Hollywood Rant

JRMapes · Post by **JRMapes** » Thu Sep 15, 2005 11:37 pm

I suppose Kurt Russel is over 50 now so i guess that takes him out.

But what about Val Kimmer?

Im never seen him wuse up a moive.

John Stark · Post by **John Stark** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 7:37 am

Jerry Mapes wrote:I suppose Kurt Russel is over 50 now so i guess that takes him out.

But what about Val Kimmer?

Im never seen him wuse up a moive.

For some reason, a guy named "Val" just doesn't quite make the macho list for me, heh.

rogatny · Post by **rogatny** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 8:24 am

My wife and I were just talking about this the other day. We were talking about who would be able to be the next James Bond. No one we could think of could come anywhere close to Sean Connery. Jude Law maybe. The recent movies with Matt Damon as a trained killer - the Bourne whatevers - puh-lease!!!

It's not just machismo. It's sheer talent. My daughter was watching Mary Poppins the other day, and we were try to think of someone, anyone who'd be able to handle the Dick Van Dyke roll.

An older actor no one's mentioned. Fred McMurray. Yeah, the dad from my three sons. Check out Double Indemnity. Another one - William Holden - Bridge Over the River Kwai, Stalag 17.

A new actor no one's mentioned. Benicio Del Torro. He carried Traffic. <<Que chico!>>

R.A.

John Stark · Post by **John Stark** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 8:47 am

rogatny wrote:My wife and I were just talking about this the other day. We were talking about who would be able to be the next James Bond. No one we could think of could come anywhere close to Sean Connery. Jude Law maybe. The recent movies with Matt Damon as a trained killer - the Bourne whatevers - puh-lease!!!

It's not just machismo. It's sheer talent. My daughter was watching Mary Poppins the other day, and we were try to think of someone, anyone who'd be able to handle the Dick Van Dyke roll.

My wife and I talk about this as well when we are watching movies. We find ourselves going further and further back in time for movies to enjoy, as the talent that is out there these days is poor. And its not just the actors, its across the board IMO.

The irony is that hollywood thinks it can cash in on the talent and nostalgia of yesteryear by making remakes and sequels of those "oldies but goodies." Look at all of the remakes the last few years. But the remakes, for the most part, stink, precisely because hollywood has had a major drain of talent.

An older actor no one's mentioned. Fred McMurray. Yeah, the dad from my three sons. Check out Double Indemnity. Another one - William Holden - Bridge Over the River Kwai, Stalag 17.

William Holden! Yes.

If we're going to mention him, we might as well toss in Sir Alec Guiness as well.

A new actor no one's mentioned. Benicio Del Torro. He carried Traffic. <<Que chico!>>

He was good in Traffic, agreed. I don't know if he's done enough stuff to qualify for the "talented macho list" though. I'd like to see him in something where he isn't just playing the "latino" role.

AxeMental · Post by **AxeMental** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 9:55 am

Benicio Del Torro

I used to hate this guy, but now like him. His first appearance was as some latino killer w/ timithy dolton. And supposedly was also on Pewee's big top.

Anyhow, the last 30 minute of "Way of the Gun".

BUt yeah, there's no way this guy could become Charleton Heston, Gregory Peck, etc. etc. It would be worth a try though...I'd give him the chance.

T. Foster · Post by **T. Foster** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:13 am

rogatny wrote:My wife and I were just talking about this the other day. We were talking about who would be able to be the next James Bond. No one we could think of could come anywhere close to Sean Connery. Jude Law maybe. The recent movies with Matt Damon as a trained killer - the Bourne whatevers - puh-lease!!!

Clive Owen, who was very good in a little movie from a few years back called Croupier (directed by Mike Hodges, the same guy who made the original Get Carter, which earned Michael Caine his spot on the list of true cinematic badasses). He even looks like James Bond (the way he's described in the Ian Fleming novels). Alas, he's said he has no interest in the role (apparently prefering to star in crap like Closer with Julia Roberts or that Jerry Bruckheimer King Arthur fiasco).

AxeMental · Post by **AxeMental** » Fri Sep 16, 2005 4:43 pm

Is it most of these guys came from mid 8os highschool comedy movies. They were all there was to fill the void. Tom Cruise, Val K, Tom Hanks (batch party), etc. The ones alot younger then us seem even worse.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:40 am

The state of ALL popular culture in America is in serious problems. Do any of these people have a single nut between them? How many men or women in the entertainment industry are willing to stand up and say what they really believe? Who dares to snub the Oscars and Grammys these days, or at least use them to give a middle finger to the establishment? Who is willing to question the government or have even a smidgen of backbone?

We've got folks dying every day in a foreign war, where is the outrage? You'll get more of a rise out of musicians by talking about file-trading on the net. And my personal icon, Bob Dylan....he's advertising ladies lingerie.

As for Hollywood actors... who is willing to risk life and limb to go to Iraq and point out what a mess we've got? Everybody is out now pleading for help rebuilding New Orleans. Anyone pleading to do the same for Iraq? Maybe we DO need another draft- an equal opportunity deathwish that would shock our culture back into reality. I guarantee we'd see a seachange in our popular culture.

AxeMental · Post by **AxeMental** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 7:30 am

Actually Guest, you have it backwards. Every freakin' actor/s feels the need to say they Hate our country because of its activities. Gwenith, Baldwins, depp, etc. etc. Did you miss holywoods involvement in politics last year?

The problem isn't actors being polticially active, and using their popularity as a way to influence political direction; the problem is 1. those that can't act are getting advanced, leaving those that can in small theater etc., 2. cooky cutter formulas for movies, 3. the thought that Americans and the world audiance at large, are too stupid to follow a complicated plot, 4. the lack of interest in "acting ability" by the studios, who are more interested in advancing brands then talent. Your correct about one thing though. Actors/s of our generation do seem to care more about thier value and net worth then they do about their craft. Perhaps the biggest problem with Hollywood (and telivision for that matter) is the stranglehold the unions have on the bizz. The cost of making movies and paying "super stars" is so high (from the guy taking out the trash to the guy writing the script) that you get ball-less plots with known quantities (think J.Lo vs. Burgman). Add to the ease of special effects and need for up-ones-manship and you have a disaster on your hands. The Jerasic Park movies are a perfect example (though Sam Neil is a great actor). You get the feel actors are directed to be simplistic and campy in fear of loosing the audiance (thus you get big budget special effects driven flics with poor acting, when infact the actor/s are never really given a chance).
The feminization of the leading male is just part of the "formula". If you want to make an art just throw in "shock" plots, don't worry about the script or delivery.

John Stark · Post by **John Stark** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 11:11 am

Anonymous wrote:The state of ALL popular culture in America is in serious problems. Do any of these people have a single nut between them? How many men or women in the entertainment industry are willing to stand up and say what they really believe? Who dares to snub the Oscars and Grammys these days, or at least use them to give a middle finger to the establishment? Who is willing to question the government or have even a smidgen of backbone?

We've got folks dying every day in a foreign war, where is the outrage? You'll get more of a rise out of musicians by talking about file-trading on the net. And my personal icon, Bob Dylan....he's advertising ladies lingerie.

As for Hollywood actors... who is willing to risk life and limb to go to Iraq and point out what a mess we've got? Everybody is out now pleading for help rebuilding New Orleans. Anyone pleading to do the same for Iraq? Maybe we DO need another draft- an equal opportunity deathwish that would shock our culture back into reality. I guarantee we'd see a seachange in our popular culture.

There are two distinct ironies here. The first is that the "guest" seems not to realize that the very anti-war rhetoric that he has posted here is nothing more than what hollywood itself has been spewing since the war started. Hollywood hasn't been antiwar enough? Do pay attention to the national media at all?

The second irony is that the "guest" seems to think that the "great" cultural heros of the 60's like Dylan actually give a crap, that these great cultural idols should be out there railing against the war more, like they did against the Vietnam war, all the while failing to realize that the antiwar movement of the 60's was as hollow then as it is today. They were always frauds, its not some new trend.

AxeMental · Post by **AxeMental** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:09 pm

Anyhow guest, don't you get tired of being talked down to by a bunch of do nothing "elightest" types who think their better then you? After all they know how you should run your life better then you do. Thats why liberal democrat and American Movie star are so often synonyms today (think your hero Ben Aflick).

Jeffery St. Clair · Post by **Jeffery St. Clair** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 12:58 pm

Hard to believe this all started because of me and my little ol' avatar!

It's also a generational thing, I suppose. Once you've lived long enough to appreciate them, the really talented actors and actresses stand out. I don't even bother with most movies myself anymore, though my wife and I did enjoy Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (once). How many movies today are really good enough to see at the theatre more than once? (because you wanted to, not becuase you were going again with friends who hadn't seen it yet) That's something I've noticed, and maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like today's movie industry puts out stuff that they want everyone to see once (ticket prices back me up on this one) and make their money, instead of quality films that fewer people would actually pay to see more than once on the big screen. I know DVD sales play a part in that, but I'd still go to the theatre more than once to see a movie I really enjoyed. Anyone else?

Heck, my wife and I would probably pay money to see the classics on a big screen again, rather than the newest remake of "Dukes of Hazzard" or some other nonsense.

JRMapes · Post by **JRMapes** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 1:08 pm

In a heartbeat man...

That is one thing i really miss about not living in the city anymore. There was alittle theatre downtown that played all the great movies from the past every weekend.

The last one i finally got to see was Once Upon A Time In The West
I cant think of much i would trade now for that experience.

AxeMental · Post by **AxeMental** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 1:55 pm

wwhhh whhh whhh whhh whhh whhh whhh whhh whhh whhhh.
whhhhhhhh....wh...................wwwwwwwwwwwwwhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

good ol' ernio.

T. Foster · Post by **T. Foster** » Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:33 pm

The ample opportunity to see classic movies on the big screen is probably the single thing I like best about living in LA. The experience of seeing a movie on-screen is completely different from watching a video (though high-end home theater equipment is narrowing the gap); if you've never seen, say, 2001: A Space Odyssey or Ben-Hur projected in 70mm on a huge screen with a top-of-the-line sound system you haven't really seen them at all.

And I totally agree that Hollywood marketing is based almost exclusively on trying to get as many people possible to see a movie on its opening weekend, and the idea of word-of-mouth and/or repeat business is an afterthought at best. The idea that a movie might stay in theaters for 6 months and have people come back to see it time and time again has completely disappeared, which is nonsensical because when you look at the most successful movies of all time -- Titanic, E.T., Gone with the Wind, the original Star Wars, the biggest Disney movies -- that's exactly how they made their money, by the same people (kids mostly, but some adults too), coming back to see them over and over again. I know I saw E.T. at least 3 times as a kid, and Star Wars about a half-dozen times, or more. Heck, I even saw Titanic twice and I didn't even like it!

I'm still more than willing to see a move twice (or more) in theatre if I really like it, especially if I'm going with different people, but 1) there are so few movies nowadays worth seeing multiple times, and 2) most of those movies come and go so quickly that by the time I want to see it again it's already disappeared. So far in 2005 I've seen one (new) movie twice -- an astoundingly-good French movie called Kings and Queen. I saw it once at a preview screening with the director in attendance, and then saw it again (with a different person) a couple months later during its one-week commercial run.

And while I don't want to debate the politics of Hollywood with you guys (because, well, I like you guys, and know that I disagree strongly with a lot of you and that if we debated this there'd probably be hard feelings, on my side if not on yours) I will agree with the general sentiment that a lot of Hollywood 'activism' is ego-driven publicity-seeking grandstanding that's not backed up with actual action (or perhaps even actual conviction). In May of 1968 filmmakers in France joined with the protestors and shut down the Cannes film festival. In March of 2003, less than a week after the US invasion of Iraq, they drove by the protestors in their limousines to congratulate themselves and make hollow self-righteous speeches on the Oscar telecast. I know because I was there on the streets that night when it happened. If fat-fuck Michael Moore had any actual courage of his convictions he would've been out there on the streets with us, not flapping his gums for the tv cameras up on the stage while brandishing his gold statuette. AFAIK only one person, Finnish filmmaker Aki Kaurismaki, boycotted the Oscars that year (and it's entirely possible that he only made that stand as a way of saving himself planefare from Helsinki to LA

).