As good as The Wire. Better really, if you like watching girls who can beat up boys, which my wife does apparently. It is also too good to binge-watch, since sleeping on it reveals more about what happened and why.
As good as The Wire. Better really, if you like watching girls who can beat up boys, which my wife does apparently. It is also too good to binge-watch, since sleeping on it reveals more about what happened and why.
Unforgettable movie, set immediately after WW 2. Every character is a little insane, some because of the war, some in the way they have always been. On Amazon.
The town I grew up in had 2 cinemas and both had reserved one night per week for what we called "Programmkino" or "Autorenfilme". Days long gone (1970s-80s), now every cinema in this country is struggling hard to survive at all, and that clearly is a pre-covid symptom, due to technical development of internet-streaming / home-entertainment.
When this covid shutdown began, we added Disney+ to our streaming services (already have Netflix & Prime). It's been a great value (it includes Star Wars, National Geographic, etc.). Then Disney decided they needed to start releasing new movies so they put Mulan out on "Disney+ Premier" for another $30. Which seems outrageous but to be fair, we would have spent that in the theater to see it, even though the movie will be "free" on Disney+ come December. We invited people to come watch it in the backyard, projected onto the side of the garage via a $150 TV Projector, using a little guitar amplifier as a loudspeaker. Pretty cool. It's not a really attractive option for tonight since there's a winter storm warning issued (was 100°F Saturday). But yes, it seems obvious that "going to the movies" is something our kids will tell their kids about and it'll be as ridiculous as using the telephone to speak to people...
The town I grew up in had 2 cinemas and both had reserved one night per week for what we called "Programmkino" or "Autorenfilme". Days long gone (1970s-80s), now every cinema in this country is struggling hard to survive at all, and that clearly is a pre-covid symptom, due to technical development of internet-streaming / home-entertainment.
When this covid shutdown began, we added Disney+ to our streaming services (already have Netflix & Prime). It's been a great value (it includes Star Wars, National Geographic, etc.). Then Disney decided they needed to start releasing new movies so they put Mulan out on "Disney+ Premier" for another $30. Which seems outrageous but to be fair, we would have spent that in the theater to see it, even though the movie will be "free" on Disney+ come December. We invited people to come watch it in the backyard, projected onto the side of the garage via a $150 TV Projector, using a little guitar amplifier as a loudspeaker. Pretty cool. It's not a really attractive option for tonight since there's a winter storm warning issued (was 100°F Saturday). But yes, it seems obvious that "going to the movies" is something our kids will tell their kids about and it'll be as ridiculous as using the telephone to speak to people...
OK... this movie will be only on aviation enthusiasts movie lists (with the Flight of The Phoenix with James Stewart and Hardy Krüger probably somewhere in the top):
Those Magnificent Men in their Flying Machines; Or, How I Flew from London to Paris in 25 Hours 11 Minutes
BUT! I am done with CGI... Gone are the days when you needed an old aircraft you needed to build a replica, and fly it!
After almost 60! years these replicas still fly...
For those interested. This is a replica of a 1910 AVRO Triplane. Below it is a 1910 Bristol Boxkite replica (copied from Farman, both similar to a Wright Flyer).
The first article reminded me of our discussion, today. BTW it's from a British tabloid (not American, so much for that). Yet I thought he did a really good job in American Sniper (B. Cooper).
As for the "devil's advocate", you may be bloody well right. Some remakes were even better than the originals. The exception seems to prove the rule, though. The lack of inspiration seems to come with a shortage in new, creative ways of story-telling. In the 1980s I think it was, when Hollyweird found out through a great survey, that at least 20-25% of the population were interested in fantasy, sci-fi, supernatural, mythical & spiritual topics and the like, whereas a majority surveyed was still lingering on traditional themes (sex & crime, etc.). It was after that, when LOTR, Harry Potter etc. came up as novelties in the movie world, and we all know of their "great artistic score".
A lot of directors, critics, and actors pointed to the "Star Wars" franchise as the beginning of the end of (particularly American) cinema, for many of the reasons that Scorcese cited. I forgot who said it but a critic once referred to 1977 and Star Wars as something like "the unseen death of American cinema" (I'll have to find the quote). I can see why: it made film-making become largely serialized output (Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Rambo, Die Hard, etc...) replacing what used to be pre-movie serials of the 1940s and '50s. Those films took up so much theater space - even numerous spots in multiplexes - that smaller films could only be seen in "specialty" theaters, and those sorts of venues were usually only in larger cities. The comic-book franchises are just a more concentrated version of that, with more "marquee" directors and actors.
Starwars surely was the one of the biggest early franchises in the movie industry. I remember this being in the press the late 1970s, and headlines about mind-boggling returns in merchandising, etc. - I guess Lucas Films was beating Disney merchandise sales (that had been there for decades) by lengths, then.
The town I grew up in had 2 cinemas and both had reserved one night per week for what we called "Programmkino" or "Autorenfilme". Days long gone (1970s-80s), now every cinema in this country is struggling hard to survive at all, and that clearly is a pre-covid symptom, due to technical development of internet-streaming / home-entertainment.
The first article reminded me of our discussion, today. BTW it's from a British tabloid (not American, so much for that). Yet I thought he did a really good job in American Sniper (B. Cooper).
As for the "devil's advocate", you may be bloody well right. Some remakes were even better than the originals. The exception seems to prove the rule, though. The lack of inspiration seems to come with a shortage in new, creative ways of story-telling. In the 1980s I think it was, when Hollyweird found out through a great survey, that at least 20-25% of the population were interested in fantasy, sci-fi, supernatural, mythical & spiritual topics and the like, whereas a majority surveyed was still lingering on traditional themes (sex & crime, etc.). It was after that, when LOTR, Harry Potter etc. came up as novelties in the movie world, and we all know of their "great artistic score".
A lot of directors, critics, and actors pointed to the "Star Wars" franchise as the beginning of the end of (particularly American) cinema, for many of the reasons that Scorcese cited. I forgot who said it but a critic once referred to 1977 and Star Wars as something like "the unseen death of American cinema" (I'll have to find the quote). I can see why: it made film-making become largely serialized output (Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Rambo, Die Hard, etc...) replacing what used to be pre-movie serials of the 1940s and '50s. Those films took up so much theater space - even numerous spots in multiplexes - that smaller films could only be seen in "specialty" theaters, and those sorts of venues were usually only in larger cities. The comic-book franchises are just a more concentrated version of that, with more "marquee" directors and actors.
Just another 2 American articles expressing a certain sentiment. Power, energy, and spirit in movie-making are still around, but not necessarily in mass attractions (perhaps they never were). Commerce does not mirror the arts in film-making, much less do the traditional glamor-shows the industry has put on, esp. since streaming tech arrived to take their butter.
Eventually, I'll be coming up with a thread on "foreign films", when I find time to do so.
That's often the justifiable criticism of Hollywood - often has been, but Bradley Cooper - "his illustrious career as an actor and director"? Maybe it's just me but I've yet to be particularity impressed by anything he's done. He seems like your standard, hack "movie star" - the 5th or 6th remake of "A Star Is Born"? That's about the same as "comic-book-franchise" movies. To play "devil's advocate", not everything was better 40 or 50 or 60 years ago - it just often seems that way - often to me as well.
The first article reminded me of our discussion, today. BTW it's from a British tabloid (not American, so much for that). Yet I thought he did a really good job in American Sniper (B. Cooper).
As for the "devil's advocate", you may be bloody well right. Some remakes were even better than the originals. The exception seems to prove the rule, though. The lack of inspiration seems to come with a shortage in new, creative ways of story-telling. In the 1980s I think it was, when Hollyweird found out through a great survey, that at least 20-25% of the population were interested in fantasy, sci-fi, supernatural, mythical & spiritual topics and the like, whereas a majority surveyed was still lingering on traditional themes (sex & crime, etc.). It was after that, when LOTR, Harry Potter etc. came up as novelties in the movie world, and we all know of their "great artistic score".
Just another 2 American articles expressing a certain sentiment. Power, energy, and spirit in movie-making are still around, but not necessarily in mass attractions (perhaps they never were). Commerce does not mirror the arts in film-making, much less do the traditional glamor-shows the industry has put on, esp. since streaming tech arrived to take their butter.
Eventually, I'll be coming up with a thread on "foreign films", when I find time to do so.
That's often the justifiable criticism of Hollywood - often has been, but Bradley Cooper - "his illustrious career as an actor and director"? Maybe it's just me but I've yet to be particularity impressed by anything he's done. He seems like your standard, hack "movie star" - the 5th or 6th remake of "A Star Is Born"? That's about the same as "comic-book-franchise" movies. To play "devil's advocate", not everything was better 40 or 50 or 60 years ago - it just often seems that way - often to me as well.
Just another 2 American articles expressing a certain sentiment. Power, energy, and spirit in movie-making are still around, but not necessarily in mass attractions (perhaps they never were). Commerce does not mirror the arts in film-making, much less do the traditional glamor-shows the industry has put on, esp. since streaming tech arrived to take their butter.
Eventually, I'll be coming up with a thread on "foreign films", when I find time to do so.
Well, how many voters, as time goes on, will have experienced movies from the old days, like the original Blob, or Thing, or Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte? Not that those are great, but that the exposure goes away as time goes on but people don't.
Yeah, it's what the movie industry keeps feeding itself of. Just imagine how many iterations (remakes) so many 'blockbusters' have been going through. Very often, the older ones are much better than the latest ones, and the average number of warhorse remakes must already be two digits, or so it seems to feel...
Sherlock Holmes novels, written in the 19th century e.g. are probably among the most reiterated stories of all times. If one has read the Lord Of The Rings and The Hobbit novels, the late movie trilogies bear very little resemblance and aren't able to compete with the novels, not by eons... and yet they're in the list, among the top rated movies of all time. A different point in case, I know.
There are many positive examples, too, but these usually run beyond mainstream. (Just thinking of this one.)
It can "show" us something... there's a big show behind the show that keeps telling of lacking inspiration.
Well to be fair - that list is based upon people's ratings of movies which is really something different than what (some of those same) people may think are the best movies of all time. "Top-Rated" really means "most popular on out site". Bud Light is the largest selling - most popular - beer in the US; no one (not even a shill for Anheuser-Busch) would argue that it is the best. Movie studios are in business to make money-making movies, not art. I don't think there's much more of a lack of inspiration from contemporary directors, actors, and writers than there was of those in prior eras - with a few possible exceptions. Don't forget, there have been many lousy films made since the advent of film-making, many made with purely monetary aspirations.
Totally get it. Seems, the votes are given by young people. I've observed this list over decades, and how it is changing constantly (except for very few titles remaining in the top 20 or so). Reminds me of sumthin I read recently, that for the first time ever, newer generations appear to be less smart and educated now. Sheesh... no wonder my kids don't care to learn Latin, Greek, and basic(!) maths.
What can we do?
Yeah, maybe somewhat younger people to some extent - not teenagers necessarily. I guess it's a matter of which demographic groups bother to fill out reviews and rate titles on the IMDB website after watching a movie.
Those "demographic groups" do definitely go after the latest Hollywood blockbusters. I can tell you that for sure. You can almost watch these titles rise and fall on the list, if you keep a steadier eye on it...
For more than 20 yrs now, 'Shawshank Redemption" is in the top 10, which used to be led by "12 Angry Men" for many years...
Well, how many voters, as time goes on, will have experienced movies from the old days, like the original Blob, or Thing, or Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte? Not that those are great, but that the exposure goes away as time goes on but people don't.
Yeah, it's what the movie industry keeps feeding itself of. Just imagine how many iterations (remakes) so many 'blockbusters' have been going through. Very often, the older ones are much better than the latest ones, and the average number of warhorse remakes must already be two digits, or so it seems to feel...
Sherlock Holmes novels, written in the 19th century e.g. are probably among the most reiterated stories of all times. If one has read the Lord Of The Rings and The Hobbit novels, the late movie trilogies bear very little resemblance and aren't able to compete with the novels, not by eons... and yet they're in the list, among the top rated movies of all time. A different point in case, I know.
There are many positive examples, too, but these usually run beyond mainstream. (Just thinking of this one.)
It can "show" us something... there's a big show behind the show that keeps telling of lacking inspiration.
Totally get it. Seems, the votes are given by young people. I've observed this list over decades, and how it is changing constantly (except for very few titles remaining in the top 20 or so). Reminds me of sumthin I read recently, that for the first time ever, newer generations appear to be less smart and educated now. Sheesh... no wonder my kids don't care to learn Latin, Greek, and basic(!) maths.
What can we do?
Yeah, maybe somewhat younger people to some extent - not teenagers necessarily. I guess it's a matter of which demographic groups bother to fill out reviews and rate titles on the IMDB website after watching a movie.
Those "demographic groups" do definitely go after the latest Hollywood blockbusters. I can tell you that for sure. You can almost watch these titles rise and fall on the list, if you keep a steadier eye on it...
For more than 20 yrs now, 'Shawshank Redemption" is in the top 10, which used to be led by "12 Angry Men" for many years...
Well, how many voters, as time goes on, will have experienced movies from the old days, like the original Blob, or Thing, or Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte? Not that those are great, but that the exposure goes away as time goes on but people don't.
Totally get it. Seems, the votes are given by young people. I've observed this list over decades, and how it is changing constantly (except for very few titles remaining in the top 20 or so). Reminds me of sumthin I read recently, that for the first time ever, newer generations appear to be less smart and educated now. Sheesh... no wonder my kids don't care to learn Latin, Greek, and basic(!) maths.
What can we do?
Yeah, maybe somewhat younger people to some extent - not teenagers necessarily. I guess it's a matter of which demographic groups bother to fill out reviews and rate titles on the IMDB website after watching a movie.
Those "demographic groups" do definitely go after the latest Hollywood blockbusters. I can tell you that for sure. You can almost watch these titles rise and fall on the list, if you keep a steadier eye on it...
For more than 20 yrs now, 'Shawshank Redemption" is in the top 10, which used to be led by "12 Angry Men" for many years...
Totally get it. Seems, the votes are given by young people. I've observed this list over decades, and how it is changing constantly (except for very few titles remaining in the top 20 or so). Reminds me of sumthin I read recently, that for the first time ever, newer generations appear to be less smart and educated now. Sheesh... no wonder my kids don't care to learn Latin, Greek, and basic(!) maths.
What can we do?
Yeah, maybe somewhat younger people to some extent - not teenagers necessarily. I guess it's a matter of which demographic groups bother to fill out reviews and rate titles on the IMDB website after watching a movie.
