So, just watched Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom. I haven't seen this anywhere else (about the only things I heard was "not as good as the first one" and "looks like they sidelined Amber Heard"), but... I think Blizzard have an excellent case to sue for plagiarism.
Stop me if you've heard this before - a young man with daddy issues, determined to get vengeance on his enemies, finds a cursed weapon which starts to possess him. Standing against him are two brothers, one of whom betrayed the other in his lust for power, who are united against their enemy through their mutual love of a woman. They are assisted in their quest by a sorceress who shoots water and ice bolts, and goddamn Gimli.
Also did I mention that the cursed weapon belongs to an Undead king who is frozen on his throne at the pole and looks like this?
I think they'd have Games Workshop coming in just behind them because these undead dudes live in an underground green-lit tomb, have green weapons that are super advanced lasers that cut through anything, and only the lord is sentient and wants to kill all life....
+7
Options
cj iwakuraThe Rhythm RegentBears The Name FreedomRegistered Userregular
Sony's efforts feel very early 2000's. They have the same texture as Tobey's run as Spider-Man. And the characters themselves don't have much going for themselves outside of the secondhand shine they catch from Spider-Man. They either need to bring in the star of the show or they need to drastically recalibrate where they are aiming, quality wise.
Or, you know, just hire good writers, shocking, I know.
Robert Zemeckis birthday was back on the 14th. that guy has a kind of a crazy filmography. There's definitely some stinkers there but most of the films i've seen have at least been enjoyable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Zemeckis
Robert Zemeckis died circa 1995, you're talking about Robert Zombieckis.
+2
Options
ElJeffeRoaming the streets, waving his mod gun around.Moderator, ClubPAMod Emeritus
Zemeckis was solid through 2000, with Castaway. Then he hit his head and decided Polar Express was a good idea and here we are.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
+5
Options
AbsoluteZeroThe new film by Quentin KoopantinoRegistered Userregular
It also has a middle-aged Eddie Deezen mo-captured as a child. Which is some straight-up Eldrich Horror nightmare fuel.
+1
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
JFC that is horrifying
Like without hyperbole or exaggeration all I coul ddo was stare at their soulless eyes, their faces that want to mimic the human form desperately but are utterly lacking in the tools to do so.
I half expected one of the children to point at the screen and start screaming like donald sutherland.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
I will say I have a lot of fondness for Zemeckis' Beowulf (2007). It doesn't entirely work, but it's got a weird, interesting script by Neil Gaiman, a fun performance by Ray Winstone, and Grendel's dialogue is all in Old English dialect.
Like without hyperbole or exaggeration all I coul ddo was stare at their soulless eyes, their faces that want to mimic the human form desperately but are utterly lacking in the tools to do so.
I half expected one of the children to point at the screen and start screaming like donald sutherland.
They were too preoccupied to wonder whether or not they should OR whether or not they could.
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Sony's efforts feel very early 2000's. They have the same texture as Tobey's run as Spider-Man. And the characters themselves don't have much going for themselves outside of the secondhand shine they catch from Spider-Man. They either need to bring in the star of the show or they need to drastically recalibrate where they are aiming, quality wise.
Or, you know, just hire good writers, shocking, I know.
Aiming for better quality would by definition require better writers, yes. It still won't be enough. I don't think there exists a script that the Sony studio can't fuck up with notes. If by some miracle this perfect script made it past the suits, the team that filmed Madam Web isn't going to do it justice.
Sony's efforts feel very early 2000's. They have the same texture as Tobey's run as Spider-Man. And the characters themselves don't have much going for themselves outside of the secondhand shine they catch from Spider-Man. They either need to bring in the star of the show or they need to drastically recalibrate where they are aiming, quality wise.
Or, you know, just hire good writers, shocking, I know.
Aiming for better quality would by definition require better writers, yes. It still won't be enough. I don't think there exists a script that the Sony studio can't fuck up with notes. If by some miracle this perfect script made it past the suits, the team that filmed Madam Web isn't going to do it justice.
I'm always wary of the easy excuse 'The Suits Interfered' because in this case I think the whole project was just shit. A bad concept, with a bad script, poorly executed with actors that were poorly cast. I don't think 'More Pepsi' is the main problem with Madame Web.
Sony's efforts feel very early 2000's. They have the same texture as Tobey's run as Spider-Man. And the characters themselves don't have much going for themselves outside of the secondhand shine they catch from Spider-Man. They either need to bring in the star of the show or they need to drastically recalibrate where they are aiming, quality wise.
Or, you know, just hire good writers, shocking, I know.
You're not wrong but "just hire good writers" is akin to saying that a professional sports team should "just get better athletes"
Like yes that's obviously the solution but at the same time there's really no "Gooder <person at job> Emporium" that someone can just walk into and then hey there ya go it's all better.
But given the number of dumpster fires that Sony has shat out in the last decade I'm also not convinced it's writers that are the problem rather than Sony just being really bad at this.
Sony's efforts feel very early 2000's. They have the same texture as Tobey's run as Spider-Man. And the characters themselves don't have much going for themselves outside of the secondhand shine they catch from Spider-Man. They either need to bring in the star of the show or they need to drastically recalibrate where they are aiming, quality wise.
Or, you know, just hire good writers, shocking, I know.
You're not wrong but "just hire good writers" is akin to saying that a professional sports team should "just get better athletes"
Like yes that's obviously the solution but at the same time there's really no "Gooder <person at job> Emporium" that someone can just walk into and then hey there ya go it's all better.
But given the number of dumpster fires that Sony has shat out in the last decade I'm also not convinced it's writers that are the problem rather than Sony just being really bad at this.
The guy who wrote Madame Web also wrote Morbius and Gods of Egypt. It might not be trivial to hire good writers, but it is trivial to say hey, this guy sucks, let's hire someone better.
That's not a great track record but I rarely get the sense on big superhero movies that it's the work of a singular writer (or even a couple of writers). Everything feels like it's been filtered by the creative kidneys of two dozen people, most of whom aren't writers, and the actual writing often feels like it's barely a placeholder to represent a bright idea someone had or a plot beat that needs to go over.
The line from the trailer that everyone takes the piss out of is an example of this.
He was in the Amazon with my mom when she was researching spiders right before she died.
That's a truly terrible line. Doesn't sound like something a human being would say, but it absolutely fulfils someone's request to get across certain plot points the movie contains, which is why it's there. The actual writing has been relegated to the least important aspect of the movie.
Good writing isn't on the list of things they even want.
Sony's efforts feel very early 2000's. They have the same texture as Tobey's run as Spider-Man. And the characters themselves don't have much going for themselves outside of the secondhand shine they catch from Spider-Man. They either need to bring in the star of the show or they need to drastically recalibrate where they are aiming, quality wise.
Or, you know, just hire good writers, shocking, I know.
You're not wrong but "just hire good writers" is akin to saying that a professional sports team should "just get better athletes"
Like yes that's obviously the solution but at the same time there's really no "Gooder <person at job> Emporium" that someone can just walk into and then hey there ya go it's all better.
But given the number of dumpster fires that Sony has shat out in the last decade I'm also not convinced it's writers that are the problem rather than Sony just being really bad at this.
Sony's the one hiring the writers (and everyone else) though. Could probably do a comedy skit about the whole "Gooder <person at job> Emporium" thing in Hollywood though, with the heaps of people looking to get into the business who end up working, or spending their days writing screenplays, at Starbucks or whatever.
Finding and hiring good people can be difficult, but if you look at a lot of the people getting writing/directing jobs in Hollywood, it's pretty clear that they're not getting gigs based on the quality of their output. It's the 'good/punctual/friendly, pick two' thing, except the list also includes 'fun at parties, knows where the bodies are buried, has the good coke', but it's still only pick two.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
Sony's efforts feel very early 2000's. They have the same texture as Tobey's run as Spider-Man. And the characters themselves don't have much going for themselves outside of the secondhand shine they catch from Spider-Man. They either need to bring in the star of the show or they need to drastically recalibrate where they are aiming, quality wise.
Or, you know, just hire good writers, shocking, I know.
You're not wrong but "just hire good writers" is akin to saying that a professional sports team should "just get better athletes"
Like yes that's obviously the solution but at the same time there's really no "Gooder <person at job> Emporium" that someone can just walk into and then hey there ya go it's all better.
But given the number of dumpster fires that Sony has shat out in the last decade I'm also not convinced it's writers that are the problem rather than Sony just being really bad at this.
The guy who wrote Madame Web also wrote Morbius and Gods of Egypt. It might not be trivial to hire good writers, but it is trivial to say hey, this guy sucks, let's hire someone better.
it's actually a duo (matt sazama and burk sharpless), who've been producing garbage for sony pictures for about 15 years. One assumes they are trading on the pleasant to work with/hits their deadlines legs of the artistic school (the third leg being talent.)
but it's more fun to imagine they have pictures of some sony exec, or possibly they're footsoldiers in some sort of inter-corporate war where all these shit films become useful ammunition or something
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Sony's efforts feel very early 2000's. They have the same texture as Tobey's run as Spider-Man. And the characters themselves don't have much going for themselves outside of the secondhand shine they catch from Spider-Man. They either need to bring in the star of the show or they need to drastically recalibrate where they are aiming, quality wise.
Or, you know, just hire good writers, shocking, I know.
You're not wrong but "just hire good writers" is akin to saying that a professional sports team should "just get better athletes"
Like yes that's obviously the solution but at the same time there's really no "Gooder <person at job> Emporium" that someone can just walk into and then hey there ya go it's all better.
But given the number of dumpster fires that Sony has shat out in the last decade I'm also not convinced it's writers that are the problem rather than Sony just being really bad at this.
Sony's the one hiring the writers (and everyone else) though. Could probably do a comedy skit about the whole "Gooder <person at job> Emporium" thing in Hollywood though, with the heaps of people looking to get into the business who end up working, or spending their days writing screenplays, at Starbucks or whatever.
Finding and hiring good people can be difficult, but if you look at a lot of the people getting writing/directing jobs in Hollywood, it's pretty clear that they're not getting gigs based on the quality of their output. It's the 'good/punctual/friendly, pick two' thing, except the list also includes 'fun at parties, knows where the bodies are buried, has the good coke', but it's still only pick two.
The sports team analogy also fails because 100% of those teams succeed at the task of "playing a good game of baseball (or whatever)", they're just locked in a ruthless giant tournament where only one team can win the World Series and they may appear to suck relative to the literal best in the world collection of individuals, but each team is still full of world class talent performing at an incredible level.
If movie studios were staffed to the same standards then every movie would be incredibly good but some just don't have a chance of winning Best Picture.
Obviously it's easier to measure the quality of an athlete with actual numbers, and it may be contentious to determine the "on base percentage" of a writer or director, especially when a film is such a large collaborative effort.
But when some people are always associated with garbage movies and some people routinely turn out hits I feel like some bare bones rankings can be made, and I'm shocked if the corporate overlords looking to making millions if not billions of dollars would allow "is nice and meets deadlines but produces crap" to stay employed when they're literally losing a fortune.
I feel like they must truly not see any connection between who's producing the work and the end product and so e.g. Scott Buck gets to run a shocking numbers of TV shows into the ground. This is really baffling to me as no other business with this much money at stake would be so cavalier with complete project failures.
Sony's efforts feel very early 2000's. They have the same texture as Tobey's run as Spider-Man. And the characters themselves don't have much going for themselves outside of the secondhand shine they catch from Spider-Man. They either need to bring in the star of the show or they need to drastically recalibrate where they are aiming, quality wise.
Or, you know, just hire good writers, shocking, I know.
You're not wrong but "just hire good writers" is akin to saying that a professional sports team should "just get better athletes"
Like yes that's obviously the solution but at the same time there's really no "Gooder <person at job> Emporium" that someone can just walk into and then hey there ya go it's all better.
But given the number of dumpster fires that Sony has shat out in the last decade I'm also not convinced it's writers that are the problem rather than Sony just being really bad at this.
The guy who wrote Madame Web also wrote Morbius and Gods of Egypt. It might not be trivial to hire good writers, but it is trivial to say hey, this guy sucks, let's hire someone better.
it's actually a duo (matt sazama and burk sharpless), who've been producing garbage for sony pictures for about 15 years. One assumes they are trading on the pleasant to work with/hits their deadlines legs of the artistic school (the third leg being talent.)
but it's more fun to imagine they have pictures of some sony exec, or possibly they're footsoldiers in some sort of inter-corporate war where all these shit films become useful ammunition or something
One of their last names being a synonym for "dull" is fitting
PSN: ImRyanBurgundy
+1
Options
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
The more I see of Furiousa in trailers, the more the greenscreen stands out, to the point it's almost Speed Racer levels of blatant, though it's tone completely refuses for me to accept the visuals. And now I'm seeing there's even a CGI enhanced, sort of attempting to be a mascot The Master knockoff who popped up in a trailer and I have no hopes for the movie now.
I post this not because it confirms that Snack Shack is good and you should watch it, but that in the second half they talk about how the Blumhouse movies have become Marvelized in terms of production, which is sad and almost the inevitable end of all production companies these days. The two horror movies Mike mentions, Night Swim and Imaginary, are so devoid of violence or payoffs for a horror movie in order to be mass marketed it completely ruins their cheap horror brand. We live in a society....where the cheap slasher could disappear.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
I think it’s all tied into whatever kompromat keeps Avi Arad in place as a major studio executive despite a life-long pedigree of failure and incompetence
For many studios in Hollywood, the executive structure isn’t a meritocracy or even a corporate oligarchy, but rather some Byzantine cabal built on networking and past relationships where success and failure just doesn’t seem to matter at all.
People like Arad and Tom Rothman and Akiva Goldsman and David Goyer wouldn’t have jobs at all in a meritorious system of production, so that at least tells you that whatever it is that keeps them employed, doing a good job isn’t it.
Sony's efforts feel very early 2000's. They have the same texture as Tobey's run as Spider-Man. And the characters themselves don't have much going for themselves outside of the secondhand shine they catch from Spider-Man. They either need to bring in the star of the show or they need to drastically recalibrate where they are aiming, quality wise.
Or, you know, just hire good writers, shocking, I know.
You're not wrong but "just hire good writers" is akin to saying that a professional sports team should "just get better athletes"
Like yes that's obviously the solution but at the same time there's really no "Gooder <person at job> Emporium" that someone can just walk into and then hey there ya go it's all better.
But given the number of dumpster fires that Sony has shat out in the last decade I'm also not convinced it's writers that are the problem rather than Sony just being really bad at this.
Sony's the one hiring the writers (and everyone else) though. Could probably do a comedy skit about the whole "Gooder <person at job> Emporium" thing in Hollywood though, with the heaps of people looking to get into the business who end up working, or spending their days writing screenplays, at Starbucks or whatever.
Finding and hiring good people can be difficult, but if you look at a lot of the people getting writing/directing jobs in Hollywood, it's pretty clear that they're not getting gigs based on the quality of their output. It's the 'good/punctual/friendly, pick two' thing, except the list also includes 'fun at parties, knows where the bodies are buried, has the good coke', but it's still only pick two.
The sports team analogy also fails because 100% of those teams succeed at the task of "playing a good game of baseball (or whatever)", they're just locked in a ruthless giant tournament where only one team can win the World Series and they may appear to suck relative to the literal best in the world collection of individuals, but each team is still full of world class talent performing at an incredible level.
If movie studios were staffed to the same standards then every movie would be incredibly good but some just don't have a chance of winning Best Picture.
Obviously it's easier to measure the quality of an athlete with actual numbers, and it may be contentious to determine the "on base percentage" of a writer or director, especially when a film is such a large collaborative effort.
But when some people are always associated with garbage movies and some people routinely turn out hits I feel like some bare bones rankings can be made, and I'm shocked if the corporate overlords looking to making millions if not billions of dollars would allow "is nice and meets deadlines but produces crap" to stay employed when they're literally losing a fortune.
I feel like they must truly not see any connection between who's producing the work and the end product and so e.g. Scott Buck gets to run a shocking numbers of TV shows into the ground. This is really baffling to me as no other business with this much money at stake would be so cavalier with complete project failures.
This is a good point, take any random third string scrub on the worst ranked team in the NBA and invite him to your neighborhood pick up game and he’s going to dominate everyone, I am not so sure its the case that if you took the writers on some movies or shows and replaced them with “Starbucks guy with a script” you’d necessarily get worse content.
The frustrating part here is that I can't blame the actors
I want to blame the actors but I can't, the writing is too terrible
I don't understand how this got made let alone released
Then I remembered that Venom 2 exists. And the actual Venom 2, not the Venom 2 I always end up thinking is Venom 2 which is actually Venom 1.
We need to take Sony's Marvel properties away from them for their own good like taking the keys away from a black out drunk at a bar.
They'd probably be bankrupt by now if Marvel hadn't taken over making Spider-Man movies for them, but they're like the little sibling, "I can make a movie too! Can I play with this (holds up the Madame Web rights)?" Sure kid, no one gives a shit about that, go along and play while we make another Billion dollars
I mean, Madame Web is not a good concept, but they had Julia Carpenter and did absolutely nothing spider related? The fuck?
The annoying thing is that there is a good/decent movie in Madam Web and you can kinda see what could have been while watching it because the shitty parts are so blatantly obvious.
The bones are there but what got made is just a frustrating mixture of ugh/why/what/wtf.
Here I quibble.
Watched this last night and it doesn't have all of the bones for a good story. In fact, that's part of what's missing. Half the skeletons.
Her motivation is missing through most of it. She has to protect the girls, but why? What are they to her and/or what will they become? None of that is addressed adequately.
The same can be said of the rest of the characters. They don't know why they're doing anything. Dance on a table because some boys are there? Sure! It's not like our lives are on the line or anything, we have to have the next story beat somehow!
Also, please ignore we're closer in age to the lead than our characters are supposed to be.
Or the absolute garbage of dialog. Trying to be clever by not saying "wall crawler" but "ceiling crawler" and avoiding saying "spider-man" at every opportunity it'd be a plain descriptor. Stuff like that gets on my nerves fast.
There aren't good bones in this one. What bones are there were borrowed from other projects without looking too closely at which ones were being robbed.
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
I think it’s all tied into whatever kompromat keeps Avi Arad in place as a major studio executive despite a life-long pedigree of failure and incompetence
For many studios in Hollywood, the executive structure isn’t a meritocracy or even a corporate oligarchy, but rather some Byzantine cabal built on networking and past relationships where success and failure just doesn’t seem to matter at all.
People like Arad and Tom Rothman and Akiva Goldsman and David Goyer wouldn’t have jobs at all in a meritorious system of production, so that at least tells you that whatever it is that keeps them employed, doing a good job isn’t it
Goyer has a lot of shielding from criticism because he's been a part of Blade, Blade 2, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, and the Dark Knight Rises, such that his failures seem fairly minimal and forgettable in comparison. Same with Arad really, he can shield himself behind Blades, Spider-Man, and the 2000s X-Men though I question the scale of contributions by either man.
+1
Options
MonwynApathy's a tragedy, and boredom is a crime.A little bit of everything, all of the time.Registered Userregular
I think it’s all tied into whatever kompromat keeps Avi Arad in place as a major studio executive despite a life-long pedigree of failure and incompetence
For many studios in Hollywood, the executive structure isn’t a meritocracy or even a corporate oligarchy, but rather some Byzantine cabal built on networking and past relationships where success and failure just doesn’t seem to matter at all.
People like Arad and Tom Rothman and Akiva Goldsman and David Goyer wouldn’t have jobs at all in a meritorious system of production, so that at least tells you that whatever it is that keeps them employed, doing a good job isn’t it.
Akiva Goldsman made a lot of people a lot of money and also won an Oscar
Granted it's been like twenty years unless you count Fringe, but still
+1
Options
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Sony's efforts feel very early 2000's. They have the same texture as Tobey's run as Spider-Man. And the characters themselves don't have much going for themselves outside of the secondhand shine they catch from Spider-Man. They either need to bring in the star of the show or they need to drastically recalibrate where they are aiming, quality wise.
Or, you know, just hire good writers, shocking, I know.
You're not wrong but "just hire good writers" is akin to saying that a professional sports team should "just get better athletes"
Like yes that's obviously the solution but at the same time there's really no "Gooder <person at job> Emporium" that someone can just walk into and then hey there ya go it's all better.
But given the number of dumpster fires that Sony has shat out in the last decade I'm also not convinced it's writers that are the problem rather than Sony just being really bad at this.
Sony's the one hiring the writers (and everyone else) though. Could probably do a comedy skit about the whole "Gooder <person at job> Emporium" thing in Hollywood though, with the heaps of people looking to get into the business who end up working, or spending their days writing screenplays, at Starbucks or whatever.
Finding and hiring good people can be difficult, but if you look at a lot of the people getting writing/directing jobs in Hollywood, it's pretty clear that they're not getting gigs based on the quality of their output. It's the 'good/punctual/friendly, pick two' thing, except the list also includes 'fun at parties, knows where the bodies are buried, has the good coke', but it's still only pick two.
The sports team analogy also fails because 100% of those teams succeed at the task of "playing a good game of baseball (or whatever)", they're just locked in a ruthless giant tournament where only one team can win the World Series and they may appear to suck relative to the literal best in the world collection of individuals, but each team is still full of world class talent performing at an incredible level.
If movie studios were staffed to the same standards then every movie would be incredibly good but some just don't have a chance of winning Best Picture.
Obviously it's easier to measure the quality of an athlete with actual numbers, and it may be contentious to determine the "on base percentage" of a writer or director, especially when a film is such a large collaborative effort.
But when some people are always associated with garbage movies and some people routinely turn out hits I feel like some bare bones rankings can be made, and I'm shocked if the corporate overlords looking to making millions if not billions of dollars would allow "is nice and meets deadlines but produces crap" to stay employed when they're literally losing a fortune.
I feel like they must truly not see any connection between who's producing the work and the end product and so e.g. Scott Buck gets to run a shocking numbers of TV shows into the ground. This is really baffling to me as no other business with this much money at stake would be so cavalier with complete project failures.
This is a good point, take any random third string scrub on the worst ranked team in the NBA and invite him to your neighborhood pick up game and he’s going to dominate everyone, I am not so sure its the case that if you took the writers on some movies or shows and replaced them with “Starbucks guy with a script” you’d necessarily get worse content.
Plus if you're looking at sports teams, there's always the NY Jets as a prime example where "just get better athletes" is actually a strategy they could try.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
+2
Options
cj iwakuraThe Rhythm RegentBears The Name FreedomRegistered Userregular
I think it’s all tied into whatever kompromat keeps Avi Arad in place as a major studio executive despite a life-long pedigree of failure and incompetence
For many studios in Hollywood, the executive structure isn’t a meritocracy or even a corporate oligarchy, but rather some Byzantine cabal built on networking and past relationships where success and failure just doesn’t seem to matter at all.
People like Arad and Tom Rothman and Akiva Goldsman and David Goyer wouldn’t have jobs at all in a meritorious system of production, so that at least tells you that whatever it is that keeps them employed, doing a good job isn’t it
Goyer has a lot of shielding from criticism because he's been a part of Blade, Blade 2, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, and the Dark Knight Rises, such that his failures seem fairly minimal and forgettable in comparison. Same with Arad really, he can shield himself behind Blades, Spider-Man, and the 2000s X-Men though I question the scale of contributions by either man.
I think it’s all tied into whatever kompromat keeps Avi Arad in place as a major studio executive despite a life-long pedigree of failure and incompetence
For many studios in Hollywood, the executive structure isn’t a meritocracy or even a corporate oligarchy, but rather some Byzantine cabal built on networking and past relationships where success and failure just doesn’t seem to matter at all.
People like Arad and Tom Rothman and Akiva Goldsman and David Goyer wouldn’t have jobs at all in a meritorious system of production, so that at least tells you that whatever it is that keeps them employed, doing a good job isn’t it.
Akiva Goldsman made a lot of people a lot of money and also won an Oscar
Granted it's been like twenty years unless you count Fringe, but still
He’s also been part of some of the biggest flops and money-losers in town, and is an atrocious writer
I’m just pointing out how in any other industry where people answer for their production and failures, that guy doesn’t get a seat at the table.
How many failson CEO's just get passed from company to company, leaving assanine ideas and terrible decisions in their wake.
Like, for all the shitty directors out there, there's a cadre of shitty c-suite people backing them up and adding their own flavor of trash to the soup.
+12
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
How many failson CEO's just get passed from company to company, leaving assanine ideas and terrible decisions in their wake.
Like, for all the shitty directors out there, there's a cadre of shitty c-suite people backing them up and adding their own flavor of trash to the soup.
It seems like in Hollywood that’s almost all there is
Only small production companies and newer startups with more corporate transparency seem to be avoiding this
Everything else is just fiefdoms run by cliques of craven idiots
How many failson CEO's just get passed from company to company, leaving assanine ideas and terrible decisions in their wake.
Like, for all the shitty directors out there, there's a cadre of shitty c-suite people backing them up and adding their own flavor of trash to the soup.
It seems like in Hollywood that’s almost all there is
Only small production companies and newer startups with more corporate transparency seem to be avoiding this
Everything else is just fiefdoms run by cliques of craven idiots
Boy do I have bad news about every other industry for you.
The more I see of Furiousa in trailers, the more the greenscreen stands out, to the point it's almost Speed Racer levels of blatant, though it's tone completely refuses for me to accept the visuals. And now I'm seeing there's even a CGI enhanced, sort of attempting to be a mascot The Master knockoff who popped up in a trailer and I have no hopes for the movie now.
I post this not because it confirms that Snack Shack is good and you should watch it, but that in the second half they talk about how the Blumhouse movies have become Marvelized in terms of production, which is sad and almost the inevitable end of all production companies these days. The two horror movies Mike mentions, Night Swim and Imaginary, are so devoid of violence or payoffs for a horror movie in order to be mass marketed it completely ruins their cheap horror brand. We live in a society....where the cheap slasher could disappear.
The day F13th goes Marvel is the day I'm done with it. I'll just enjoy my awesome blu-ray set and ignore whatever comes next. If that franchise has proven one thing it's that all you need is a camp, cheap actors, a great practical FX team, and Harry Manfredini. End of list.
Zemeckis was solid through 2000, with Castaway. Then he hit his head and decided Polar Express was a good idea and here we are.
Flight was 2012. And while I have problems with the script and especially the ending, the crash sequence is a goddamn masterpiece. He's still got it when the mood strikes him.
I've never seen The Walk but I've heard that one is similar in terms of some breathtaking sequences.
I think it’s all tied into whatever kompromat keeps Avi Arad in place as a major studio executive despite a life-long pedigree of failure and incompetence
For many studios in Hollywood, the executive structure isn’t a meritocracy or even a corporate oligarchy, but rather some Byzantine cabal built on networking and past relationships where success and failure just doesn’t seem to matter at all.
People like Arad and Tom Rothman and Akiva Goldsman and David Goyer wouldn’t have jobs at all in a meritorious system of production, so that at least tells you that whatever it is that keeps them employed, doing a good job isn’t it
Goyer has a lot of shielding from criticism because he's been a part of Blade, Blade 2, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, and the Dark Knight Rises, such that his failures seem fairly minimal and forgettable in comparison. Same with Arad really, he can shield himself behind Blades, Spider-Man, and the 2000s X-Men though I question the scale of contributions by either man.
I think it’s all tied into whatever kompromat keeps Avi Arad in place as a major studio executive despite a life-long pedigree of failure and incompetence
For many studios in Hollywood, the executive structure isn’t a meritocracy or even a corporate oligarchy, but rather some Byzantine cabal built on networking and past relationships where success and failure just doesn’t seem to matter at all.
People like Arad and Tom Rothman and Akiva Goldsman and David Goyer wouldn’t have jobs at all in a meritorious system of production, so that at least tells you that whatever it is that keeps them employed, doing a good job isn’t it.
Akiva Goldsman made a lot of people a lot of money and also won an Oscar
Granted it's been like twenty years unless you count Fringe, but still
This feels like it's the answer to these questions most of the time. They worked on something good/profitable or they made something good/profitable once or twice and they've been coasting on that ever since. That seems to be the way of things in film and TV. It's hard once you've been successful to ever be so bad you can't get work ever again.
On the flip side, I'd hate to spend a decade or more to get a relatively senior creative role - and then see the product butchered for reasons outside of my control, and then be like "Welp, there goes my career".
Like, it is a team effort and people do deserve second chances. It's when they get 7th and 8th chances that you start going "I know you've invested a lot of time and effort... but maybe this isn't for you".
Posts
Stop me if you've heard this before - a young man with daddy issues, determined to get vengeance on his enemies, finds a cursed weapon which starts to possess him. Standing against him are two brothers, one of whom betrayed the other in his lust for power, who are united against their enemy through their mutual love of a woman. They are assisted in their quest by a sorceress who shoots water and ice bolts, and goddamn Gimli.
Also did I mention that the cursed weapon belongs to an Undead king who is frozen on his throne at the pole and looks like this?
Or, you know, just hire good writers, shocking, I know.
Thats on the writers, directors, and producers if they can’t make that interesting and entertaining.
MWO: Adamski
Where is that, HBO, THE ONE TO WATCH?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Zemeckis
Blizzard: Pailryder#1101
GoG: https://www.gog.com/u/pailryder
Heard he was standing on a toilet trying to hang a clock; the porcelain was wet, he slipped and hit his head on the edge of the sink.
Like without hyperbole or exaggeration all I coul ddo was stare at their soulless eyes, their faces that want to mimic the human form desperately but are utterly lacking in the tools to do so.
I half expected one of the children to point at the screen and start screaming like donald sutherland.
It's slightly on the expensive side, but I find it's got the best selection range without having to subscribe to a dozen different services.
They were too preoccupied to wonder whether or not they should OR whether or not they could.
Aiming for better quality would by definition require better writers, yes. It still won't be enough. I don't think there exists a script that the Sony studio can't fuck up with notes. If by some miracle this perfect script made it past the suits, the team that filmed Madam Web isn't going to do it justice.
I'm always wary of the easy excuse 'The Suits Interfered' because in this case I think the whole project was just shit. A bad concept, with a bad script, poorly executed with actors that were poorly cast. I don't think 'More Pepsi' is the main problem with Madame Web.
You're not wrong but "just hire good writers" is akin to saying that a professional sports team should "just get better athletes"
Like yes that's obviously the solution but at the same time there's really no "Gooder <person at job> Emporium" that someone can just walk into and then hey there ya go it's all better.
But given the number of dumpster fires that Sony has shat out in the last decade I'm also not convinced it's writers that are the problem rather than Sony just being really bad at this.
The guy who wrote Madame Web also wrote Morbius and Gods of Egypt. It might not be trivial to hire good writers, but it is trivial to say hey, this guy sucks, let's hire someone better.
The line from the trailer that everyone takes the piss out of is an example of this.
That's a truly terrible line. Doesn't sound like something a human being would say, but it absolutely fulfils someone's request to get across certain plot points the movie contains, which is why it's there. The actual writing has been relegated to the least important aspect of the movie.
Good writing isn't on the list of things they even want.
Choose Your Own Chat 1 Choose Your Own Chat 2 Choose Your Own Chat 3
Sony's the one hiring the writers (and everyone else) though. Could probably do a comedy skit about the whole "Gooder <person at job> Emporium" thing in Hollywood though, with the heaps of people looking to get into the business who end up working, or spending their days writing screenplays, at Starbucks or whatever.
Finding and hiring good people can be difficult, but if you look at a lot of the people getting writing/directing jobs in Hollywood, it's pretty clear that they're not getting gigs based on the quality of their output. It's the 'good/punctual/friendly, pick two' thing, except the list also includes 'fun at parties, knows where the bodies are buried, has the good coke', but it's still only pick two.
it's actually a duo (matt sazama and burk sharpless), who've been producing garbage for sony pictures for about 15 years. One assumes they are trading on the pleasant to work with/hits their deadlines legs of the artistic school (the third leg being talent.)
but it's more fun to imagine they have pictures of some sony exec, or possibly they're footsoldiers in some sort of inter-corporate war where all these shit films become useful ammunition or something
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
The sports team analogy also fails because 100% of those teams succeed at the task of "playing a good game of baseball (or whatever)", they're just locked in a ruthless giant tournament where only one team can win the World Series and they may appear to suck relative to the literal best in the world collection of individuals, but each team is still full of world class talent performing at an incredible level.
If movie studios were staffed to the same standards then every movie would be incredibly good but some just don't have a chance of winning Best Picture.
Obviously it's easier to measure the quality of an athlete with actual numbers, and it may be contentious to determine the "on base percentage" of a writer or director, especially when a film is such a large collaborative effort.
But when some people are always associated with garbage movies and some people routinely turn out hits I feel like some bare bones rankings can be made, and I'm shocked if the corporate overlords looking to making millions if not billions of dollars would allow "is nice and meets deadlines but produces crap" to stay employed when they're literally losing a fortune.
I feel like they must truly not see any connection between who's producing the work and the end product and so e.g. Scott Buck gets to run a shocking numbers of TV shows into the ground. This is really baffling to me as no other business with this much money at stake would be so cavalier with complete project failures.
One of their last names being a synonym for "dull" is fitting
I post this not because it confirms that Snack Shack is good and you should watch it, but that in the second half they talk about how the Blumhouse movies have become Marvelized in terms of production, which is sad and almost the inevitable end of all production companies these days. The two horror movies Mike mentions, Night Swim and Imaginary, are so devoid of violence or payoffs for a horror movie in order to be mass marketed it completely ruins their cheap horror brand. We live in a society....where the cheap slasher could disappear.
For many studios in Hollywood, the executive structure isn’t a meritocracy or even a corporate oligarchy, but rather some Byzantine cabal built on networking and past relationships where success and failure just doesn’t seem to matter at all.
People like Arad and Tom Rothman and Akiva Goldsman and David Goyer wouldn’t have jobs at all in a meritorious system of production, so that at least tells you that whatever it is that keeps them employed, doing a good job isn’t it.
This is a good point, take any random third string scrub on the worst ranked team in the NBA and invite him to your neighborhood pick up game and he’s going to dominate everyone, I am not so sure its the case that if you took the writers on some movies or shows and replaced them with “Starbucks guy with a script” you’d necessarily get worse content.
Here I quibble.
Watched this last night and it doesn't have all of the bones for a good story. In fact, that's part of what's missing. Half the skeletons.
Her motivation is missing through most of it. She has to protect the girls, but why? What are they to her and/or what will they become? None of that is addressed adequately.
The same can be said of the rest of the characters. They don't know why they're doing anything. Dance on a table because some boys are there? Sure! It's not like our lives are on the line or anything, we have to have the next story beat somehow!
Also, please ignore we're closer in age to the lead than our characters are supposed to be.
Or the absolute garbage of dialog. Trying to be clever by not saying "wall crawler" but "ceiling crawler" and avoiding saying "spider-man" at every opportunity it'd be a plain descriptor. Stuff like that gets on my nerves fast.
There aren't good bones in this one. What bones are there were borrowed from other projects without looking too closely at which ones were being robbed.
Goyer has a lot of shielding from criticism because he's been a part of Blade, Blade 2, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, and the Dark Knight Rises, such that his failures seem fairly minimal and forgettable in comparison. Same with Arad really, he can shield himself behind Blades, Spider-Man, and the 2000s X-Men though I question the scale of contributions by either man.
Akiva Goldsman made a lot of people a lot of money and also won an Oscar
Granted it's been like twenty years unless you count Fringe, but still
Plus if you're looking at sports teams, there's always the NY Jets as a prime example where "just get better athletes" is actually a strategy they could try.
(He's a huge pro wrestling fan, no surprise looking at his game dev history.)
He’s also been part of some of the biggest flops and money-losers in town, and is an atrocious writer
I’m just pointing out how in any other industry where people answer for their production and failures, that guy doesn’t get a seat at the table.
How many failson CEO's just get passed from company to company, leaving assanine ideas and terrible decisions in their wake.
Like, for all the shitty directors out there, there's a cadre of shitty c-suite people backing them up and adding their own flavor of trash to the soup.
It seems like in Hollywood that’s almost all there is
Only small production companies and newer startups with more corporate transparency seem to be avoiding this
Everything else is just fiefdoms run by cliques of craven idiots
Boy do I have bad news about every other industry for you.
The day F13th goes Marvel is the day I'm done with it. I'll just enjoy my awesome blu-ray set and ignore whatever comes next. If that franchise has proven one thing it's that all you need is a camp, cheap actors, a great practical FX team, and Harry Manfredini. End of list.
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
Flight was 2012. And while I have problems with the script and especially the ending, the crash sequence is a goddamn masterpiece. He's still got it when the mood strikes him.
I've never seen The Walk but I've heard that one is similar in terms of some breathtaking sequences.
This feels like it's the answer to these questions most of the time. They worked on something good/profitable or they made something good/profitable once or twice and they've been coasting on that ever since. That seems to be the way of things in film and TV. It's hard once you've been successful to ever be so bad you can't get work ever again.
Like, it is a team effort and people do deserve second chances. It's when they get 7th and 8th chances that you start going "I know you've invested a lot of time and effort... but maybe this isn't for you".