There must be more ideas out there. There has to be other avenues of entertainment we have not yet travelled. I often find myself praying to the unknown deity of escapism, pleading for something different, something exciting. Then I return to an article about another 'rebooted' franchise, or a classic film remade, or another action blockbuster with the same ingredients, just a different skin. And the same goes for games, not just movies. I have seen it all before. I have experienced everything they can offer. I want more.
Have we used up all the good ideas for movies? Is it too much to ask for, to have something uncharted, something out of everybody's comfort zone? Yes, probably. What major film company is going to shell out hundreds of thousands of dollars on a risk? There was a time when they would, they did, but since the planet's economy got sick of all our moaning and buggered of to who knows where, nobody wants to spend a penny. Or a cent. Or whatever.
Technology has made huge improvements, so who can blame us for wanting to see our favourite childhood heroes brought back in high definition, or to seemingly fly without strings? Sometimes it is done well, occasionally better, but too many times it just serves to cock up our fond memories and tarnish the original film. And 3D is an ugly beast if it isn't done well - I don't think side effects of going to the cinema should be intense headaches and nausea. When I first heard of 3D movies, I fully expected to be flinching in my seat every five minutes, that things would be tearing out of the screen and stopping only inches in front of my nose. What a disappointment it was, to realise that there was just an added depth to the picture that would make my eyes work tenfold to adjust to the change. What a wonderful benefit that I had the pleasure of paying extra for.
I would like to say, though, that Avatar in 3D was fantastic. I was enveloped by this fantasy world, and after I had seen it I raved about it for weeks - until someone shattered my illusions of grandiose with the following succinct review: It's Ferngully with giant Smurfs. Wow, so it is. I don't think that was the line that brokered the deal with 20th Century Fox, but when you boil it down to it's constituent parts, it is scary how similar they are. Rainforest habitat, humans with their big bulldozers and greed, a human that is transformed into one of the natives. Which one am I talking about? The thing is, back in 1992 we didn't have the ability to make Avatar as we see it today. Cartoon animation was the best way to make a fantasy film 20 years ago (and more), not because it was more realistic but because the audience didn't expect it to be realistic, so could accept the story without the feeling of disbelief. With today's technology, anything short of photo-realism is dismissed and vast vaults of cash are poured into computer animation and rendering. Sadly, this often means that the budget is absorbed and nothing is left for i) good writing, ii) good directing and iii) good acting.
Sequels are another example of absent originality. It can be a curse for a movie to do well presently, as executives get dollar signs rolling in their eyes as they prepare for the next installment. It needn't have anything engaging in it, just the same characters/graphics/catchphrases. They don't know when to stop either. It all comes down to paper - will they make a profit? A sad fact about moviemaking: it doesn't matter if it is the best idea in the world, if there is a chance that it won't make a return on investment it won't exist. Sometimes they do make mistakes though, and a movie flops - maybe that's karma for all the great movies they didn't make because of greed.
When asked, most people have to think about what their favourite movie is. There are too many to choose from, they whine. Rubbish! There aren't enough films with the substance, direction, acting and plot required to make it into a top 10. My favourite film is Cinema Paradiso - not everybody's cup of tea and that is a real shame. It is an Italian film about a film director's childhood, and the relationships he had. It is a beautifully crafted and polished movie, and I would urge anyone who has not seen it to do so. Don't be put off by the subtitles - it actually engages you more in the film, and enables you to take in the grandeur of this classic. It doesn't rely on computer graphics, catchphrases, or any other Hollywood glitz - it is wonderful in its simplicity, even after 23 years.
No comments:
Post a Comment