|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
#21
05-17-2006, 04:56 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Remakes can be fine, hell I loved the remake of Dawn of the Dead more than the original...thats the way how you remake a classic... As long as remakes are made, there will always be an initial audience, maybe not much expectations but for the sheer curiosity value which it will generate...the sustenance comes from THAT difference I mentioned above...if its good, it ll remain in the memories "heck the remake of Dawn was on par with the original", but if its bad people will forget it and come out feeling they have been robbed...
__________________
"If you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche 
|
|
#22
05-17-2006, 05:09 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
well, i no longer see a movie without listening to a little buzz and considering the source.
my friend sees them all at advance screeners and he's pretty much dead on in the way i see horror films - so i use him for an accurate barometer...
|
|
#23
05-17-2006, 08:12 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I wait to see what all the reviews on RottenTomatoes say, I usually go with the consensus to see what I wanna see.
__________________
MISINTUPITATED- The act of removing the spine by use of fire. DEVESTED- The removal of one's vest. SCTUPP- To deficate on a woman after nonconsensual sex.
|
|
#24
05-17-2006, 04:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Fuck what the next man thinks of a movie. I prefer to judge for MYSELF.
but then i think ... nahhhhhh ... some people - a lot of people - will pay to see anything and have no concept if the movie is good or not. And there you have it. Hollywood knows that teens/young adults will go and see whatever they throw at them. They could give two shits about us harcore fans. I wouldn't even mind, really, except for the fact that like you mentioned the bad-to-good ratio of horror movies these days is at best 5:1. That's pathetic.
|
|
#25
05-17-2006, 04:04 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Define a recent movie you would consider "made for hardcore fans".
Or do you think old horror movies were made with the intent of "being for hardcore fans"?
__________________
MISINTUPITATED- The act of removing the spine by use of fire. DEVESTED- The removal of one's vest. SCTUPP- To deficate on a woman after nonconsensual sex.
|
|
#26
05-17-2006, 04:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Whether you liked it or not..."Hostel".
|
|
#27
05-17-2006, 05:37 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
MISINTUPITATED- The act of removing the spine by use of fire. DEVESTED- The removal of one's vest. SCTUPP- To deficate on a woman after nonconsensual sex.
|
|
#28
05-18-2006, 05:02 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
i said it a million times before .. the target audience - the people who actually go to films .. are kids.
appreciate the fact that when someone does make an r rated gorefest - they are not going to make much money. not too many people can affoard to run a business where they lose money. it's not about caring - its about business sense. i dont have to like it - but it's reality. to put it in perspective : lets say you opened a video store. you only wanted to stock the stuff you like. and then you realize that 99% of your customers (the population within range of your store) dont share your tastes. Do you say fuck it and go out of business - because you care so much about the 1% who dig your stuff ? How does that help them ? ... because now they dont have anything at all to rent. if you stay in business - catering to both the 1% and the 99% you'll stay in business and the 1% will have something to rent. and maybe ... just maybe .. the popular culture will change down the road some day. its better than nothing.
|
|
#29
05-18-2006, 06:30 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I agree that the first target audience today are kids...more specifically teens who have just started to dig their claws into the horror genre, and dont mind seeing some nudity and gore.
With CGI running rampant now, we get to see more of "artificial" images than original. Gone were the days when a movie like "Dead Alive" was supposedly using 5 buckets of fake blood per shot. (damn that was some movie!) But then, that was the era of classics. Now...if they remade "Dead Alive" without the Jackson touch, and with CGI, I shudder to think what it would come out like... A passable remake, perhaps?
__________________
"If you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
#30
05-18-2006, 07:29 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
you have to understand in this case - what came 1st 'the chicken or the egg'
in this case..the egg ... the kids are the only ones who can afford to go to movies or even want to these days.. so the film industry panders to them. the only exceptions are things like the da vinci code where there is so much pedestrian hype over this shit due to a combination of a poorly written 'commuter novel', a wishy washy director, and a highly bankable star. add some chritianity conspiracy bullshit suggested to the press and you have it .. the next Titanic. this is what the mass majority of adults is daring to risk their babysitting dollars on.. for adults - a movie is a 'big night out' .. not just something to do as an option to watching tv or hanging around the mall. its just not worth a $100 night to see 'the beast that ate the babysitter' to most adults ..
|
 |
|
|
