|
Are movies generally getting longer? When I was growing up in the late 80s/early 90s I thought a film was typically 90 minutes long but nowadays it seems like most of the films I see are 2 hours plus and a rising number go into a third hour. I'm thinking that it could be when I was a kid I watched movies aimed at a younger audience and they were probably deliberately shorter than adult features or maybe I just happened to see a lot of long films recently but anyway, am I alone in thinking this?
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2008 08:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 02:24 |
|
|
Herr R. posted:I think in the German version Kinski's character is dubbed by someone else. Kinski dubbed himself in the German version. Think about it, a very distinct sounding German actor being dubbed in German by someone else, it makes no sense.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2008 11:09
|
|
|
Lot 49 posted:Are movies generally getting longer? It often bugs me because CG is usually obvious, and while the cars jump off ramps and bridges and roofs, or the army increases their firepower against a monster, the plot has come to a standstill and we have to wait for the CG to conclude in order to get back to the forward motion of the storyline.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2008 12:13
|
|
|
Lot 49 posted:Are movies generally getting longer? Comedy films and childrens films tend to be shorter than "adult" films, and it's much more likely that, when you're younger, you'll see more of the former than the latter. And, whilst it's not exactly stunning evidence, a quick trip through my film collection had the shortest, modern, non-comedy at 99 minutes, and if you're talking 80's/90's then we've got big films pushing two hours, two and a half hours or more. The Alien films, the Terminator films, the Batman films, Jurassic Park, Forrest Gump, all kinds of things off the top of my head. MrL_JaKiri fucked around with this message at 14:15 on Jun 23, 2008 |
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2008 14:11
|
|
|
The scene in American Beauty where Kevin Spacey slams the asparagus plate against the wall. Does anyone else like to point out/marvel at how he managed to perfectly stick a lemon slice above the picture frame? I bet he couldn't have done that again if he tried 100 more times. Sorry I couldn't find a screen cap 
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2008 18:03
|
|
|
OldSenileGuy posted:I just saw Chinatown for the first time. The Two Jakes is not as good as Chinatown, but it's still worth seeing, especially if you liked Chinatown and want a similar vibe. James Robinson, a comic book writer I like a lot, actually says it's better than the original, but I wouldn't go that far. Plus Tom Waits has a tiny cameo as a cop.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2008 01:30
|
|
|
Shatter Map posted:The scene in American Beauty where Kevin Spacey slams the asparagus plate against the wall. Does anyone else like to point out/marvel at how he managed to perfectly stick a lemon slice above the picture frame? I bet he couldn't have done that again if he tried 100 more times. I think they talk about it for a while on the commentary.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2008 02:50
|
|
|
Probably a stupid question, but in Momento how does the main character know the man he's looking for is named John (or James) G.? Additionally, the person calling him on the phone is Teddy, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2008 03:11
|
|
|
Barry Lemonade posted:Probably a stupid question, but in Momento how does the main character know the man he's looking for is named John (or James) G.? Additionally, the person calling him on the phone is Teddy, right? Teddy is indeed on the phone. Teddy actually feeds him the information that the "killer" is John/James G. He does so becuause Teddy wants to get a drug dealer killed and off the streets and figures that he'd be the perfect hitman. The drug dealer, Jimmy Grants, didn't have anything to do with the rape of his wife but he's like a guided missile and follows notes implicitly. Including his own notes intended to turn the tables on James "Teddy" Gammel.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2008 03:38
|
|
|
itrorev posted:For you older goons, I've always been interested about peoples thoughts regarding the original Star Wars (A New Hope) when it was being shown in theaters, back in 77. Remember, this is 1977 - no internet, no home consoles (Atari 2600 had just been launched), no VCRs. For fun kids played with action figures, went to the movies and read comic books. Since Lucas had kept the rights for all that crap, that was his advertising. You could not go into any store without seeing Star Wars stuff. There wasn't a ton of hype for movies like you get now. For almost all movies there was some newspaper ads and maybe magazine articles the month of the release, then ads on TV the week it came out - no months of hype like today. The movies had to stand on their own. Word of mouth could make or break a movie, and if you didn't catch it in the theater you were screwed. On May 20, 1977, Variety (5 days before its release): "Star Wars is a magnificent film. George Lucas set out to make the biggest possible adventure-fantasy out of his memories of serials and older action epics, and he has succeeded brilliantly. What Lucas lacks in originality is more than made up by enthralling special effects." Star Wars' opening day totaled $ 254,309 from just 32 theaters. It's first weekend box-office gross equaled $ 1.5 million. By the end of its first theatrical run, Star Wars was the most successful film in North American history with a gross in excess of $ 307.2 million. So to answer your questions - there was a lot of hype and advertising for it (in a roundabout way) and it was most awesome thing ever seen. Compare it to other sci-fi movies of its time (before Star Wars was released). And we're still talking about it today. Heres an old article about its British release: http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/december/27/newsid_2544000/2544239.stm Has the unaltered Star Wars been released on DVD? That may be the biggest/most popular movie not yet released on DVD.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2008 05:08
|
|
|
Internet Gentleman posted:Has the unaltered Star Wars been released on DVD? That may be the biggest/most popular movie not yet released on DVD. They were released 2 or 3 years ago. You get them on a disk with both the enhanced and the classic versions on them. You can get them pretty cheaply these days. Best Buy has them for 15bux right now. I had a question, What was the First movie to have a nationwide release, assuming it would be something like the Wizard of Oz or Gone With the Wind, or even Birth of a Nation. I checked around, it was loving JAWS. What? It took nearly 80 years for Hollywood to release a movie nationally? Apparently, until the Jaws release, moves opened in one market and slowly spread across the country. if i were lucky enough to live in LA or New York, you could see The Godfather when it was first released. If you lived in the Cleve or Lubbock texas, it could take up to a year for it to get to you. Madness!
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2008 08:01
|
|
|
Internet Gentleman posted:Word of mouth could make or break a movie, and if you didn't catch it in the theater you were screwed. This last line got me thinking and made me realize something, In this day and age we take the availability of movies for granted. I grew up in the early eighties when VCRs, video stores, and movie channels were just getting started but shortly before then you really had to see movies in theaters if you wanted to see them at all. Sure some movies would re-air on T.V. and some drive ins and local theaters would show older films but for many movies you had one chance to see them. The average running time of a movie back then could be many months if not a year but after they were gone you had to luck out to see them again or for the first time if you missed it. Today if we want to watch an old classic like Ghostbusters again you can rent it, download it, get it On Demand, rent it at a local video store, Netflix it, simply go somewhere and buy your own copy, or just wait and sooner or later it will play on one of the hundreds of channels on T.V.. Imagine wanting to see that movie again and having to wait for a local theater to show it as a midnight movie or lucking out and catching it on the rare occasion that they show movies on network T.V.. Up until the invention of the VCR people must have gone years or even decades without seeing their favorite movies simply because they weren't available.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2008 10:38
|
|
|
Part of the reason for the slow gain in wide releases... 1. Prints took longer to make and were more expensive. Up until the 1980s, films usually had all their prints made from the original negative. This was the case for Star Wars, having hundreds of prints made off of it. That practically hosed up the negative to the point that they couldn't have re-released it in 1997. 2. Technicolor films were usually sent to the big cities first, then made their way to the small town houses. 3. People were actually patient enough. 4. There was more of an air of "showmanship" as if bigger films were treated more like special engagements. Note all the big "roadshow" releases of the 1950s and 1960s. This wasn't necessarily the case with routine films, of course. Today, the Lord of the Rings films would have taken a while to get to a small town, but not Meet the Spartans.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2008 12:12
|
|
|
I actually have a few. What are the differences between the three versions of Close Encounters of the Third Kind? Like Blade Runner, I thought it was pretty good, but I'm not dying to see it again. Still I am curious to know whether its worth it to check out the other cuts. My second question is about the different soundtracks to Man With A Movie Camera. Does anyone have preferences? I've listened to the Cinematic Orchestra's version and it was still awesome, but I know that's far from the definitive. And my third question is about Kieslowski's Short Films about Killing and Love. I loved the Decalogue, so I guess I will probably just watch them anyways, but again, is there enough added to really make it worth it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2008 20:52
|
|
|
Desiato: Nice avatar dude. I've been waiting for a thread like this to get one question off my chest: In Boondock Saints, what the hell is the significance of the old guy running in on them and finishing their prayer with them? I beleive it's a family prayer, so does that mean he's their dad or something?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2008 21:09
|
|
|
In The Matrix, what the hell is Neo supposed to be selling those people who show up at his apartment in the beginning of the movie? They treat it like its something illegal but it looks like he just gave them some minidiscs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2008 21:17
|
|
|
neutral posted:I actually have a few. The main difference is whether or not you see the inside of the ship. The cut with the inside of the ship (I believe it's called the Extended Edition) has been universally derided over time, even by Spielberg himself. I have to say it was pretty awesome when I was 8 years old, though. Other minor differences primarily focus on how much time is spent with Roy's family. neutral posted:My second question is about the different soundtracks to Man With A Movie Camera. Does anyone have preferences? I've listened to the Cinematic Orchestra's version and it was still awesome, but I know that's far from the definitive. The Alloy Orchestra track is the best. neutral posted:And my third question is about Kieslowski's Short Films about Killing and Love. I loved the Decalogue, so I guess I will probably just watch them anyways, but again, is there enough added to really make it worth it? No, not really. IIRC, Love has a different ending.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2008 21:19
|
|
|
neutral posted:My second question is about the different soundtracks to Man With A Movie Camera. Does anyone have preferences? I've listened to the Cinematic Orchestra's version and it was still awesome, but I know that's far from the definitive.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2008 21:20
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:In The Matrix, what the hell is Neo supposed to be selling those people who show up at his apartment in the beginning of the movie? They treat it like its something illegal but it looks like he just gave them some minidiscs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2008 21:21
|
|
|
Blakkout posted:Desiato: Nice avatar dude. Yes, Yes it does.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2008 21:30
|
|
|
Blakkout posted:Desiato: Nice avatar dude. He is their dad, as confirmed in the last scene in the hotel where they refer to him as "Da". There are a handful of hints throughout the movie about their father disappearing when they were young, with Il Duce being in prison it's a pretty obvious fit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2008 21:35
|
|
|
Bergman watching question: I recently received quite a few dvds as an engagement present from my fiance's family friend, I think based somewhat on the condition that he was going to watch them as well so we could talk about them (I think he is happy to have found another film dork). - For Scenes From a Marriage, neither of us has ever seen it. Should we watch the theatrical version or the 5 hour television first. Does your answer change if we might not ever see the other version? - For Fanny and Alexander, I have only seen the theatrical version, and he has seen neither - same question, which one should he watch first? SubG posted:I don't care much for the Cinematic Orchestra score, and am fairly indifferent to the Nyman score. I recently watched the film with the Alloy Orchestra score for the first time and while I'm not particularly fond of the overuse of faux diagetic effects, overall I think it's my favourite score for the film. The Alloy Orchestra score is definitely my favorite, but it was the first score I heard the first time I saw the film, performed live at the Academy Theater in Los Angeles, so I know my impression is completely biased.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 06:01
|
|
|
Voodoofly posted:Bergman watching question: Definitely the television version for Fanny & Alexander. I actually prefer the shorter cut of Scenes From a Marriage. However, if you might not get another chance to see the longer version (why would this be?) then go for that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 06:08
|
|
|
In Casino Royale what was the password to the money and what was its relevance, and why did the girl apologize to Bond after he told her.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 15:44
|
|
|
Lascivious Sloth posted:In Casino Royale what was the password to the money and what was its relevance, and why did the girl apologize to Bond after he told her. Watch it again if you don't get why this would make her sad. Crows Turn Off fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Jun 25, 2008 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 15:47
|
|
|
FitFortDanga posted:Definitely the television version for Fanny & Alexander. I actually prefer the shorter cut of Scenes From a Marriage. However, if you might not get another chance to see the longer version (why would this be?) then go for that. He can be a busy person - if he didn't like the shorter version, I doubt he would spend the time watching the longer version after. Thanks for the answers though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 16:07
|
|
|
Og Oggilby posted:Part of the reason for the slow gain in wide releases... Lot 49 posted:Are movies generally getting longer? I think so, for a few reasons. In part because producers/studios are rushing to gets films into theatres to hit certain release dates. CG/VFX play a role in that they take a long time to create and integrate into a film, thus creating additional time pressure. Lastly, most independent films have limited budgets and can't spend that long in post, or afford the time taken to properly edit (e.g., a bank is financing the film and the interest is mounting - they need to complete and deliver the film ASAP to pay the bank off). It takes time to make a long movie shorter, and the economics are such that few directors, producers and editors these days have that time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 17:58
|
|
|
therattle posted:Really? That's amazing. They didn't use an interpositive/internegative? These days one can only make about 300 prints from an IN until it gets screwed, so if they were printing from the original negative for a wide release, that would do the trick.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 18:10
|
|
|
Crows Turn Off posted:The most dangerous thing a person can sell, man - information. Huh, that actually makes sense. I just don't know why they didn't bother SAYING that in the movie.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 18:30
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:Huh, that actually makes sense. I just don't know why they didn't bother SAYING that in the movie.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 19:32
|
|
|
itrorev posted:For you older goons, I've always been interested about peoples thoughts regarding the original Star Wars (A New Hope) when it was being shown in theaters, back in 77. I was 6, it was hands-down the best thing ever. Had all the toys and what-not.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 19:43
|
|
|
muscles like this? posted:In The Matrix, what the hell is Neo supposed to be selling those people who show up at his apartment in the beginning of the movie? They treat it like its something illegal but it looks like he just gave them some minidiscs. I took it to be some bootleg hacking poo poo, you know if the matrix was set in a pre-bittorrent/high speed internet world I guess total cyber punk looking ravers would buy bootlegs from some dude. And a question I got. There was a movie i saw the end to years ago on AMC when it would show classic movies without commercials and other non-classic movie shows. Anyways the movie ended with some people trapped in a church, a couple women, a boy with a donkey, and two men with tommy guns. out side the church mexican (I think) army or cops were breaking through the door. The movie ends with the doors breaking and the two men opening fire. It was an black and white film and the first time I really saw an old film have a depressing ending. Anyone know what movie this is? And does anyone know of any other older american movies (40's and 50's) that dont have the typical happy ending or "the heroes stops the bad guy" endings?
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 21:16
|
|
|
BooDoug187 posted:And does anyone know of any other older american movies (40's and 50's) that dont have the typical happy ending or "the heroes stops the bad guy" endings? Most film noirs (films noir? I never know) are very bleak, but have "happy" endings due to requirements for bad guys to get what's coming to them. A few that have dark conclusions despite this are Ace in the Hole, Double Indemnity and Sweet Smell of Success. And a double-shot of Kubrick: Paths of Glory and The Killing. I could come up with more, but that's off the top of my head.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 21:39
|
|
|
FitFortDanga posted:Most film noirs (films noir? I never know) are very bleak, but have "happy" endings due to requirements for bad guys to get what's coming to them. A few that have dark conclusions despite this are Ace in the Hole, Double Indemnity and Sweet Smell of Success. And a double-shot of Kubrick: Paths of Glory and The Killing. Yeah I figured that America had that stupid rear end Hayes Rules and almost all films had to have some bullshit tacked on endings. Also figured noirs would be a good place to start... still like to know what that movie I talked about was.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 21:58
|
|
|
FitFortDanga posted:Most film noirs (films noir? I never know) are very bleak, but have "happy" endings due to requirements for bad guys to get what's coming to them. A few that have dark conclusions despite this are Ace in the Hole, Double Indemnity and Sweet Smell of Success. And a double-shot of Kubrick: Paths of Glory and The Killing. Don't forget The Searchers
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 22:09
|
|
|
BooDoug187 posted:Yeah I figured that America had that stupid rear end Hayes Rules and almost all films had to have some bullshit tacked on endings. Also figured noirs would be a good place to start... still like to know what that movie I talked about was. Are you sure it was in English? It sounds a bit like The Exterminating Angel to me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 22:13
|
|
|
Shatter Map posted:The scene in American Beauty where Kevin Spacey slams the asparagus plate against the wall. Does anyone else like to point out/marvel at how he managed to perfectly stick a lemon slice above the picture frame? I bet he couldn't have done that again if he tried 100 more times. Hell, that's nothing. In Alien Resurrection, when Ripley is on the other side of the basketball court and throws it behind her, without looking, and makes it? That was all her, and the FIRST ATTEMPT. The reason they cut away so fast is because the very next second one of the actors shouted "holy poo poo!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 22:32
|
|
|
Peaceful Anarchy posted:Are you sure it was in English? It sounds a bit like The Exterminating Angel to me. Don't think there were any donkeys or men with guns inside the church in that scene.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 22:43
|
|
|
Peaceful Anarchy posted:Are you sure it was in English? It sounds a bit like The Exterminating Angel to me. Heh, what? Besides ending in a church, there's no similarity at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 22:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 02:24 |
|
|
When did movies first start to have huge cast and crew lists at the end? I imagine it's probably due to union requirements and it probably happened around the mid-1970s, but when I watch a film made before that on DVD, it's always really jarring when it goes THE END -BOOM- TITLE MENU!
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2008 22:51
|
|
