4 ms·

Movies lately: * Generic Super-Hero Movie A. * Generic Super-Hero Movie B. Different title from A, yet actually identical plot and sometimes actors. * A new

Movies lately: * Generic Super-Hero Movie A. * Generic Super-Hero Movie B. Different title from A, yet actually identical plot and sometimes actors. * A new CG cartoon "for the whole family". They haven't had an original idea since Wall-E. * Generic block-buster action movie with robots and/or ninjas or ninja-robots, explosions, Chevrolet placement ads, and at least 2 pairs of extremely shapely female breasts. * Generic ultra-patriotic military-hero-worship action flick where rugged, muscly bearded Alpha-Macho super-bros kill brown people, usually has the word "American" in the title, and a scene-that-lasts-too-long where Rick tearfully tells Sam to tell his wife he loves her as his guts slowly (all too slowly) fall out of his torn-up torso. * Generic coming-of-age and beating-all-odds story about a lovable but bullied lonely/introverted/gay/black/Muslim kid from the streets/ghetto/Pakistan who overcomes all odds to be his neighborhood's/high-school's/country's star juggler/drummer/dancer/stripper/singer/refugee-turned-Nobel-laureate and gets the girl/boy at the end. * A documentary telling me I'm fat, living in a banana republic Orwellian surveillance police-state dystopia with horrible health-care and a deteriorating environment. * Girl-Squad/Bro-team Buddy Comedy with a bunch of 45-year-olds acting like rich, spoiled, immature 18-year-olds at friend X's wedding. Hilarity ensues. Basically, I'm either being bored out of my mind for the whole duration, or sad/frustrated that this world is so horrible/unjust, or watching a 120-minute commercial for Pepsi/Chevrolet/Sex, or being actively recruited for the Marines. TV is much better, with lots more variety.

criddell 9y ago
> TV is much better, with lots more variety That's pretty interesting. TV used to be the home for schlock and quality story telling was mostly done by movies. These days, if you want to tell a substantial story with depth, you do it on television. Movies are to television as short stores are to novels.
- MBCook 9y ago
  Yeah, it’s flipped. Part of that is more control when working for TV, part of it is the ability to tell a story in more than 120m. Let’s you explore much deeper things or have way more character development.
  - izacus 9y ago
    And also lower budget - due to "cheap" actors, even the most high-budget TV shows don't come close to a single Hollywood blockbuster which makes them a significantly less risky investment. Hence you see more innovation and tryouts - similar to indie/AA gaming market vs. AAA gaming blockbusters.
Thriptic 9y ago
Don't forget the obligatory World War 2 epic XD
Boothroid 9y ago
You forgot kick ass female lead, implausibly beating up men twice her size using minimal muscle mass :|
- mschuster91 9y ago
  You don't need muscle mass. All you need to understand as a smaller person is how to use two things to your advantage: 1) your own low mass, which makes you by definition more agile than your opponent 2) the kinetic energy of your opponent. It takes training, yes, but given that I've seen a 1.65m pixie cop bring down a 2m Russian hulk in a bar fight, alone, in 15 seconds, many movie scenes are not that unrealistic.
  - Boothroid 9y ago
    The exception that proves the rule. They often show tiny women winning in tests of strength! It's ludicrous and insulting to the audience, almost as much as the wisecracking black guy stereotype. When was the last time you saw a black guy in a film that wasn't all tough/street etc?

criddell 9y ago

> TV is much better, with lots more variety That's pretty interesting. TV used to be the home for schlock and quality story telling was mostly done by movies. These days, if you want to tell a substantial story with depth, you do it on television. Movies are to television as short stores are to novels.

MBCook 9y ago
Yeah, it’s flipped. Part of that is more control when working for TV, part of it is the ability to tell a story in more than 120m. Let’s you explore much deeper things or have way more character development.
- izacus 9y ago
  And also lower budget - due to "cheap" actors, even the most high-budget TV shows don't come close to a single Hollywood blockbuster which makes them a significantly less risky investment. Hence you see more innovation and tryouts - similar to indie/AA gaming market vs. AAA gaming blockbusters.

Thriptic 9y ago

Don't forget the obligatory World War 2 epic XD

Boothroid 9y ago

You forgot kick ass female lead, implausibly beating up men twice her size using minimal muscle mass :|

mschuster91 9y ago
You don't need muscle mass. All you need to understand as a smaller person is how to use two things to your advantage: 1) your own low mass, which makes you by definition more agile than your opponent 2) the kinetic energy of your opponent. It takes training, yes, but given that I've seen a 1.65m pixie cop bring down a 2m Russian hulk in a bar fight, alone, in 15 seconds, many movie scenes are not that unrealistic.
- Boothroid 9y ago
  The exception that proves the rule. They often show tiny women winning in tests of strength! It's ludicrous and insulting to the audience, almost as much as the wisecracking black guy stereotype. When was the last time you saw a black guy in a film that wasn't all tough/street etc?