The great Terry Gilliam Critiques Marvel Studios

[jmc]

Yeah, you're right. When it comes to big business my default is cynical, at the end of the day they're there to extract every reluctant cent they can from consumers. Granted they do frequently provide quality products in that attempt, but more frequently it's about milking the sycophants for everything they can.

In defense of your point though, something like Apple/Google getting into film would change the landscape quite a bit, everything from financing to content would be altered because they may have more unique and accurate perspectives for the audience. That said, I'd prefer big money to stay as far away from creating culturally relevant content as possible.

The problem is big money is already there and it's already dictating what studios do. A tech company frankly has more data available to them about what consumers may want. Hollywood delivers what they think people want with not much data to back it up. I also think the tech companies will offer far more freedom for content creators because the monetary risks as aren't nearly as high.

 

[DeadPresident]

The problem is big money is already there and it's already dictating what studios do. A tech company frankly has more data available to them about what consumers may want. Hollywood delivers what they think people want with not much data to back it up. I also think the tech companies will offer far more freedom for content creators because the monetary risks as aren't nearly as high.

Yeah, true. That notion is both compelling and worrying at the same time.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Fair enough. I haven't seen it yet (just caught snippets of a copied download a friend had on) and I'm still missing out on TASM2 but I caught TWS which I thought was one of Marvel's better projects. Consensus seems to be GotG is better than TWS, possibly the novelty of the characters has something to do with that also I suppose. I am keen to see it though, it does seem to have a bit more going for it than a Transformers entry for example, so that's cool.

I really enjoyed both Cap and Guardians but for different reasons. I'm gonna marathon a bunch of the best Summer movies later this year and the I'll decide.

You're not missing anything with TASM2. Amazing Spider-Man 2 represents all the problems with Hollywood. Garfield and Stone are great, but Sony hurt this movie trying to copy Marvel by attempting to build a universe and forcing events in their script that doesn't feel organic. The result is a movie just meanders story and plotwise with a few good scenes that end up fizzling out in the end.

 

[Lilbaz]

Hollywood has become scared to take risks. Films like Donnie Darko and Pans Labyrinth took risks and paid off handsomely.

I think that they make enough money to take the odd risk and try something new. Yes quite often the movies will be terrible or just not click with audiences but we will also get some gems.

These films don't need to be high art although some of them can be. This also doesn't mean stop making big blockbusters or rom coms that people like, it just means that once in a while try a chicken vindaloo rather than a McDonalds. You might find that people prefer it.

By the way McDonalds is crap.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Hollywood has become scared to take risks. Films like Donnie Darko and Pans Labyrinth took risks and paid off handsomely.

I think that they make enough money to take the odd risk and try something new. Yes quite often the movies will be terrible or just not click with audiences but we will also get some gems.

These films don't need to be high art although some of them can be. This also doesn't mean stop making big blockbusters or rom coms that people like, it just means that once in a while try a chicken vindaloo rather than a McDonalds. You might find that people prefer it.

By the way McDonalds is crap.

Those are small budget movies. Risks are taken with those types of movies every year. It usually involves them buying it though.

 

[MrMaooz]

Didn't Edge of Tomorrow do well overseas?

It did very well. Especially in SK and China.

Final Box Office Numbers for EOT:

Domestic: $100,206,256 27.1%
+ Foreign: $269,000,000 72.9%
= Worldwide: $369,206,256

These grosses exceeded many people's expectations. I saw many people saying it would gross only 250 million WW.

 

[Lord]

I disagree with the notion that works of pop culture is instantly more forgettable than high art. Movies like Star Wars, Back to the Future, It's a Wonderful Life, and Indiana Jones are more pop culture and arguably more memorable than many works and fondly remembered than works that are considered high art. Hell, I'd say that Back to the Future and It's a Wonderful Life structurally is up there with many films that are high art, and are in some ways superior to it.

The thing is, When those films were coming out, they were new and exciting, either doing new stuff people had never seen in Cinema or taking old stuff and making them new again. New superhero films aren't doing that right now, at best you have a guy like James Cameron pushing technology forward, but films themselves have become very repetitive, i don't think adapting American Comic books is helping at all, since many of them have 75+ years of history that's constantly repeating itself.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

You're casting a wide assumption, especially considering that the 80s were dominated with muscular action heroes and ripoffs. Like I said, I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but we just came off a pretty good slate of movies.

Also, Superhero movies are not the only Hollywood genre. They're dominant one, but not the only one.

Captain America Winter Soldier and Days of Future Past did deviate from the normal Superhero movie in several ways (not fully enough to transcend the genre, it was certainly an attempt to show that superhero movies can take on subgenres), and Guardians did the Hollywood formula very well, better than most Hollywood movies today do.

 

[Lord]

I think that's what he's getting at too. The general audience (I feel) has been conditioned to find these glossy, superficial franchises enjoyable. It's one of the reasons I think movies like Godzilla 2014 or Drive got bad initial reactions is because they appear to be reproductions of the visceral actionfests that are popular and when the general audience finds out they're not they slate them. It's like ordering a Big Mac and when you get a steak with vegetables and a baked potato people are like "What the **** man!? This is horrible!!" instead of going "Hey, this isn't what I ordered?".

Don't even put Drive and Godzilla on the same level, Godzilla simply failed at doing what it wanted to do, Jaws is a good example of not showing too much, while Godzilla didn't know how to do so without making it feel as though a portion of the movie had been cut.

The trailer hyping a reboot of the original 50s Gojira, with the monster as a real disaster had the potential of being a realy good movie, what we got was just weak.

 

[Lord]

I really enjoyed Guardians. It didn't reinvent the wheel, but it did the formula it was given really well while doing sometime many tentpoles struggle with: giving a movie a personality with unique and flawed characters that are all interesting in their own right.

I disagree with that, Star-Lord was for me just another womanizing "funny guy" Gary stue character that's been getting pretty popular lately, and the power of friendship bit in the end made my eyes roll, that would even be too much for Fairy Tail.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

That doesn't mean wasn't a flawed character who wasn't interesting. We got to see briefly why he was the way he was and he had personality to him. Though I do agree the gem, I just went with it.

I never said he was a groundbreaking character.

 

[Marvolo]

Considering how Hollywood has treated Gilliam it isn't a surprise and he makes some valid points. Gilliam's story about when he met execs in Hollywood about directing a harry potter made me feel bad for him.

There has been a battle between the art and commercial side of cinema since the dawn of the medium. Blockbuster popcorn flicks is where the major studios make most of their money. Franchises and sequels are big cash cows for the industry.

Personally I dislike sequels that are just a rehash of the previous movie. I want to see the story and characters develop as well as move forward.

The flip side is some indie films are just and offbeat for the sake of it. Some directors are pretentious and think their films are challenging but they really aren't.

I do hope guys like Gilliam and cronenberg continue to make films because cinema should be diverse and those guys have brought some unique things to movies over the years.

WB was wise to pass on Terry Gilliam for Philosopher's Stone. The man just wasn't a safe bet, and Gilliam understands it whether he likes it or not. When you look at his box office takes prior to 2001 and consider his work itself its no wonder WB decided to go with Columbus. WB wanted a safe bet to jump start the Harry Potter franchise. The safest choice imaginable was Columbus. He's good with kids, had had big box office takes, and couldn't insult general audiences if he tried. Sure his two Harry Potter films were by the numbers and lacking in areas but they did what they were meant to. After he stepped down from the director's chair, WB took some chances.

About the topic at hand, Gilliam may not like the state of cinema and summer blockbusters, but they sell and people myself included enjoy them immensely. At the end of the day people just want to be entertained. Not all of cinema needs to be unique and quirky or thought provoking.

And its not like quality films aren't being made. Look at some of the films coming out in October and November. Gone Girl, Fury, Nightcrawler, Interstellar are all good looking non marvel films.

 

[DeadPresident]

Don't even put Drive and Godzilla on the same level, Godzilla simply failed at doing what it wanted to do, Jaws is a good example of not showing too much, while Godzilla didn't know how to do so without making it feel as though a portion of the movie had been cut.

The trailer hyping a reboot of the original 50s Gojira, with the monster as a real disaster had the potential of being a realy good movie, what we got was just weak.

That's a matter of opinion for me, but it wasn't what I was originally trying to communicate. All I was saying is those two are very different from typical blockbusters, albeit for very different reasons. I wasn't claiming they're on the same level of execution. I don't think Godzilla failed, although it had quite a few areas where it could have been improved I found it quite enjoyable.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Drive isn't a blockbuster. It's an indie movie. In fact, it cost only $15 million to make.

 

[Lord]

That's a matter of opinion for me, but it wasn't what I was originally trying to communicate. All I was saying is those two are very different from typical blockbusters, albeit for very different reasons. I wasn't claiming they're on the same level of execution. I don't think Godzilla failed, although it had quite a few areas where it could have been improved I found it quite enjoyable.

Pacific Rim was stated a few times in this thread as a souless blockbuster, and to be honest, i think it tried more than Godzilla, it used the usual Hollywood structure, but was more focused and put the focus on a non-sexualised female character that was well developed, then had an ending where the main protagonists didn't magicaly fall in love, but remained good friends.

It also knew how to focus properly on the action, instead of the fast editing we've been given lately.

 

[Lord]

That doesn't mean wasn't a flawed character who wasn't interesting. We got to see briefly why he was the way he was and he had personality to him. Though I do agree the gem, I just went with it.

I never said he was a groundbreaking character.

I know that having cliches doesn't make you a bad character, but he just didn't work for me, i didn't find his personality very well done because to me he felt just like another one of these types of character. Now it's even revealed that his father is probably some powerful individual.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Well, different strokes.

 

[Rocketman]

What will happen in the future (I think), is that these "super franchises" will continue shared event movies and there will be no interest or demand for solo films. So the superhero genre will be so oversaturated and overproduced at such a volume that the solo films will bomb and massively underperform.

So, for example, a bunch of Avengers films, a bunch of Justice League films, a bunch of blah-blah-blah films, etc. So no Batman film, no Thor film, no Cap film, no Iron Man film, no Superman, and so on... Just major films with all them together.

And I do see Disney acquiring Spider-Man from Sony, X-Men/Fantastic 4/Deadpool from Fox. That's only a matter of time. It WILL happen. And then you'll see Mega-Marvel-Movies that will completely kill the genre. You can only get so big before it either becomes boring, or you can't get any bigger and it's all redundant.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

What will happen in the future (I think), is that these "super franchises" will continue shared event movies and there will be no interest or demand for solo films. So the superhero genre will be so oversaturated and overproduced at such a volume that the solo films will bomb and massively underperform.

So, for example, a bunch of Avengers films, a bunch of Justice League films, a bunch of blah-blah-blah films, etc. So no Batman film, no Thor film, no Cap film, no Iron Man film, no Superman, and so on... Just major films with all them together.

And I do see Disney acquiring Spider-Man from Sony, X-Men/Fantastic 4/Deadpool from Fox. That's only a matter of time. It WILL happen. And then you'll see Mega-Marvel-Movies that will completely kill the genre. You can only get so big before it either becomes boring, or you can't get any bigger and it's all redundant.

 

[jmc]

What will happen in the future (I think), is that these "super franchises" will continue shared event movies and there will be no interest or demand for solo films. So the superhero genre will be so oversaturated and overproduced at such a volume that the solo films will bomb and massively underperform.

So, for example, a bunch of Avengers films, a bunch of Justice League films, a bunch of blah-blah-blah films, etc. So no Batman film, no Thor film, no Cap film, no Iron Man film, no Superman, and so on... Just major films with all them together.

And I do see Disney acquiring Spider-Man from Sony, X-Men/Fantastic 4/Deadpool from Fox. That's only a matter of time. It WILL happen. And then you'll see Mega-Marvel-Movies that will completely kill the genre. You can only get so big before it either becomes boring, or you can't get any bigger and it's all redundant.

You bring up a very valid point actually, these mega-franchises can only get so big and only go so far before you start repeating yourself. I often feel it's very much a short sighted approach to filmmaking. The only reason a franchise like Bond has lasted as long as it has is down to loose continuity, the infrequent release of the movies in the last 30 years, and the character being in a constant flux of change.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

There will not be only teamup movies. It goes against what made the first Avengers special in the first place. Each of the main Avengers were a given a great amount of time and focus as they had their own film. We know what they experienced in what they gain and lost.

Also, you're insane if you think WB will stop making Batman movies. Both studios will keep making solos because that how you rake in money in addition to teamups.

Also, I do not see Disney acquiring X-Men anytime in the near possible future. Fantastic Four (if the new movies does terrible numbers), maybe. Spider-Man, we'll see how this Sony plan does. X-Men? No way.

 

[Rocketman]

If only Parker Wayne wasn't on my ignore list, I could see what BS he's spewing right now. What a shame.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

If only Parker Wayne wasn't on my ignore list, I could see what BS he's spewing right now. What a shame.

If I was actually on your ignore list, how do you know that I'm talking about you?

Didn't think that one through, didn't you?

 

[Drizzle]

If only Parker Wayne wasn't on my ignore list, I could see what BS he's spewing right now. What a shame.

It wasn't BS at all. He was countering your argument, and I agree with him. There is no way in hell that there will be a time in the future where Batman will only turn up in Justice League movies. There will always be solo Batman movies.

 

[Dr. Evil]

Well, different strokes.

[YT]8L5ZLuggSpM[/YT]