In Reply to: Good Hollywood movies/what happened? posted by Corbu on March 15, 2004 at 17:25:40:
It seems obvious from your post that what you consider "good" films are the ones that tend to create deep human impact and emotions. Uplift a person, really.Those should be contrasted with ones creating pleasurable motor reactions. And good cash flow.
The first category was destined to produce negative cash flow - hence the chopping block for it.
The second meant riches unheard of before - hence the shift.
I kinda agree with the guys below that there are some good films in the second category being produced. I have watched every Die Hard film more than once - I too love that motor reactions.
But don't look at Hollywood for deep, insighful, human movies - that part is gone, gone, gone...
The tradition of that sort of films is still alive, however, in many other countries, and in the indy films.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Cash flow improved - Victor Khomenko 18:25:16 03/15/04 (7)
- Re: Cash flow improved - patrickU 05:04:10 03/16/04 (6)
- Don't recall that one - Victor Khomenko 05:45:05 03/16/04 (5)
- Re: Don't recall that one - patrickU 07:47:01 03/16/04 (4)
- Re: Don't recall that one - Victor Khomenko 08:17:45 03/16/04 (3)
- Re: Send one to Clark, the one with the bottle... - patrickU 08:36:59 03/16/04 (2)
- You did? I heard him cry in the corner... - Victor Khomenko 08:48:23 03/16/04 (1)
- Re: No, but you should... - patrickU 10:45:57 03/16/04 (0)