Jump to content

"Whatever happened to movies for grownups?"


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Michael Clayton came close. As an adult I prefer less gimmicky story telling. Had the idiot director told a linear story his film would have succeeded better, told a better story, and been far more dramatic. Denby clearly has a man crush on George Clooney.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If an "adult" walked into "Hey Blinkin: Vampire Hunter" and expected a serious period piece built around previously-unreleased historical accounts and facts, he was delusional The movie was clearly made for an unsophisticated audience.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is his point. In 1935, 1959 and 1972, movies were mainly for adults - not that there's anything wrong with sweet kiddie movies - but now there is hardly a film left which is neither overproduced comic spectacle, schematic rom-com or gross horror film. I can fully understand his bittersweet musings, as i myself only go out to the movies 3 times a year now - i'm not bitter about it, the many great tv productions are more comfortable to watch, anyway, but when you see all the lavish money squandered on this target-grouped bullshit, it is tragic, really. And i include movies like ICE AGE 4...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Poppycock. The studios throw plenty of money at the bona fide blockbusters, sure, but they still make plenty of "adult" only films that don't appeal to the kids and kids at heart, but which are financed by this "bullshit" because the "boring" films don't do as well at the box office.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I also can understand Denby's frustration because we all know Hollywood never made children's films in the past. Well maybe a few..., Snow White and the Se7en Dwarfs, The Blue Bird, All the Shirley Temple films, National Velvet, the Andy Hardy films, the Bowery Boy movies, all the other disney cartoons, something called Wizard of Oz.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now we're comparing DAREDEVIL and FANTASTIC FOUR part 15 with WIZARD OF OZ?

Ok, include me out.

sorry but don't remember those first two being mentioned, but considering Wizard of Oz is a timeless Hollywood classic film it is relevant to the discussion.

to me Denby is just espousing elitist bullshit. Last time I checked Hollywood is still making all sorts of films for audiences all ages.

They market to adults, children, women, men, boys, girls.

Hollywood isn't selling one genre. Summer is their big boxoffice, they also release films not directed towards teens and action fans, Magic Mike, the Master, End of Watch, Trouble with the Curve, Hope Springs, Savages, Bel Ami, For Greater Glory, People Like Us, Seaking People for the End of the World, Intouchable, Moonrise Kingdom all sought their own niche.

And Pub you brought up Abraham Lincoln Vampire Slayer, its bombed at the boxoffice, it didn't find an adult, teen or any crowd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please tell me in which category The Artist belongs: overproduced comic spectacle, schematic rom-com or gross horror film.

Or Albert Nobbs. Or Brokeback Mountain. Or Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close. Or The Tree of Life. Or Moneyball. Or The Fighter. Or Black Swan. Or Blind Side. Or Frost/Nixon.

But since I clearly don't know what I'm talking about, I'm going back to my finger paints and poop swatches.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So in a nutshell, Wojo and Joey see no difference between today and 40's, 50's or 70's cinema, whatsoever....um, ok.

And Wojo, cunningly your list includes movies which are at least 5 years old - and, i might add, most of them never or only briefly played at any of the big multiplexes near me. We have more arthouse-geared cinemas in Berlin, so i could have watched TREE OF LIFE or THE ARTIST, but their lack of exposure is staggering. And i guess in a century where we can choose from 5.000 media libraries at once it doesn't matter much, but still...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem seeing films made for adults. I have a problem seeing some of them at the theater. But distribution of films in here has always sucked.

In any case there's a problem in this discussion of overgeneralization. The films in the group of "made for adults" can be as different to each other as to the films in the group of "made for kids".

I find that I cannot retreat much into TV given how averse TV tends to be to adventure stories, science fiction and historical pieces etc. I'm not going to get Lawrence of Arabia in the TV for quite a while. Also the extreme length of many TV productions today puts me off a bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The New Yorker has some good points, but they forgot a crucial thing: Adult dramas just don't sell tickets nowadays. Unless they have a good story, recognizable actors (not stars) and are made on the cheap, they don't even break even. (George Clooney's Up in the Air and The Ides of March were profitable simply because they cost $37.5M to produce, and he was willing to defer a big upfront payment in exchange for a considerable backend deal.)

It's pure studio economics -- as well as politics -- at work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So in a nutshell, Wojo and Joey see no difference between today and 40's, 50's or 70's cinema, whatsoever....um, ok.

And Wojo, cunningly your list includes movies which are at least 5 years old - and, i might add, most of them never or only briefly played at any of the big multiplexes near me. We have more arthouse-geared cinemas in Berlin, so i could have watched TREE OF LIFE or THE ARTIST, but their lack of exposure is staggering. And i guess in a century where we can choose from 5.000 media libraries at once it doesn't matter much, but still...

I see a lot of difference, but one thing has stayed the same, they make all kinds of movies, they make good ones, great ones, bad ones, kids movies, adult movies, etc. Personally I seek out older movies as much as I seek out new ones.

The Artist's lack of exposure??? it won the Academy Award for Best picture. Tree of Life got the exposure it deserves as it's a pile of self serving crap.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh. I just thought that as long as I picked movies more recent than 1972, I would be ok. And it's your fault you live in Germany and have to whine you can't go someplace else to watch movies made for adults.

It is not ok and i doubt you have seen more than one film on this list.

The Artist's lack of exposure??? it won the Academy Award for Best picture. Tree of Life got the exposure it deserves as it's a pile of self serving crap.

It was long out of cinemas when it won the award. About TREE OF LIFE i agree, but that's beside the point i made, which both you and Wojo so dutifully ignored.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You asked if I see a difference in the movie era's. I do see a difference but it's always been a money game, and there were always blockbusters.

the main thing I see differenct is the marketing and the summer and winter season. They unload films during that time to catch as many dollars as possible so the programmed block busters are given the best possible releases.

There are still adult hits, the Help, yes last year but an adult hit as was Bridesmaids which was an adult comedy, Due Date was an adult romantic comedy, maybe Denby is talking strickly adult dramas, I'm not sure but there are quite a few adult theme films, not sex, but other issues. Up in the Air was one he mentioned but seriously it was about 3 of the most unlikable individuals portrayed in movies in the last several years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the main thing I see differenct is the marketing and the summer and winter season. They unload films during that time to catch as many dollars as possible so the programmed block busters are given the best possible releases.

Studios are realizing that people will go see good movies any time of year. Months like February, March, and October are being booked for more high profile movies rather than studio dumping ground.

Not to mention because the summer and big winter holiday spots are being booked way in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Spielberg and Lucas came along and fucked it all up.

Spielberg and Lucas as a combined creative force have never made a movie for grown-ups. The Indiana Jones movies are blockbuster action-packed love letters to the serials of their youths.

Lucas on his own has probably only made three movies geared towards adults: THX-1138, which no child will want to sit through; American Graffiti, which may be more mature than most children need to see, though it's just fine for teenagers on up that don't find it boring; and Red Tails, which is stretching the adult category since it's an action flick. But all the Star Wars movies are really kids' movies; he's said it himself.

Spielberg has proven adept at making movies for adults (Schindler's List, Munich, Saving Private Ryan (blockbuster action, pushing it), The Color Purple, etc.) as he can for children (ET, Close Encounters, Indy, AI, War of the Worlds, Tintin, etc.). I think Jaws is somewhere in the middle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if you like it MissPadme that's good, we can't all agree on what is or isn't good, or what appeals to us individually.

Joey being reasonable? :o

;)

The Artist's lack of exposure??? it won the Academy Award for Best picture.

It was long out of cinemas when it won the award.

It was actually still in theaters in my area.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There simply aren't enough of us going to the cinema anymore (Hollywood has driven us away). Let the kids have their theater. We watch TV series for grownups now.

If I end up stuck watching these TV series you have in mind I'll shoot myself.

You are still too young to understand this, Chaac, but to grownups they are like a godsend. If it wasn't for those elite TV series, I would have shot myself already.

There's no money to be made in anything that's not PG13

Hollywood is to blame. They are responsible that 'adults' have the movie taste of 13-year-olds.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There simply aren't enough of us going to the cinema anymore (Hollywood has driven us away). Let the kids have their theater. We watch TV series for grownups now.

If I end up stuck watching these TV series you have in mind I'll shoot myself.

You are still too young to understand this, Chaac, but to grownups they are like a godsend. If it wasn't for those elite TV series, I would have shot myself already.

I'm just no attracted to most of the predominant ideas and themes and genres around these supposedly quality TV shows. I would be able to go through all that stuff in a simple film, but in a whole TV series I need something else to motivate myself to see it. That's why I said that comment about science-fiction the other time.

There's no money to be made in anything that's not PG13

Hollywood is to blame. They are responsible that 'adults' have the movie taste of 13-year-olds.

I guess if you don't have Alexcremers' taste, you have the taste of a 13 year old. :lick:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just no attracted to most of the predominant ideas and themes and genres around these supposedly quality TV shows.

Neither are 13-year-olds, Chaac. See, they too would relentlessly (dis)miss all the adult themes, ideas, great writing, acting and character development of today's quality adult TV series. I mean, you are clearly part of the young audience while I am clearly part of the demographic that became disappointed with what is playing at the movies. Fortunately, TV has finally realized that there's a whole group left out in the cold. They are doing what Hollywood isn't. Besides our age, there's another difference between you me. I don't go dismiss movies as a whole. I still love movies but they are few and far between. The thing that has kept me sane the last ten years is TV.

Alex

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hollywood is to blame. They are responsible that 'adults' have the movie taste of 13-year-olds.

I can't rely on the taste of most people my age. It's pretty pointless. I feel similar about modern music, but there it's more a matter of quantity over quality.

he defeats his own argument when he cites mediocre films like Sideways, the Decendants, and Michael Clayton( a seriously flawed film with poor structure and no drama).

The films might have not been good examples, but I totally agree with everything else that he has said.

I don't even expect films to be good these days. I tend to be more sceptical.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The films might have not been good examples, but I totally agree with everything else that he has said.

Indeed, our personal rating of these movies is missing the point of the article. The fact remains, the writer goes to the multiplex only to find that it's overrun by kids movies. That doesn't mean there aren't any adult movies being made anymore but perhaps it's another case of few and far between. Also, will the multiplex in my city play The Master, Killing Them Softly or Amour (the latest Haneke, for Christ's sake!). Well, we shall see.

Alex

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear The Master is a bit of a dud...

I've heard the opposite!

Also, will the multiplex in my city play The Master, Killing Them Softly or Amour (the latest Haneke, for Christ's sake!).

That depends.

The nearest multiplex to me is playing:

-Killing Them Softly.

-Under the Hawthorn Tree (Zhang Yimou, 2010)

-The latest Woody Allen.

-Brave and a few other animated films.

-A few stupid "romantic comedies".

-Random action or horror films nobody cares about.

-Some very small films, like a Spanish silent film, a French one of 2011 I hadn't heard about, etc

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.