|
|
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Speed Racer: Big or Bust?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002
|
posted 05-11-2008 05:53 PM
Bobby,
I agree with Brad in regards to SPEED RACER's ability to suspend disbelief. The opening sequence of the movie does a wonderful job of establishing the rules of the world, and it wasn't hard for me to suspend my disbelief from that point on. It seems like most people here agree. The problem with the movie is the writing.
That being said, some people have a harder time suspending disbelief than others. My Grandpa hates STAR WARS, because he thinks it's all make believe. I'm sure he'd have a hard time with SPEED RACER too. To each his own.
I agree that it's insulting to think that WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS is an alternative to SPEED RACER. But that's the comparison which people in this thread are making. And for the sake of this discussion, it's valid. You said:
quote: Bobby Henderson
I hope one positive thing comes from this, and that's the death of the bullshit style of action movies with stupidly implausible, absolutely unbelievable set pieces that would have normal viewers throwing popcorn at the screen and yelling "bullshit."
I interpret that as meaning that you hope studios stick with what "works" for the average movie-goer. That's exactly what WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS is. A time-tested, formulaic crowd-pleaser. That sounds like movie death to me. People like the Wachowskis need to keep doing new stuff that might not work in the hopes of finding something that does. They've done it once already with THE MATRIX, and hopefully they'll keep trying.
But as you suggested, SPEED RACER is all sound and fury with no content. I agree that that's generally not good. But it cuts both ways. To have all content and no sound or fury would be equally bad.
What I would hate to have happen would be for studios to look at SPEED RACER and say, "Hey, get rid of that sound and fury," when they should be saying "Hey, get a better script." But if movies like WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS, which are equally devoid content, are successful, that's exactly what's going to happen.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 05-11-2008 06:17 PM
quote: Mike Schindler
I interpret that as meaning that you hope studios stick with what "works" for the average movie-goer.
You interpreted wrong. So don't try to put any words in my mouth -especially any sort of stupidly assumed notion that I endorse half-assed romantic comedies like What Happens in Vegas.
Movie studios have been churning out one stupidly implausible action movie after another thanks to movies like The Matrix and Croching Tiger Hidden Dragon.
Movies like Crank, Torque, the Transporter series, Charlie's Angels and countless others have numerous scenes in them that aren't remotely realistic. Those kinds of movies are the current, corporate Hollywood status quo of action movies. It's a bunch of crap not remotely grounded in reality and very uninvolving, BORING and unsuspensful. The people who make those movies are only interested in putting stuff they think looks cool on the screen rather than present a believable, involving, entertaining story.
So many of these kinds of brainless action movies are being made that other movies like Shoot 'Em Up make fun of how ridiculously stupid those movies really are.
At the same time, audiences respond very favorably to action movies like Casino Royale or A History of Violence because at least some effort is being made to pay attention to story fundamentals and make the action believable.
Speed Racer seems to me like a movie that tried to cash in on a certain "100% style 0% substance" formula after that formula fell way out of fashion. It's kind of like a disco band trying to get work after disco died in 1979 or a "hair band metal" outfit trying get anywhere in 1993. I think audiences have finally gotten sick of this shit. Fundamentally, it's just not enough to have really pretty pictures thrown on the screen alone. The cake icing needs to have a cake underneath it in order to be complete.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Shane Cooper
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 232
From: Little Rock, Arkansas
Registered: Jun 2004
|
posted 05-11-2008 06:24 PM
quote: Mike Schindler
I interpret that as meaning that you hope studios stick with what "works" for the average movie-goer. That's exactly what WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS is. A time-tested, formulaic crowd-pleaser. That sounds like movie death to me. People like the Wachowskis need to keep doing new stuff that might not work in the hopes of finding something that does. They've done it once already with THE MATRIX, and hopefully they'll keep trying.
The problem with your comparison is that these are two very different genre of movie. It is disingenuous to say that the failure of Speed Racer will result in more sub-par comedies like WHIV.
I also think the issues with this movie stretch far beyond the writing. As stated on the first page of this thread, the movie was marketed poorly, never really finding out how to reach it's target audience. Additionally, the marketing that was out there looked incredibly ridiculous. Factor in poor scheduling by dropping it in the wake of Iron Man and right before Narnia, (two movies that draw the same demo Speed Racer was targeted at - young males), and a disappointing $20 million opening doesn't look like that much of a surprise.
Batman Begins, Live Free or Die Hard, Casino Royale and IMO Iron Man have all done the action genre well over the last few years. I don't think the steaming pile of ![[bs]](graemlins/bs.gif) that is Speed Racer will have any affect on the genre at all.
Matrix 2 and 3 and know Speed Racer...maybe we all drank the cool-aid on those guys too soon eh?
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mike Schindler
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1039
From: Oak Park, IL, USA
Registered: Jun 2002
|
posted 05-11-2008 07:59 PM
quote: Bobby Henderson
You interpreted wrong. So don't try to put any words in my mouth -especially any sort of stupidly assumed notion that I endorse half-assed romantic comedies like What Happens in Vegas.
Sorry about that. I very deliberately quoted you and stated that that was my interpretation so that you would know that I wasn't trying to put words into your mouth. I should have been more explicit about that. My bad.
Secondly, I never assumed that you endorsed movies like WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS. You implied that you didn't in your last post. I was trying to say that your way of thinking leads to the dark side. Your intentions are good. But in the end, the movies will not be better, but worse.
As for misinterpreting your words, here is where I'm confused. Let's use your cake analogy:
I interpreted your initial post as meaning that you hope that SPEED RACER's failure will show the studios that they shouldn't put icing on their cakes anymore, and that they should instead focus on making really good cakes.
My response was that the everyone really liked SPEED RACER's icing. The problem was actually with the cake. And my fear was that the studios would jump to the same conclusions that you seem to have, and be like, "No one liked SPEED RACER because it had so much icing," when the reality is that SPEED RACER's icing was awesome and it would've tasted great on a better cake.
You seem to think that if the studios stop making icing, they'll step up their cake-making game. In reality, I think it's more likely that we'll end up with the same crappy cakes, just without any icing. I'm all in favor of better cakes. But who wants a cake without icing?
So if the cakes were better, would you be okay with the icing?
I've been thinking about this, and here's what I see as being the difference between the two of us in general. Tell me if you agree.
You want every movie to be the best it can possibly be. Usually, that means sticking with what works, but at least you'll know that it works.
I, on the other hand, am willing to sacrifice individual movies for the greater good. I'd rather have a good movie suck a little bit in order to figure out a way to make the next movie great.
In other words, you're a power hitter who swings for the fences, and I'm a number two guy who'll lay down a bunt to advance the runner. One's not necessarily better than the other. They're just two different philosophies.
As for comparing WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS to SPEED RACER, I think you guys are missing my point. It doesn't matter what genre we're talking about. The two factors which matter in this discussion are style and substance. SPEED RACER is all style and no substance. WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS doesn't have style or substance. That's all that matters. But if you'd prefer, replace every reference I've made to WHAT HAPPENS IN VEGAS with, say, SPIDER-MAN 3. It's the same thing.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 05-12-2008 12:35 AM
quote: Mike Schindler
You want every movie to be the best it can possibly be. Usually, that means sticking with what works, but at least you'll know that it works.
Mike, you're implying that some formula, style or fashion is involved. My opinion is all of that kind of crap is irrelevant.
Any movie should stand on its own as its own kind of movie, not part of some greater form of fashion or style. When movies follow trends they get into trouble. They end up being derivate, forgetable pieces of dreck.
The seemingly implausible action in The Matrix worked because the story set it up that way. The action taking place was within a massive computing network rather than physical reality. The characters figured out how to bend the rules of physics when jacked into the Matrix. Pretty easy to follow. Audiences bought it. The film was a big hit.
The problem is a litany of action movies trying to cash in on the popularity of The Matrix copied a lot of the same sorts of action without the story and simple logic being able to support it. It was just bullshit.
quote: Mike Schindler
You seem to think that if the studios stop making icing, they'll step up their cake-making game.
That statement makes me believe you don't understand my cake analogy at all.
I don't want Hollywood to stop making the "cake icing." What I want is for them to do their damned jobs, stop going through the motions and actually put a freaking cake underneath that icing. If they cannot give the movie a proper foundation they just end up with a pile of overly sweet goo, kind of like Speed Racer.
Why don't we take a good look at something else that often looks very pretty on movie screens: any given movie release from Pixar.
Pixar always has great visuals in all their movies. But those guys bust their asses on the story. If some fancy eye popping sequence they have in mind doesn't serve the story they shit-can it. They don't force some pretty image they're in love with into the story unless it works.
It amazes me how movie industry types and even critics seem to be mystified on why Pixar has such a decent winning streak with making movies. There's no special secret on why their movies are good. Sure, they redefine the state of the art in computer animation with each movie release. But they also pay attention to the fundamentals and make their movies with pretty much the same kind of work flow that Disney has used for several decades.
Any movie studio could do the same damned thing with their live action movies. But many don't. Few apply the same levels of effort in constant rewrites before anything gets put in front of a camera. Lots of movies go into production without the script even being remotely finished. Too many are just half-assed with the attitude, "if the show tanks in theaters we'll still come out ahead on DVD."
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[thumbsup]](graemlins/thumbsup.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic