How Does One Rebuild a Failed Movie

In the movie Garden State, Natalie Portman‘s character is trying to get Zach Braff‘s character to do something really stupid and silly, and says “This is your one opportunity to do something that no one has ever done before and no one will copy through-out human existence. And if nothing else you'll be remembered as the one guy who ever did this… this one thing.” It’s movies like this, movies that are written with great meaning, that I walk away from with just this warm unexplainable feeling. Movies that have the creator’s blood, sweat, and tears in the soul of the movie, not just thrown together at the end just to make the quick buck are the ones worth seeing. Movies that are made up from filmmakers not money hungry producers, like

I believe that this action packed blockbuster that gave Leonardo DiCaprio an Oscar is boring. I believe this not because it has a poor scenery or bad acting, the acting is phenomenal and the scenery and special effects are very detailed and

Comparative Analysis on True Grit (1969) and True Grit (2010) Many modern adaptations of classical films have effectively been reinvented to successfully adapt the current market and cater audiences from the new generation. One such film is the 2010 movie “True Grit”, which is an artistic remake by the Coen brothers of the 1969 film of the same title by Henry Hathaway. While both films are adaptation of Charles Portis' 1968 novel True Grit, the two versions differ in certain cinematic elements that make their variations artistic and inventive on their own right.

It appeals to the audience’s desire for familiarity. To know that their choice of film will provide them with the expected entertainment. But what if your goal isn’t to recreate the same spark, but to forge ahead and always strive to create something new?

It’s no secret that Nicolas Refn is an artistically experimental film maker. Many of his movies like Drive or Only God Forgives prove this statement. All of these films share unique camera angles, dramatic lighting, and twisted concepts like torture, or seual assault. These experimental way of making a movie have

The movie I have chosen to review is The Usual Suspects. It is one of my all-time favorite movies, which is strange because I don’t typically enjoy crime movies but The Usual Suspects is different. There are a lot of elements that come into play and an excellent twist. If you haven’t seen it I highly recommend you make the time to watch it. The writer, Christopher McQueen had worked as security in a movie theater in Australia. He tells of how he would watch the audience for their reactions to scenes and to anticipate if there would be a busy night at work because of a newly released movie. Because of his close relationship to the reactions of audiences, he was able to write a movie for an audience, with appreciation for the audience’s point

I agree with people who say movies aren’t based on real life experience, but I am pretty sure producers have specific messages to tell their audience. Movies might be long and time taking, but when there is free time to spend why not lay back and watch a good movie? Today I will be reviewing one of my favorite movies of all time, Tokyo Drift.

There is a lot of forgotten materials in cinematography, dirctoring, and acting that should be revived in todays films. Back then, filmmakers had the secrets to entertaining its audience such as there was no fillers in the plot and was more straight forwards scenes to follow. Overall films does not need to be a big production and an overly complext plot and random fillers that loses the viewers attentions and idea of the film is loses to the action. Sometimes keeping simple makes a great

Instead of just messing up and doing it in an over the top way, so at least it’s memorable the film takes a cookie cutter approach and delivers a watered down mess. It’s like every time the screenwriters had a chance to take a risk or do something different they just deliberately did the opposite. The film doesn’t even stop to take breaks with the exception of a sequence in which Ratchet gets to try out an arsenal of really cool and colorful weapons and gadgets at a weapons test rang, Ratchet & Clank is all plot, all the time. Even though it’s all plot, at the same time there’s no real substance to speak of throughout the film, just a grab bag of scenes that feel

Restoration is a film directed by Michael Hoffman and adapted from the Rose Tremain novel of the same title. The peculiar English tale takes place in the seventeenth century, when King Charles II took control of the country, replacing Oliver Cromwell. Along with King Charles’s reign came the period of Restoration known for its return to man and hedonists lifestyles, which replaced Cromwell’s strict Puritan rule. The film beings with a fictional aspiring doctor, who King Charles calls on to cure on of his beloved spaniels, becomes entranced by the King’s web of lies and persuasion and, eventually, is coerced into marrying one of the King’s mistresses. Robert Downey Jr. plays the asinine doctor, Robert Merivel,

The term ‘so bad, it’s good’ is thrown around a lot these days, but what makes a ‘so bad, it’s good’ movie? A lot of bad films out there try to fall into that category by intentionally being terrible, but I like to think that the true good/bad films are the ones that in all honesty are trying their darndest to be good. It’s the ones where the people that worked on the film tried their best, but through some terrible acting and incoherent plots, ended up with a product that was a valiant attempt, but with a terrible execution. Dangerous Men is to me a perfect example of the aforementioned term. It’s obvious that director John Rad was trying to make a movie that was supposed to be good and you can tell it was a passion of his to finish it, even

What makes a movie horrible? It could be a bad ending or bad actors . A movie like Sharknado will leave the views disappointed. There is no better way of explaining it than "The Concourse" article, "But the Sharknado phenomenon mostly resonates with people because it nn embodies all the greatness of what a shitty movie can be." (concourse.deadspin.com). Rated 3.3 out 10 by IMDb, Sharknado is a horrible movie because of its special effects , bad actors , and not ending.

A movie’s greatness is often measured by its monetary returns. There are numerous examples of huge commercial successes that are able to draw dollars from people with each iteration of their product even when the movies themselves are less memorable. Think of Fast & Furious or Transformers, hugely popular, even producing a great movie from time to time. Less often, is a franchise that produces a string of great films. Star Wars and James Bond have consistently brought viewers to the box office over decades. Many of those movies will be watched by generation after generation. Then there is the oddity, the financial dud that gets better ratings with time. The Shawshank Redemption didn’t impress on opening weekend. It didn’t have a surge after a limited release with great reviews. It did have a compelling story and superb acting providing the viewer an emotional experience. That experience allowed The Shawshank Redemption become one of the most well-regarded movies of recent history.

particularly important given the poor measurability of success before the film is released. It achieves high levels of intrinsic motivation through:

A swath of videos titled “Why Action Movies Suck” have been buzzing around the internet for the past few years. They have discussed surface details of some of the practical and obvious reasons why so many big time action movies released over the past few years have been such a massive disappointment.