Movies - The Problems with Modern Day Cinema

ROCKSTAR · 08-12-2011, 07:25 PM

Den of Geek: The 10 biggest problems with modern day cinema
Simon Brew and Ryan Lambie

1. Inaudible dialogue
Let’s start with something that puts an immediate firewall between the audience and what’s happening on the screen: the fact that the plague of inaudible dialogue is refusing to go away. Too often, thanks to the loudness of explosions all around, bad sound mixing, or a refusal to re-record dialogue in the case of certain directors, it’s impossible to hear what characters are saying on the screen.

2. The multiplex
The multiplex is reflective of the state of modern day television, in that there are hundreds of channels, that still offer surprisingly little to watch. The whole idea, in an ideal world, of one building having ten, twenty or even thirty screens devoted to film is that it can host a broad selection of programming. But that isn’t the case.

3. This.
(Picture of Martin Lawrence's Big Momma character.) Hee.

4. Too many toys for film makers to play with
It’s the proverbial kid in the candy store, and it’s a problem. This is most obviously manifested in films bloated with tedious effects sequences, and we can all name umpteen of those in a flash.

5. Spoiler-filled trailers
With the information flowing as freely as it does around the Internet, it’s becoming more and more difficult to avoid having a film spoiled for us before we get a chance to see it.

6. Shaky cameras
It really is a fine art, though, and cinema is filled with action scenes where it’s almost impossible to tell what’s going on.

7. An unwillingness to end a story
There’s nothing necessarily wrong with this practice, and we’ve no particular axe to grind against sequels or prequels. But at the same time, the days when we could expect to sit through a two-hour film with a satisfying beginning, middle and end appear to be over.

8. Movies that go on for too long
These days, even the most simplistic multiplex fodder can drag on for hours.

It’s a weird trend, and one that we’re at a loss to explain. Maybe filmmakers are trying to pack too much detail into a film, when the proper place for dozens of plot strands and characters is really TV. Perhaps movie producers think they’re giving audiences better value for money if their features plod on for hours.

9. Too much reverence, not enough originality
It feels like a long time since we sat in a multiplex and felt surprised by a director’s individuality. The last time, in fact, may have been Fight Club, where we genuinely couldn’t believe that such a film had been granted studio funding.

10. The audience
Rankling about which film is doing better than another is, of course, a way to fill the Internet many times over. But it is an indicator that modern day cinema is playing to audiences unwilling to dig too deep for interesting fare to watch. You could also throw in the fact that modern cinema audiences struggle to behave when watching a film, have a general aversion to subtitles and non-English language films, and seem bred with an unquenchable thirst for sequels.

For the complete article click here.

-------

I think this is a great list. I completely agree #2.

It also appears like too many toys, as the article puts it, has replaced compelling storytelling and good movie dialog.

ocfan27 · 08-12-2011, 08:43 PM

i agree with the list...i think that another problem is they insist on making everything 3D when it doesn't need to be

ROCKSTAR · 08-12-2011, 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ocfan27 (View Post)

i agree with the list...i think that another problem is they insist on making everything 3D when it doesn't need to be

I thought the trend would die down but so far it hasn't. What really bothers me is when a movie wasn't shot with 3D tech yet they insist on "converting" it -- which doesn't really work -- to cash in. Bad 3D can ruin a movie.

thescoobygang · 08-13-2011, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ROCKSTAR (View Post)

I thought the trend would die down but so far it hasn't. What really bothers me is when a movie wasn't shot with 3D tech yet they insist on "converting" it -- which doesn't really work -- to cash in. Bad 3D can ruin a movie.

Agreed. Even though people like to slag James Cameron for reviving 3D with Avatar, he is not responsible for all the blatant and terrible overuse of the medium. He has stated on many occasions that not all films need 3D to tell a story and that post conversion is poor quality. IMO 3D & CGI are supposed to be subtle technologies that blend in with the background & story...but most directors seem intent on making them the feature selling point. It's become quite obvious that Hollywood studios are using 3D & IMAX to prop up their box office revenue. Just look at how many recent movies have been able to gross $600 million or more. Is it really more ticket sales or just more expensive tickets?

And I agree with everything on the list...especially the one about inaudible dialogue. I think a lot of people who watch movies in the theater actually end up looking for bootleg copies on the internet because they want to "rewatch" the parts they couldn't hear or didn't catch.

~Adema~ · 08-14-2011, 02:18 AM

I totally agree. And speaking of 3D: I thought it would go away sooner than later, because there were so many viewers who didn't enjoy the 3D movies. But I noticed that now people want to watch rather 3D movies than 2D. In my theatre we ha had both 2D and 3D Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 and the 3D version had more viewers. I don't really get it. Firstly, you have to pay more and secondly, it does nothing for the story. So why? I'm still happy that Inception was kept in 2D. I think other directors and producers would have shot this movie in 3D.

Gabriela · 08-15-2011, 09:10 AM

I also agree with the list, especially # 3,5, 6, and 7.

I feel like in the last year especially there have been a number of movies in which some of the best and/or most spoilerish parts have been put in the trailer! (DH part 1 is a perfect example of this). It drives me crazy. And I hate it when they put the final scene of a movie in the trailer.

I hate that there's not enough originality anymore to not do sequels. Just because the first one is really good doesn't mean you have to continue them. I'm all for sequels if there's further story to tell or if it's different enough that you remember which film is which within the series, but for so many of them, that's not the case....it's that there's more money to be made.

SlowburnDarkly · 08-15-2011, 08:43 PM

I'm in agreement with this list, and also on the 3D discussion. It certainly adds nothing to the story, and I think people are attracted to the mere novelty. As if going to the movies isn't enough, the yuppie populous insists on sitting around with cheap plastic glasses. I just don't see the point. It doesn't even look that good, and has anyone else noticed that you don't even need the glasses to watch the film? Why are we paying $3 for a $0.15 pair of glasses? Stupidity.

I also agree on the originality of Hollywood. As a writer myself (as a hobby and form of expression), I constantly come up with interesting ideas just from single or double lines. I could elaborate on this idea and make a film out of it, and it would be awesome. There would be none of this excess and there would be actual meat to it. It seems, however, that few people in privileged positions have simple ideas such as these. I've heard a million times that everything has been done before, and that is true in theory, but there is quite a bit that is seemingly never touched on by Hollywood anymore-- not just film ideas, but styles and takes on anything.

I don't believe that the people are obsessed with sequels, but I do think that we'll go and see them out of hope. We look back on "The Empire Strikes Back" and we think 'Huh, maybe "Pirates IV" will be like "Empire".' We have faith when we should not, we blow our money on these things when we should not, and that gives Hollywood the message that we like what they're spitting out.

ROCKSTAR · 08-16-2011, 08:48 PM

Great discussion guys!

I agree that we keep watching sequels hoping for a good movie.

On 3D:

I avoid going to 3D shows now unless word of mouth is excellent. But usually it's unnecessary and distracting.

**paper rings** · 08-18-2011, 03:08 AM

I spent $30 at the movies for a large popcorn and my ticket to see Glee 3D.

ROCKSTAR · 10-19-2011, 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lulu-144 (View Post)

I spent $30 at the movies for a large popcorn and my ticket to see Glee 3D.

That's so insane! It's so much cheaper to wait for the DVDs now.

Forum Affiliates
The Room Fansite, Daily Marvel, Geek the Geek, FYeah Female Leads, Female Directed Films, Sidney Prescottz, Daily Iron Family
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page


Fan Forum > General Discussion > Movies > The Problems with Modern Day Cinema