Does this look like a good summer for movies or no?

[MusterX]

I think people who like good movies complain, while three times their number flock to see Transformers 9 and Five Hundred of the Furious.

I'm not sure how it happened but sometimes the state of the film industry is downright depressing. Sure, good movies come along but there were times in the past, like in the 80's and 90's when the number of great films being released in a year exceeds what we see now, and by a fairly wide margin.

 

[BisexualMMA]

I'm not sure how it happened but sometimes the state of the film industry is downright depressing. Sure, good movies come along but there were times in the past, like in the 80's and 90's when the number of great films being released in a year exceeds what we see now, and by a fairly wide margin.

I think it's just a response to what the internet and social media have done to people's minds. Everything needs to be made such that it can be mostly followed if you're checking your phone and won't miss anything subtle or deep, and full of references that can be retweeted and looked up, easter eggs, filled with advertising with few consequences because everyone on social media is part of the hustle anyway...

I remember watching Rogue One and the cinema just randomly applauding when C3PO and R2D2 showed up out of nowhere for their dumb cameo scene. "I recognize that!" Lots of movies in these franchises today are basically just filled with different versions of the moment when The Fonz walks into the room for the first time in every episode of Happy Days.

 

[Guestx]

Well here is the thing. People complain about sequels but Hollywood is not dumb. They are the only movies that make any money. Original films have been flopping. People don't want to take risks anymore on something they are not familiar with.

Yeah, I agree with that.

Hollywood is just following the spending trends of the people. They keep paying for sequels and remakes so that's what Hollywood keeps giving them.

And here's the thing, I am not against sequels in and of themselves. I like to go on new adventures with characters I know and like. But it's a problem when that's ALL that we're being given.

 

[Guestx]

I'm not sure how it happened but sometimes the state of the film industry is downright depressing. Sure, good movies come along but there were times in the past, like in the 80's and 90's when the number of great films being released in a year exceeds what we see now, and by a fairly wide margin.

I've thought a lot about this and I think it's a mix of remembering the past fondly and Hollywood genuinely doing a better job in earlier decades of producing quality line-ups.

There were some pretty weak years even back then, but if you go back and look at a year like 1999 or 1996, those years were like stacked PPV cards where every fight on the main card is a title fight. In comparison, this year is looking more like a Fight Night on FS1.

 

[Guestx]

I remember watching Rogue One and the cinema just randomly applauding when C3PO and R2D2 showed up out of nowhere for their dumb cameo scene. "I recognize that!" Lots of movies in these franchises today are basically just filled with different versions of the moment when The Fonz walks into the room for the first time in every episode of Happy Days.

That seems overly cynical.

Why wouldn't fans be excited when beloved characters appear in a story?

 

[SmilinDesperado]

Well like I was saying to BMMA earlier, even if you retain the dino carnage element for each entry in an attempt to give the fans what they want and expect each time out, I think that you can continue to make each new entry interesting and relevant by building an interesting story around the climax. I think the main reason the first film is regarded as the best in the franchise is because of the characters and the story surrounding the action. And I feel like the key to success with future installments is to follow that formula: Establish interesting characters and build an interesting story around the action.

You said, "Even in your example, 2 corporations are developing dinos...to do what ...?"

Well, I don't have it all worked out but it opens up the path for a story about competition. Suddenly InGen is not the only kid on the block with this capability. They no longer have a monopoly. I have to think there's somewhere interesting to go with that idea.

haha Fair enough, brah.
I just don't see why anyone would be interested in a dinosaur movie that focused on coporations ability to make dinosaurs. What's the point of a monster movie where the monster isn't the focus, or doesn't do anything? You could just make a movie about corporations battling it out.
If I watch a movie about dinosaurs, like most anybody, I'm going to want them to do dinosaur stuff.
It's not that i'm not open to other things, it's just that an animal that has a brain the size of a walnut can only do so much in a movie.

And really? You think the popularity of the original Jurassic Park was the characters? I could be in the minority, but the characters were hardly memorable for me. lol All i really remember is a guy (Was it Jackson?) getting eaten by a T-Rex while on the toliet or something. There weren't any iconic characters
The cool thing about the original Jurassic Park was just that there were dinosaurs on the big screen, they looked real, and they were next to humans.

 

[LATEXXX COMMANDO]

No.

 

[BisexualMMA]

That seems overly cynical.

Why wouldn't fans be excited when beloved characters appear in a story?

Well, in this instance, they weren't even related to the story. It literally stopped the story to show characters from another movie. If you hadn't seen the other movies, that scene would have been just baffling. Either write the characters in or don't.

People can like whatever they want, but I'm not going to applaud ten seconds of footage that isn't remotely related to what's happening in the rest of the movie. It's just sad to me that audiences today find that not only satisfactory, but a selling point.

 

[BisexualMMA]

And really? You think the popularity of the original Jurassic Park was the characters? I could be in the minority, but the characters were hardly memorable for me. lol All i really remember is a guy (Was it Jackson?) getting eaten by a T-Rex while on the toliet or something. There weren't any iconic characters
The cool thing about the original Jurassic Park was just that there were dinosaurs on the big screen, they looked real, and they were next to humans.

I think it's a testament to how badly characters are written today that we're looking back with fond admiration at the characters from the first Jurassic Park. They're certainly functional and adequate. But even the sequel makers seemed completely indifferent as to who returned for the next movie and who didn't.

 

[Guestx]

haha Fair enough, brah.
I just don't see why anyone would be interested in a dinosaur movie that focused on coporations ability to make dinosaurs. What's the point of a monster movie where the monster isn't the focus, or doesn't do anything? You could just make a movie about corporations battling it out.
If I watch a movie about dinosaurs, like most anybody, I'm going to want them to do dinosaur stuff.
It's not that i'm not open to other things, it's just that an animal that has a brain the size of a walnut can only do so much in a movie.

Like I said, make the last 45 minutes or whatever about dinos getting crazy. It's the way you get to that point that matters.

That is what will make it an interesting film or not.

And really? You think the popularity of the original Jurassic Park was the characters? I could be in the minority, but the characters were hardly memorable for me. lol All i really remember is a guy (Was it Jackson?) getting eaten by a T-Rex while on the toliet or something. There weren't any iconic characters
The cool thing about the original Jurassic Park was just that there were dinosaurs on the big screen, they looked real, and they were next to humans.

Hell yeah the characters matter!

To JP fans Dr. Grant (Sam Neill), Ellie Sattler (Laura Dern) and Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum) are serious business! Those characters and the way they're brought to life through the talents of the performers is a big reason why the first JP was a success.

It's sounding to me like maybe JP just isn't for you.

 

[SmilinDesperado]

Like I said, make the last 45 minutes or whatever about dinos getting crazy. It's the way you get to that point that matters.

That is what will make it an interesting film or not.



Hell yeah the characters matter!

To JP fans Dr. Grant (Sam Neill), Ellie Sattler (Laura Dern) and Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum) are serious business! Those characters and the way they're brought to life through the talents of the performers is a big reason why the first JP was a success.

It's sounding to me like maybe JP just isn't for you.

Hmm, I wouldn't say that. I liked the first one.
I saw the 2nd one, but don't really remember it, and I just never got around to watching the last one with Pratt.
I've got no problem with a monster movie. (i just enjoyed the shit out of Rampage last week)
Not meaning to go round and round on the same point, i just don't think there is a way to make a dinosaur movie more than a dinosaur movie. (well, make it more than a dinosaur movie and worth watching)

lol I dunno man. The only character i remember is Goldblum's, but that's mostly just because Goldblum always plays himself, and he's always this kind of weirdo guy character. But, yeah, if they manage to make an interesting dinosaur movie, i'll be there.

 

[Guestx]

. . . and I just never got around to watching the last one with Pratt.

You should give it a look. Best one since the first one.

The only character i remember is Goldblum's, but that's mostly just because Goldblum always plays himself, and he's always this kind of weirdo guy character.

I'm surprised Ellie Sattler made no impression on you. Laura Dern was awesome and cute as a button.

 

[BisexualMMA]

Hell yeah the characters matter!

To JP fans Dr. Grant (Sam Neill), Ellie Sattler (Laura Dern) and Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum) are serious business! Those characters and the way they're brought to life through the talents of the performers is a big reason why the first JP was a success.

It's sounding to me like maybe JP just isn't for you.

The characters matter, but the characters in the first Jurassic Park were basically vehicles to get to the dinosaur action. Sam Neill and Jeff Goldblum are both masters when they are on their game, but Ian Malcolm was just Seth Brundle Lite. I thought Goldblum deserved an Oscar nomination for Seth Brundle in The Fly, but here, while he and Neill definitely infused their roles with charisma, on paper they weren't characters for the ages.

They were certainly up to the task, but they weren't Quint and Brody from Jaws. Their job was to be introduced as the relatively normal fish out of water characters, then be awed by the splendor of the dinosaurs, then scared when the dinosaurs wanted to eat them.

I'm surprised you Ellie Sattler made no impression on you. Laura Dern was awesome and cute as a button.

Pretty nondescript character in my opinion. I bought her as a scientist but just barely.

 

[SmilinDesperado]

You should give it a look. Best one since the first one.



I'm surprised Ellie Sattler made no impression on you. Laura Dern was awesome and cute as a button.

It's definitely on my to watch list. I'll get around to it pretty soon. It's one of those that i wish i had caught in the theaters though.

haha She's fine and all, but just left no lasting impression on me. I actually confused her for Helen Hunt.

 

[Guestx]

The characters matter, but the characters in the first Jurassic Park were basically vehicles to get to the dinosaur action. Sam Neill and Jeff Goldblum are both masters when they are on their game, but Ian Malcolm was just Seth Brundle Lite. I thought Goldblum deserved an Oscar nomination for Seth Brundle in The Fly, but here, he and Neill definitely infused their roles with charisma, but on paper they weren't characters for the ages.

They were certainly up to the task, but they weren't Quint and Brody from Jaws. Their job was to be introduced as the relatively normal fish out of water characters, then be awed by the splendor of the dinosaurs, then scared when the dinosaurs wanted to eat them.

No, I disagree.

I thought they were all very charismatic and, for me, going back to watch the first JP is largely about getting to spend time with those characters again.

Not sure why Quint is a better character than Dr. Grant.

 

[BisexualMMA]

No, I disagree.

I thought they were all very charismatic and, for me, going back to watch the first JP is largely about getting to spend time with those characters again.

Not sure why Quint is a better character than Dr. Grant.

Quint is probably a better character than everyone in Jurassic Park put together. And I think the Jurassic Park characters are fine.

I can recall two good or interesting character moments in Jurassic Park. Sam Neill scaring the kid with the claw fossil, and Jeff Goldblum's shoulders of giants / could/should lecture. Even one good character moment is ahead of the game these days, but almost every single moment Quint was on screen probably matched or exceeded these Jurassic Park high points.

 

[Guestx]

Quint is probably a better character than everyone in Jurassic Park put together. And I think the Jurassic Park characters are fine.

Yeah, I don't agree with that.

I totally bought Sam Neill as the layered character that is Dr. Alan Grant. His passion and enthusiasm for paleontology, his insight and concern over what was being done at the park, his skepticism (and ultimate semi-conversion) regarding children, and his subtle romance with Dr. Sattler are all very real to me.

 

[LHWBelt]

Just looking at release dates for the next few months and the line-up doesn't really have me hyped. I can't tell if it's just me and my expectations are too high or if this really doesn't look like an especially strong list of films.

In terms of big blockbuster releases, here's what we're looking at:

Avengers: Infinity War (4/27)
Deadpool 2 (5/18)
Solo (5/25)
The Incredibles 2 (6/15)
Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (6/22)
Sicario 2 (6/29)
Ant-Man 2 (7/6)
Mission: Impossible - Fallout (7/27)

If you care about Oceans 8, that's also on the way.

All fucking sequels. Where are the fresh, new ideas?

Personally, the only two films out of all of those that I'm REALLY looking forward to are Jurassic World 2 and Sicario 2. The rest, eh, I'll watch them, but I'm not chomping at the big to get to the theater.

What do you guys think?

That's Hollywood for you these days. I'm interested in Avenger's Infinity War, Solo, and Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom though so that ain't too bad for me.

 

[BisexualMMA]

Yeah, I don't agree with that.

I totally bought Sam Neill as the layered character that is Dr. Alan Grant. His passion and enthusiasm for paleontology, his insight and concern over what was being done at the park, his skepticism (and ultimate semi-conversion) regarding children, and his subtle romance with Dr. Sattler are all very real to me.

Madman obsessed with shark hunting no matter the cost because of the USS Indianapolis in WW2.

vs.

Enthusiastic paleontologist, appropriately concerned about a paleontology business venture, goes from disliking kids to indifferent, flirts a bit with another scientist.

 

[Guestx]

Madman obsessed with shark hunting no matter the cost because of the USS Indianapolis in WW2.

vs.

Enthusiastic paleontologist, appropriately concerned about a paleontology business venture, goes from disliking kids to indifferent, flirts a bit with another scientist.

Would you call Quint three-dimensional?