're great or you're the victim.
|
|