|
Maybe we've been going about this all wrong. To determine future classics, we need to look at the merchandising sales. Therefore, the films from 2000 onwards that will most likely be remembered are: Frozen, Cars, and Transformers.
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 17:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 13:53 |
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:It's gonna be avengers, and not one person reading this is going to agree with that right now, but every kid who is 7 right now and is living their entire life soaked in avengers is eventually going to grow up and be adults that get to pick what the most important films are. I remember SMG rhetorically posing the question of "How is The Avengers going to hold up in 20 years when its effects are dated?", and my response was something like "kids who grew up on it will be writers for film websites and defend it as a classic", so you're on the right track here Which movie do we want to credit for the recent stylistic boom in long, ostentatious takes that focus on an intense, anxious physicality? Is Gravity setting it too late, and it's more of a Children of Men thing that just took a few years to really blossom?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:It's gonna be avengers, and not one person reading this is going to agree with that right now, but every kid who is 7 right now and is living their entire life soaked in avengers is eventually going to grow up and be adults that get to pick what the most important films are. I agree with you, since it technically follows my definition of "classic," but more in a financial sense than a critical sense. It is still being talked about, since it was such an important film in the MCU franchise.; and it has signaled a shift (or renewed effort) in franchise filmmaking, as evidenced by the efforts of DC and Fox with the Justice League, and other studios with their attempts at mimicking the Avengers formula. Avengers, and Marvel's wider Stage 1 superhero movie sequence, did not start the franchise filmmaking trend, but it certainly legitimized it in the modern era. We're going to see a lot of shoddy attempts to replicate Marvel's success in the coming years; it's possible to imagine Disney's and Pixar's sequelization trend regarding their animated movies might even lead to a "cinematic universe" of their respective properties. Disney property crossovers worked for the video game series Kingdom Hearts and Disney Infinity, after all. Jenny Angel posted:I remember SMG rhetorically posing the question of "How is The Avengers going to hold up in 20 years when its effects are dated?", and my response was something like "kids who grew up on it will be writers for film websites and defend it as a classic", so you're on the right track here Long action takes have been a thing for years, going back as far as Kurosawa in the mid-twentieth century. Of course the time distance between cuts was longer back then, so they seem longer relatively now. kalel fucked around with this message at 17:24 on Feb 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
Jenny Angel posted:Which movie do we want to credit for the recent stylistic boom in long, ostentatious takes that focus on an intense, anxious physicality? Is Gravity setting it too late, and it's more of a Children of Men thing that just took a few years to really blossom? Saving Private Ryan in particular is the one I'd single out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:If that's the case then Cars is definitely one of those movies. Yeah, maybe, so many kids watching it so many times it's gonna mean SOMETHING to people in 30 years. People in the future will care about and elevate their childhood just as much as people today do, I'm sure. I'm not sure there will ever be a break and people will think of it as some masterpiece but it's not going to be this important to this many kids and have a generation grow up and decide it didn't matter at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Well you just hit on it. Everyone loved the Jack Sparrow character but nobody was all that invested in anything else, which Disney of course realized so they kept offering Depp tons of money to come back. There's no way they or anyone else would spend as much as those movies cost without the bankability of Depp behind it. And with that said, the Pirate movies have certainly made an impact in that it took Johnny Depp from "kind of popular quirky somewhat heartthrob from the 90s" to an A-list superstar. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:If that's the case then Cars is definitely one of those movies. Not sure how serious you're being with this suggestion, but I'd hesitate before going too far with the kids/merchandise angle. I was the biggest Ninja Turtles fan as a kid and the movie was huge, and even though I still think it's a pretty darn solid movie all things considered, I'm not sure I'd submit it as a classic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
If you're calling something a classic based on the kids growing up with it just loving everything to do with it, Cars is definitely one of those things.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
I don't think they're going to hold that much nostalgia for it in adulthood, though. Like, I was obsessed with the Land Before Time movies as a little kid, and now the first one is the only one I can even go back and rewatch (because it is legit the highlight of Don Bluth's career); Cars is probably gonna fall into that kind of zone in coming years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Saving Private Ryan in particular is the one I'd single out. Spielberg and Kaminski have been dope at those takes for a long while, for sure, but it seems like it's blown up especially in the last few years what with the potential Lubezki three-peat, Arkapaw's True Detective work, Daredevil aping Oldboy, etc. It may be more down to shifts in what gets covered rather than shifts in what's actually an influential cinematographic style, but I feel like I passively come across fairly frequent "You'll never believe how [PRESTIGE DRAMA] pulled off this [SEVERAL]-minute take" clickbaits that weren't there only a few years before Amusingly enough, the other ostentatious super-long take that I remember off the top of my head that predates the recent boom (outside of stuff like Tarkovsky that comes from kinda a different tradition) is the opening shot of de Palma's Snake Eyes, which opened like a week or two after Saving Private Ryan
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
LORD OF BUTT posted:I don't think they're going to hold that much nostalgia for it in adulthood, though. Like, I was obsessed with the Land Before Time movies as a little kid, and now the first one is the only one I can even go back and rewatch (because it is legit the highlight of Don Bluth's career); Cars is probably gonna fall into that kind of zone in coming years. We have no idea what kids will look back on fondly. If we were talking about this in 1993 and said "oh yeah for sure Jurassic Park is going to be a CLASSIC" based on kids loving it, that could go either way. Kids loved The Mummy, and you could make an argument that it had a somewhat outsized influence (for instance: remakes) relative to whatever financial or critical impact the movie had.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
LORD OF BUTT posted:I don't think they're going to hold that much nostalgia for it in adulthood, though. Like, I was obsessed with the Land Before Time movies as a little kid, and now the first one is the only one I can even go back and rewatch (because it is legit the highlight of Don Bluth's career); Cars is probably gonna fall into that kind of zone in coming years. Yeah but read what you wrote, you loved a dinosaur movie as a kid then grew up and now you can talk about that movie as the apex of a specific director's career. You didn't forget about it or just stay at the same level of "yay! treestars! I loved cera!" baby stuff, you grew up and then now talk about it in terms of a grander thing like it's place in a director's career.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Yeah but read what you wrote, you loved a dinosaur movie as a kid then grew up and now you can talk about that movie as the apex of a specific director's career. You didn't forget about it or just stay at the same level of "yay! treestars! I loved cera!" baby stuff, you grew up and then now talk about it in terms of a grander thing like it's place in a director's career. Hard to imagine what his would be for Avengers, because as a film it's just so unremarkable. As a success of marketing and commercial franchise planning it's a landmark, perhaps, but that's not something people are going to get excited about in twenty or thirty years. Keep in mind, as well, that in terms of ticket sales, Avengers fell closer to Thunderball and Love Story than Jurassic Park or The Lion King, which continue to be major marketing presences now. As far as Star Wars goes, Avengers' total is closer to a movie that sold no tickets, ever.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
DeimosRising posted:Hard to imagine what his would be for Avengers, because as a film it's just so unremarkable. It's pretty remarkable, the whole shared universe thing has rarely been done before and never ever to this scale and it seems pretty obvious even if it's a pretty bad movie that 40 years from now people will talk about it like they talk about jaws: a movie that changed everything about the industry forever. Add that to the fact kids are still super crazy about the hulk and iron man at a minimum and will eventually grow up and be the ones talking about what movies mattered and you have a real big chance of this being a thing that a slow shift turns favor on it as a big deal movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:It's pretty remarkable, the whole shared universe thing has rarely been done before and never ever to this scale and it seems pretty obvious even if it's a pretty bad movie that 40 years from now people will talk about it like they talk about jaws: a movie that changed everything about the industry forever. Add that to the fact kids are still super crazy about the hulk and iron man at a minimum and will eventually grow up and be the ones talking about what movies mattered and you have a real big chance of this being a thing that a slow shift turns favor on it as a big deal movie. I think the Avengers will end up closer to the legacy of bands like Limp Bizkit. Or Ja Rule. Where every shakes their heads ten years later. A collective "What was the big fuss?"
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
The problem with The Avengers being considered a classic in the future is that I can't think of any "classic" films from say 25-30 years ago that are so bland and uncreative. I also disagree that the shared universe thing is really as innovative as it's often held up to be.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 00:03
|
|
|
Terrorist Fistbump posted:The problem with The Avengers being considered a classic in the future is that I can't think of any "classic" films from say 25-30 years ago that are so bland and uncreative. I think it'll be remembered as a big dumb moneymaking event movie more than anything else, beloved by some, not by others. basically the way we remember Independence Day now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 00:07
|
|
|
Terrorist Fistbump posted:I also disagree that the shared universe thing is really as innovative as it's often held up to be. I mean, it's literally changing everything about how movies are produced, marketed and consumed. I can barely name a bigger change in big name hollywood movies in the last 20 years. Like maybe it's a fad and never will spread past the series messing around with trying their own hand at shared universe sequels but it's a really big deal. Honestly I bet 20 years from now there are still marvel shared universe movies coming out. They have at least 10 years of plans already and 20 years is long enough for them to get stale and resurge.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 00:08
|
|
|
"Shared universe" is marketing verbiage. The word for such films in the past was "sequel" and less commonly, "spinoff".Uncle Boogeyman posted:I think it'll be remembered as a big dumb moneymaking event movie more than anything else, beloved by some, not by others. basically the way we remember Independence Day now. Independence Day is a great example. Big smash, has a lot of influence on blockbuster formula movies. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD fucked around with this message at 00:13 on Feb 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I mean, it's literally changing everything about how movies are produced, marketed and consumed. I can barely name a bigger change in big name hollywood movies in the last 20 years. Like maybe it's a fad and never will spread past the series messing around with trying their own hand at shared universe sequels but it's a really big deal. Honestly I bet 20 years from now there are still marvel shared universe movies coming out. They have at least 10 years of plans already and 20 years is long enough for them to get stale and resurge. In all three of the fields you named, the Avengers model is merely the next logical step in the development of big, profitable franchises that dates back to at least the early 1980s. The Avengers itself is the inverse of a spin-off conceptually and was a safe bet given the contemporary tastes of the market. What I'm saying is that it's evolutionary, not revolutionary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:"Shared universe" is marketing verbiage. The word for such films in the past was "sequel" and less commonly, "spinoff". I get that if you don't like the movie you don't want them to be important, but they figured out "one weird trick" to let them release TWELVE sequels in like 5 years with 11 more coming out in the next 5 without anyone complaining. It's clearly a major change to the hollywood formula and is influencing a ton of other stuff that wants to copy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 00:19
|
|
|
I'm just trying to figure out the parameters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
Terrorist Fistbump posted:In all three of the fields you named, the Avengers model is merely the next logical step in the development of big, profitable franchises that dates back to at least the early 1980s. The Avengers itself is the inverse of a spin-off conceptually and was a safe bet given the contemporary tastes of the market. It's literally the format the avengers comics themselves have used for like 54 years. It's not an original idea at all, but it's also basically never been done in movies ever to this scale and is a really big deal that is going to probably make the way big budget movies are made be different forever and ever.I bet in 20 years barely any of the biggest movies will come out with at least a 5 movie deal to explore the backstory of whatever 50 dumb things can spin off and back in to the series.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
Terrorist Fistbump posted:What I'm saying is that it's evolutionary, not revolutionary. I agree to an extent. As Owlofcreamcheese said, the "shared universe" component (a.k.a multiple stories running concurrently and intertwining occasionally, about characters which live in the same world) marked a huge shift in moviemaking. Whether it was an innovation or an inevitable outcome of previous business practices is irrelevant; other studios are guaranteed to attempt to copy the formula laid out by Marvel. HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:I'm just trying to figure out the parameters. I stated my concept of "classic" in the OP, but it doesn't make a distinction between "business" or "technical" or "artistic." In my view, any "classic" movie is a movie that people remember for one reason or another. I'm trying to figure out if anyone can make a case for any recent movie being a landmark or memorable film.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 00:31
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:It's literally the format the avengers comics themselves have used for like 54 years. It's not an original idea at all, but it's also basically never been done in movies ever to this scale well in Japan it has SciFiDownBeat posted:I stated my concept of "classic" in the OP, but it doesn't make a distinction between "business" or "technical" or "artistic." In my view, any "classic" movie is a movie that people remember for one reason or another. that seems pretty broad. people remember Little Nicky 15 years later but I wouldn't call that a classic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
SciFiDownBeat posted:I stated my concept of "classic" in the OP, but it doesn't make a distinction between "business" or "technical" or "artistic." In my view, any "classic" movie is a movie that people remember for one reason or another. I'm trying to figure out if anyone can make a case for any recent movie being a landmark or memorable film. That's exactly what I mean. All the arguments presented so far make things like The Mummy, Independence Day, Cars, Pirates of the Carribbean and for a gimme, Lady In The Water, classics. Mere notability can't be the parameters of "classic".
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
Define "classic" in your own words, then.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 00:50
|
|
|
SciFiDownBeat posted:Define "classic" in your own words, then. mine would be something like "a movie that is remembered fondly by many as being exceptionally good and/or particularly important." ymmv.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:well in Japan it has Do you mean with godzilla and the kaiju movies? Because I can see that. Although I'd say the difference is that they used it as a trick to push out more low budget movies somewhat faster, and marvel is using it as a trick to create some of the highest budget movies ever pushed out at a rate no other series has even come close to. I think I'd say with no hyperbole that avengers is one of the most important movies ever even though it was a pretty nothing movie. It is changing everything and I bet there will never again be a time where big budget movies get released that don't have influence from it's formula. Like I bet in a few years a movie series like fast and the furious will just be unthinkable and a movie series that high budget will just be expected to be a wide network of movies focusing on the individual characters and the whole group/whole world weaving together into a much larger and more marketable format. I bet avengers spells the end for single thread blockbuster series probably pretty much permanently. No one is going to like the movie or think it's all that good of a movie but I bet in 50 years people will still be writing essays about how it's the template for modern big budget movies that everything after followed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Do you mean with godzilla and the kaiju movies? Because I can see that. Although I'd say the difference is that they used it as a trick to push out more low budget movies somewhat faster, and marvel is using it as a trick to create some of the highest budget movies ever pushed out at a rate no other series has even come close to. those are what I was thinking of at first although you could probably throw the Zatoichi movies in there too. they even had a crossover with Yojimbo. Owlofcreamcheese posted:I think I'd say with no hyperbole that avengers is one of the most important movies ever even though it was a pretty nothing movie. It is changing everything and I bet there will never again be a time where big budget movies get released that don't have influence from it's formula. Like I bet in a few years a movie series like fast and the furious will just be unthinkable and a movie series that high budget will just be expected to be a wide network of movies focusing on the individual characters and the whole group/whole world weaving together into a much larger and more marketable format. I bet avengers spells the end for single thread blockbuster series probably pretty much permanently. all of this stuff I find extremely doubtful but I suppose time will tell. I think the shared universe thing will more likely be remembered as a fad, like 3D or disaster movies, and The Avengers in particular will be one of those movies that some people (the future equivelant of "90s kids") will have a whole lot of nostalgia for but others will be like "uhhh that movie wasn't actually very good." again, like Independence Day.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Do you mean with godzilla and the kaiju movies? Because I can see that. Although I'd say the difference is that they used it as a trick to push out more low budget movies somewhat faster, and marvel is using it as a trick to create some of the highest budget movies ever pushed out at a rate no other series has even come close to. It is changing blockbuster film-making, not everything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 01:05
|
|
|
The main flaw of such a thread is that we're essentially tasked to create a list of TOP TEN: OTHER PEOPLE'S FAVORITE FILMS, IN A HYPOTHETICAL FUTURE SOCIETY. You can basically say whatever. So I'm going to predict that Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension will be at the forefront of a new trend in quasi-ironic appreciation of "second wave" 3-Dimensional gimmick cinema, shortly after the development of affordable, 'glasses-less' stereoscopic home entertainment.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
Uncle Boogeyman posted:all of this stuff I find extremely doubtful but I suppose time will tell. I think the shared universe thing will more likely be remembered as a fad, like 3D or disaster movies, and The Avengers in particular will be one of those movies that some people (the future equivelant of "90s kids") will have a whole lot of nostalgia for but others will be like "uhhh that movie wasn't actually very good." again, like Independence Day. I think it makes sense in the context of how films are watched that the world would move in this direction. In the pre 70s you either saw a movie when it came out or you didn't, maybe it'd be on tv eventually and maybe you could catch it but probably not. But movies came and went and were gone. Since then movies have gotten more and more accessible and you could buy any movie. Now every movie is accessible to almost everyone all the time anywhere. The concept of missing a movie is totally gone from culture, so it makes way more sense for movies to start interconnecting and not having any expectation they need to be stand alone, since anyone can watch any of the feeding movies at any time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
Like I mentioned earlier, I think if any of these modern superhero movies go down in history, it's gonna be the Dark Knight, like it or not. Got rave reviews critically, was a massive hit, one of the first movies to cross the billion dollar mark, one of the first and only superhero movies to get any kind Oscar consideration, had a big splashy story about one of the stars dying during production, one of the few performances to get a posthumous Oscar win (also is pretty much responsible for getting them to increase the number of Best Picture nominees), marked a major aesthetic shift in action/blockbuster filmmaking, a fair amount of quotable dialogue, up-and-coming film nerd director, etc. etc.SuperMechagodzilla posted:You can basically say whatever. so your usual M.O., then.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
Nobody has been successful with one of these shared universe mega-franchises without taking advantage of an established history of beloved characters that has a built-in fan base. That kind of thing takes decades to develop, and there's only so many of them out there. The "Universal Monsters" series was an interesting idea but it seems like its flopping, and for good reason. There are still plenty of directors around who can get a blockbuster type movie made even if its not part of some huge planned universe, and I think those movies will continue to be made as long as authors are still writing really successful novels.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:Nobody has been successful with one of these shared universe mega-franchises without taking advantage of an established history of beloved characters that has a built-in fan base. That kind of thing takes decades to develop, and there's only so many of them out there. The "Universal Monsters" series was an interesting idea but it seems like its flopping, and for good reason. Somehow I forgot the original Universal Monsters movies when I was talking about pre-Avengers shared universes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 01:16
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:There are still plenty of directors around who can get a blockbuster type movie made even if its not part of some huge planned universe, and I think those movies will continue to be made as long as authors are still writing really successful novels. Right now the novels hollywood wants are the ones you can turn into 3 parts with the last book being two movies. I bet hollywood is soon going to find itself very very interesting in the novels structured so you can turn it into 8 movies with movies feeding in and out of some main thread story.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 01:31
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Right now the novels hollywood wants are the ones you can turn into 3 parts with the last book being two movies. I bet hollywood is soon going to find itself very very interesting in the novels structured so you can turn it into 8 movies with movies feeding in and out of some main thread story. That kind of thing still takes time to write though, like a decade plus for even a prolific writer. I'm not sure even GoT really qualifies and Martin is limping to the finish line. I mean what's out there like what you're describing that isn't Marvel or DC comics? The Universal Monster thing I mentioned already but that's a failure. Who's going to write all this stuff? Edit: King's Dark Tower comes to mind, but again, that took him like 30 years to complete. Basebf555 fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Feb 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
Basebf555 posted:That kind of thing still takes time to write though, like a decade plus for even a prolific writer. I'm not sure even GoT really qualifies and Martin is limping to the finish line. I mean what's out there like what you're describing that isn't Marvel or DC comics? The Universal Monster thing I mentioned already but that's a failure. Who's going to write all this stuff? Well at least the argument has flipped from it being some nothing movie that wasn't even that big of an achievement to it being such a giant task and massive achievement that only the greatest writers working for decades could create such a universe as rich as the one that contains "ant man"
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
SciFiDownBeat posted:Define "classic" in your own words, then. Hey, not being antagonistic but you have to put some bars around this thing. When I talk about Children of Men being a classic, even I don't know exactly what that means, so it might as well be "a movie that is memorable in some way, influential in some way, has some cultural footprint, critically and commercially successful, etc." But even by that metric, 300 is undeniably a classic, but a movie I think is a stone cold favorite film of all time like Lake Mungo is not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 13:53 |
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Well at least the argument has flipped from it being some nothing movie that wasn't even that big of an achievement to it being such a giant task and massive achievement that only the greatest writers working for decades could create such a universe as rich as the one that contains "ant man" I'm talking about from a marketing perspective, we're discussing the future of blockbuster movies. Marvel and DC had a very long history already established and a fan-base that already loved pre-existing characters before the first dollar was ever spent on Avengers. That kind of thing is very rare and it happens organically over time, a long time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2016 01:47
|
|