John Matrix said:

---

Gig-Em2003 said:

---

Having James Cameron on the sidelines for literally 3 decades focused almost solely on Avatar has likely robbed us of some great original content. Who knows what might have been.

---

I'm glad I'm not the only who feels this way. I just watched True Lies the other day, and it reminded me that Cameron, for al of his visionary credentials, really just started out as a schlocky, badass action director. Instead of dedicating his life to tech to tell a kind of mediocre story (Avatar), why not go back to his roots and just direct a lean and mean old school action movie.

---

Don't most movie directors do the films that make money so they can get to the point of their career where they can make the movies they really want to make?

I love True Lies as well, but Cameron would be crucified for the way women are treated in that movie if it came out today.

Heck, I'd be happy if Cameron was just as prolific as Nolan, who hasn't directed that many movies. After Tenet, Nolan will have directed 11 movies in 22 years. Cameron has directed 8 movies since 1981! I'm counting Piranha II. Otherwise its 7 since 1984. 7 movies in last 35 years. And of course, only two movies since 1997.

MuckRaker96 said:

---

John Matrix said:

---

Gig-Em2003 said:

---

Having James Cameron on the sidelines for literally 3 decades focused almost solely on Avatar has likely robbed us of some great original content. Who knows what might have been.

---

I'm glad I'm not the only who feels this way. I just watched True Lies the other day, and it reminded me that Cameron, for al of his visionary credentials, really just started out as a schlocky, badass action director. Instead of dedicating his life to tech to tell a kind of mediocre story (Avatar), why not go back to his roots and just direct a lean and mean old school action movie.

---

Don't most movie directors do the films that make money so they can get to the point of their career where they can make the movies they really want to make?

I love True Lies as well, but Cameron would be crucified for the way women are treated in that movie if it came out today.

---

Oh, without a doubt. Every director in Hollywood probably wants to be where Cameron, Nolan, Spielberg, etc. are in making anything they want with absolute freedom. You're also right in that the reason those directors do films like Terminator 2, The Dark Knight Rises, and The Lost World, etc. so that they can get a chance to do those films-one for them, one for me. I just really dig it when artists-whether in film, music, etc. fo back of their roots on occasion. Sam Raimi did that when he made Drag Me From Hell, and I loved it. Cameron can still do a million Avatars and maybe, instead of doing like 8 of them, do one low-budget film with the energy and ingenuity of the first Terminator.

Sex Panther said:

---

Disney makes cartoons of all their beloved live action classics


Also all the characters are gay

---

And gender roles reversed or is that for 2021?

91_Aggie said:

---

I don't see Dune as ever being that big as a movie franchise

I know it's got its rabid fan following, but that fan following is smaller than I think that group thinks it is.

---

We know it's small. We like it that way. We are smarter than you.

John Matrix said:

---

texagbeliever said:

---

Does John Wick count as new? Kind of reminds me of MI or Bourne type series.

---

I love Jon Wick, but that'll never get to the popularity level of a Star Wars or Marvel.

---

I don't know, if you would have told me in 2001 that The Fast and the Furious would turn into one of the biggest franchises in history and have 9 films in it I would have laughed really hard, yet here we are.

I dont think fantastic four will ever be good, even in the MCU. I know its stan Lee's favorite team, but its boring as sht.



Speaking of which I am a little surprised there havent been studios getting exclusive rights from entire catalogs of authors. I remember when everyone was grabbing for Philip k dick properties. But I'm not seeing companies getting exclusive rights to an authors works.

Sooner or later studios are going to try and make video game movies again. They stopped trying for a while after a bunch of them stunk.

Quad Dog said:

---

Sooner or later studios are going to try and make video game movies again. They stopped trying for a while after a bunch of them stunk.

---

In the last five years: Need for Speed, Hitman, Warcraft, Assassins Creed, Resident Evil, Tomb Raider, Rampage and Detective Pikachu. Next year there's Sonic and Uncharted.

Good point, guess it's already started.

And Illumination is doing a Super Mario animated movie.

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

And Illumination is doing a Super Mario animated movie.

---

I rather see the sequel to the live action Mario film. It was so campy it's a masterpiece.

In my opinion, the reason a lot of these franchises are failing, or new franchises are having issues, is because in the film world, with big budgets and big screens, directors and producers are choosing spectacle over storytelling. This is also the reason I think people were so upset with the GOT final season. Marvel has been one of the only film franchises to balance this well over the long haul, and they are basically following the TV model to do it.

With streaming TV shows and limited series, long form storytelling is really where it's at right now. You can tell a more complex, interesting story in 8-13 episodes as opposed to 90-120 minutes. People have really fallen in love with that, so the only thing to get them to the theater is spectacle, something really worth seeing on the big screen. The problem is, when you tell big stories, you lose the character moments that drive audiences to fall in love with a film. So you are trading longevity with box office numbers, and if you are a new franchise, then the word of mouth tanks any box office legs you may have had (if that makes sense).

So, I actually think the next thing in movies is exhibition of restored older films. With all these studios coming up with streaming services, they could pull some of their popular older films from the catalog, restore them (be that picture, sound, or coloring...etc.) and release them in theaters, giving a discount ticket to those that subscribe to their streaming service or something.

I also think that at some point (and I can't figure out how this would work exactly) that theaters are going to be able to screen any movie by appointment. So if you get in the mood to watch Jurassic Park, you can pay some money to see it in a theater instead of in your home (which would totally be worth it).

Other than that, I think movies (as a format) are going to be on the decline for the next several years, unless or until they can get out of the franchise rut somehow. All the good original storytelling is happening on TV these days, and ultimately, that is what audiences want. We may pay to see spectacle on the big screen, but we fall in love with characters and stories, not CGI.

veryfuller said:

---

So, I actually think the next thing in movies is exhibition of restored older films. With all these studios coming up with streaming services, they could pull some of their popular older films from the catalog, restore them (be that picture, sound, or coloring...etc.) and release them in theaters, giving a discount ticket to those that subscribe to their streaming service or something.

---

OR... They just go ahead and remake their classics. Gone with the Wind (2021), Ben Hur (2022), Citizen Kane (2023).

Remastering doesn't generate much excitement. Rehashing old material is the new hotness,... and I hate it.

Here's a radical idea for a new trend in movies: stories about normal people in difficult situations who find the resources within themselves to make things better.

Props to the Marvel universe, but it's all the same story: a crisis arises and an individual (preferably White, preferably male) comes forth to save the day. This conditions audiences to look for resolutions to their problems to suddenly appear out of a clear blue sky.

ro828 said:

---

Here's a radical idea for a new trend in movies: stories about normal people in difficult situations who find the resources within themselves to make things better.

Props to the Marvel universe, but it's all the same story: a crisis arises and an individual (preferably White, preferably male) comes forth to save the day. This conditions audiences to look for resolutions to their problems to suddenly appear out of a clear blue sky.

---

I'm sorry the source material comes from white Male authors writing to a white Male audience.

Please show us the intriguing stories of the transexual Ethiopian jews and let's get the film made.

But the interesting bit here is that many of these groups have very little to add to storytelling except "I'm a victim". So what does Hollywood do? They take existing IP and make them female or black, or in 007s instance both.

Ffs, tell us an original story.

The Debt said:

---

ro828 said:

---

Here's a radical idea for a new trend in movies: stories about normal people in difficult situations who find the resources within themselves to make things better.

Props to the Marvel universe, but it's all the same story: a crisis arises and an individual (preferably White, preferably male) comes forth to save the day. This conditions audiences to look for resolutions to their problems to suddenly appear out of a clear blue sky.

---

I'm sorry the source material comes from white Male authors writing to a white Male audience.

Please show us the intriguing stories of the transexual Ethiopian jews and let's get the film made.

But the interesting bit here is that many of these groups have very little to add to storytelling except "I'm a victim". So what does Hollywood do? They take existing IP and make them female or black, or in 007s instance both.

Ffs, tell us an original story.

---

Wow, missed the point and a healthy dose of racism.

Sine poena nulla lex.

Par for the course for The Debt.

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

The Debt said:

---

ro828 said:

---

Here's a radical idea for a new trend in movies: stories about normal people in difficult situations who find the resources within themselves to make things better.

Props to the Marvel universe, but it's all the same story: a crisis arises and an individual (preferably White, preferably male) comes forth to save the day. This conditions audiences to look for resolutions to their problems to suddenly appear out of a clear blue sky.

---

I'm sorry the source material comes from white Male authors writing to a white Male audience.

Please show us the intriguing stories of the transexual Ethiopian jews and let's get the film made.

But the interesting bit here is that many of these groups have very little to add to storytelling except "I'm a victim". So what does Hollywood do? They take existing IP and make them female or black, or in 007s instance both.

Ffs, tell us an original story.

---

Wow, missed the point and a healthy dose of racism.

---

Person 1: <brings up race>
Person 2: <discusses that assertion>
Peanut Gallery: "there goes Person 2 talking about race again."

No wonder Hollywood cant think of anything new, its filled with people who cant track with a simple conversation. Maybe if my posts had more baysplosions!

I think the Old Man War saga would be cool.

The Debt said:

---

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

The Debt said:

---

ro828 said:

---

Here's a radical idea for a new trend in movies: stories about normal people in difficult situations who find the resources within themselves to make things better.

Props to the Marvel universe, but it's all the same story: a crisis arises and an individual (preferably White, preferably male) comes forth to save the day. This conditions audiences to look for resolutions to their problems to suddenly appear out of a clear blue sky.

---

I'm sorry the source material comes from white Male authors writing to a white Male audience.

Please show us the intriguing stories of the transexual Ethiopian jews and let's get the film made.

But the interesting bit here is that many of these groups have very little to add to storytelling except "I'm a victim". So what does Hollywood do? They take existing IP and make them female or black, or in 007s instance both.

Ffs, tell us an original story.

---

Wow, missed the point and a healthy dose of racism.

---

Person 1: <brings up race>
Person 2: <discusses that assertion>
Peanut Gallery: "there goes Person 2 talking about race again."

No wonder Hollywood cant think of anything new, its filled with people who cant track with a simple conversation. Maybe if my posts had more baysplosions!

---

Or more idiotic assertions like "white male writers are only able/capable/interested in writing white male characters" and "white male audiences only care about stories with white male leads". Your own racism implies serious flaws in the capabilities of white men and ignores the fact that white popular culture has been idolizing black athletes and musicians for at least 100yrs.

The Debt said:

---

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

The Debt said:

---

ro828 said:

---

Here's a radical idea for a new trend in movies: stories about normal people in difficult situations who find the resources within themselves to make things better.

Props to the Marvel universe, but it's all the same story: a crisis arises and an individual (preferably White, preferably male) comes forth to save the day. This conditions audiences to look for resolutions to their problems to suddenly appear out of a clear blue sky.

---

I'm sorry the source material comes from white Male authors writing to a white Male audience.

Please show us the intriguing stories of the transexual Ethiopian jews and let's get the film made.

But the interesting bit here is that many of these groups have very little to add to storytelling except "I'm a victim". So what does Hollywood do? They take existing IP and make them female or black, or in 007s instance both.

Ffs, tell us an original story.

---

Wow, missed the point and a healthy dose of racism.

---

Person 1: <brings up race>
Person 2: <discusses that assertion>
Peanut Gallery: "there goes Person 2 talking about race again."

No wonder Hollywood cant think of anything new, its filled with people who cant track with a simple conversation. Maybe if my posts had more baysplosions!

---

Except that merely "discussing that assertion" and "talking about race" are not all that you did. Stereotyping "many" racial groups by saying "they have very little to add to storytelling" IS racist. Straight up, no question. It's the same thing as a poster in another thread yesterday alluding to black people's "lack of culture" as a reason there aren't more stories about black people, which is an utterly insane statement. There are a handful of posters on this board - you included - who are constantly doing this. You make clearly racist or ridiculously stereotypical comments about a group of people (minorities, "libs," you name it), get called out on it time and time again, and your defense is ALWAYS, "Why are you upset with ME? I was just having a conversation?!" It's sickening and ugly and is becoming embarrassingly prevalent on this board.

Quote:

---

Or more idiotic assertions like "white male writers are only able/capable/interested in writing white male characters" and "white male audiences only care about stories with white male leads". Your own racism implies serious flaws in the capabilities of white men and ignores the fact that white popular culture has been idolizing black athletes and musicians for at least 100yrs.

---

"I'll take things The Debt never said for $400, Alex"

It's cute you have to paraphrase my words to fit you're own bigotry. Go back 50 years. Who wrote comics? What demographics are those heros? What demographic was buying comics?

That's what "source material" means. If you cant grasp that, I cant help you.

Making films portraying blacks as eternal victims of X,Y,Z is not adding anything to any culture or telling audiences something they havent heard for the millionth time.

I CONTINUE to say tell us original stories. Tell us some African myths, tell us the story of Mansa Masu one of the greatest emperors in history. "No, let's make, Englishman, James Bond black."

I'm saying "please do something original" and you're saying "they have nothing original but changing the pigment of existing IP"

Except that you're painting "many" of these "groups" with this "victimhood cinema" label or whatever the hell you're talking about, when, sure, those films exist, but they're not in any way the primary subject or source material of minority-focused films. Again, you're STEREOTYPING to make a non-existent point.

Also, people making the same argument you are almost always say, "They should make their own movies! They should make their own myths!" And sure, in a perfect world, minorities would be able to make their "own movies" any time they wanted and have them do gang busters at the box office, but that's not the world we live in. IP - intellectual property - is what currently rules cinema; movies and shows based on PRE-EXISTING ideas/properties with built-in audiences. These types of movies and shows are the safest bets for executives afraid of losing their jobs. It's a sh*tty situation, but it is what it is for now. Chances are, an original, minority-focused story/myth isn't going to succeed at the box office in the same way an original, white-focused story/myth isn't going to succeed at the box office. Not because of race, but because neither is based on something audiences are already familiar with. So, given the current landscape, one of the only ways for studios to exercise inclusion - whether for money or for virtue - is to do what Disney did with The Little Mermaid. Again, it's not ideal, but it's currently the only way that makes financial sense. I love how so many people's reaction to that news was simply, "They should make their OWN mermaid movie with a black mermaid!" Yeah, as if anyone would show up to watch an original mermaid movie about a teenage mermaid that wasn't called The Little Mermaid. And even if they would, a studio isn't going to take that chance, no matter the skin color of the lead.

TCTTS said:

---

Except that you're painting "many" of these "groups" with this "victimhood cinema" label or whatever the hell you're talking about, when, sure, those films exist, but they're not in any way the primary subject or source material of minority-focused films. Again, you're STEREOTYPING to make a non-existent point.

Also, people making the same argument you are almost always say, "They should make their own movies! They should make their own myths!" And sure, in a perfect world, minorities would be able to make their "own movies" any time they wanted and have them do gang busters at the box office, but that's not the world we live in. IP - intellectual property - is what currently rules cinema; movies and shows based on PRE-EXISTING ideas/properties with built-in audiences. These types of movies and shows are the safest bets for executives afraid of losing their jobs. It's a sh*tty situation, but it is what it is for now. Chances are, an original, minority-focused story/myth isn't going to succeed at the box office in the same way an original, white-focused story/myth isn't going to succeed at the box office. Not because of race, but because neither is based on something audiences are already familiar with. So, given the current landscape, one of the only ways for studios to exercise inclusion - whether for money or for virtue - is to do what Disney did with The Little Mermaid. Again, it's not ideal, but it's currently the only way that makes financial sense. I love how so many people's reaction to that news was simply, "They should make their OWN mermaid movie with a black mermaid!" Yeah, as if anyone would show up to watch an original mermaid movie about a teenage mermaid that wasn't called The Little Mermaid. And even if they would, a studio isn't going to take that chance, no matter the skin color of the lead.

---

You know how I can tell that TheDebt is racist?

He could make his argument about a lack of original stories without bringing race into it... but he can't. He has to take every chance he gets to express his very very thinly veiled racist stereotypes. Any chance he has to talk about the beliefs that he surely think that PC Libtards won't let him say in public have to be shoehorned into any other subject he can find.

I agree that there is a lack of original storytelling at the highest budget levels of movie making... it has absolutely nothing to do with race.

Splash cost $8million and grossed over $60million. Dont tell me it's too expensive to make live action mermaid film with black talent.

You're just making excuses for lazy studios.

sequel after sequel after sequel ...then a reboot to start the process over again...

Hollywood is devoid of original thought and movie studios are afraid to take risks...

The next BIG thing will be screens on multiple visual planes (above, left and right) and/or holographic projection (think about a fight sequence moving off the screen and down the aisles).

I didnt bring up the race of superheroes, buddy. ro decided that would be an salient part of his/her point.

TMoney2007 said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Except that you're painting "many" of these "groups" with this "victimhood cinema" label or whatever the hell you're talking about, when, sure, those films exist, but they're not in any way the primary subject or source material of minority-focused films. Again, you're STEREOTYPING to make a non-existent point.

Also, people making the same argument you are almost always say, "They should make their own movies! They should make their own myths!" And sure, in a perfect world, minorities would be able to make their "own movies" any time they wanted and have them do gang busters at the box office, but that's not the world we live in. IP - intellectual property - is what currently rules cinema; movies and shows based on PRE-EXISTING ideas/properties with built-in audiences. These types of movies and shows are the safest bets for executives afraid of losing their jobs. It's a sh*tty situation, but it is what it is for now. Chances are, an original, minority-focused story/myth isn't going to succeed at the box office in the same way an original, white-focused story/myth isn't going to succeed at the box office. Not because of race, but because neither is based on something audiences are already familiar with. So, given the current landscape, one of the only ways for studios to exercise inclusion - whether for money or for virtue - is to do what Disney did with The Little Mermaid. Again, it's not ideal, but it's currently the only way that makes financial sense. I love how so many people's reaction to that news was simply, "They should make their OWN mermaid movie with a black mermaid!" Yeah, as if anyone would show up to watch an original mermaid movie about a teenage mermaid that wasn't called The Little Mermaid. And even if they would, a studio isn't going to take that chance, no matter the skin color of the lead.

---

You know how I can tell that TheDebt is racist?

He could make his argument about a lack of original stories without bringing race into it... but he can't. He has to take every chance he gets to express his very very thinly veiled racist stereotypes. Any chance he has to talk about the beliefs that he surely think that PC Libtards won't let him say in public have to be shoehorned into any other subject he can find.

I agree that there is a lack of original storytelling at the highest budget levels of movie making... it has absolutely nothing to do with race.

---

Yep. Very well said. And he ALWAYS does it with that sh*t-eating grin of an emoji he uses. In every single post. Another tiny thing he does to try and veil his racism / terrible takes.

The Debt said:

---

Splash cost $8million and grossed over $60million. Dont tell me it's too expensive to make live action mermaid film with black talent.

You're just making excuses for lazy studios.

---

Splash is 35-YEAR-OLD movie, genius. By your logic, all westerns should succeed in modern times as well.

You know someone is triggered when emojis get them butthurt.

So it's your assertion that the new Little Mermaid will bomb because the mermaid genre isnt topical anymore? "We missed the aquatic fantasy zeitgeist by 35 years" hahahha

I havent seen you this unhinged in quite some time. Bravo.