Duh.. Duh.. Dih dih dir! Dir Di dih dih dir dir du du duh! - Star Trek - Next Gen
It does not have to be original. And I don't mean only the intro but the entire soundtrack. Often, the theme song is reused over and over during the film with many variations to set the tone of a scene.
Bad movies skimp on soundtracks.
You could argue the indie scene is similar to the startup scene in SV. You have investors/producers pretty much funding these films based on team/talent and a pitch alone, with the festival circuit (could be considered an analog to SV demo-days or investor powows) essentially serving as a way to get bought by big studios for potential wide release, limited-release runs (which can still make a lot of money for those involved), or teams hired/screenplays bought and adapted by other studios. You can even make it big right out of college (or in college) [1] with little-to-no connections, though of course even more-so than SV a name and pedigree gets you further faster.
There’s so much in LA (and NYC) that gets released in theaters only locally, and the city is better for it. It’s the wide-release that, almost by definition, must serve lowest common denominator in order to make its 8/9-figure budget back in a span of months (tech companies get years!!). It’s sad that SF and LA, so close geographically, have industries so socially polarized to each other in every way, since there’s really a lot of overlap when you get down to it (and each industry could definitely learn things from the other)
[1] https://variety.com/2022/film/news/apple-cha-cha-real-smooth...
There are arthouse movie theaters throughout that play the same movies that you think are only locally shown in LA/NYC. You just need the right context (near a university, for example).
Am I wrong about this? Anything I'm missing?
It’s just a sci fi show set in that universe, that’s the way I see it. Takes the universe seriously, sets down rules for how it could work and it operates within that space.
But it’s better written, acted and art directed than most TV I’ve ever seen.
Id rank it as high or higher than Chernobyl. I’d say it’s must see TV.
But I understand your point— mid-budget studio movies (romcoms especially) have been hit the hardest by the pivot to Marvel mania and cinematic universes. Unfortunately that’s as much because of audience preference as it is studios.
I think the big thing is the financial risk of committing to a series, but it seems like if you take the films one at a time, you get to see how the last one is doing before you get too far along making the next one. Can't be that much worse than making everything a one-off.
They spent probably less than $5M total on the 3 movies (and filmed all at once), and the first two have already brought in $25M at the box office. A pretty good indie success story.
But then theres also the insidious observation. My generation are now senior writers and also the majority of the audience and between us is as much creativity as a fart.
Even movies like Big Trouble in Little Chinatown or Predator, while not necessarily having plots worthy of the next Great American Novel, at least had interesting memorable ideas.
As a discovery mechanism, I'd recommend following Vyce Victus[3], who writes reasonably well about action movies.
[1] https://letterboxd.com/journal/direct-action-scott-adkins-dtv-film-evolution/
[2] https://www.rogerebert.com/features/the-real-vulgar-auteurs-three-great-directors-of-direct-to-video-films
[3] https://letterboxd.com/vycevictus/I showed my 12 year old son Die Hard for the first time the other day.
He absolutely (...) loved it.
Unprompted, he talked about how good all the effects were - they didn't look like the bland CGI he is used to.
And he absolutely loved the movie. Zero political correctness. So incredibly liberating.
(A few scenes had me question the parenting choice of showing DH to a 12 year old, but it'd been at least a decade since I saw it last).
Plus DieHard is one of the best movies ever made!
(Have an 8th so not reached that stage myself yet)
All the best for the journey ahead!
Also "we'll travel to the FAR FUTURE" being when they were two years old has to be amusing (and sobering, to us olds).
Next watch Aliens (the second one) together and you are gold.
Aliens: My son suffered from night terrors in the not too distant past - I'd rather not reboot those just yet! :) (Would have to watch them in order, and the first is absolutely terrifying).
Will do them when he's 14.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Seven_Basic_Plots
That being said, I just saw Black Panther: Wakanda Forever. I thought it dealt with personal issues very well. She Hulk as much as it was derided, was also a different type of MCU show and it was self aware enough to know that Marvel had gotten too formulaic.
Which is great, for those who like his particular films. But there are literally thousands of other filmmakers making films every year who don't attract the kind of attention Tarantino does. His films aren't better than theirs -- he's just famous enough that we've all heard of him, and he continues to produce exactly the kinds of thing that you specifically like.
There are tons of things to dig into if you want. Netflix does a better job than most of surfacing small filmmakers (because they can get them cheaply). Film festivals have even more -- more than you can possibly watch in ten lifetimes. Most of it, of course, is dreck -- same as everything else.
I'm glad your friend likes Tarantino, but it just feels a bit like saying, "Gosh, I wish they made more stuff like Tarantino." What I want is an alternative to both Tarantino and the major studios -- and it exists. It just takes more effort.
A friend of mine regularly compares Quentin Tarantino’s early movies to today’s mass produced boredom. Calling it MBA filmmaking. It reminds me of an industry running on Amazon’s recommendation engine, only making derivatives of existing successes.