I Have Proof That Hollywood Is Running Low on Ideas!

[Convincing John]

Well...as for the versions of "A Christmas Carol", there are two I always will love. One of course is the Muppet Christmas Carol. This is the most accurate "children's" version of the film out there. Everyone praises the Disney version...which is horribly innacurate, while Gonzo quotes Dickens' story word for word. (Heck, Mr. Magoo's version got the ghosts in the wrong order and it was still more accurate than Disney!)

The second Christmas Carol I loved is the Patrick Stewart version. Yeah, he was great in Star Trek TNG, but he just made a great Scrooge. He was a very convincing grouch in that one! The image of him with his cane raised (about to smack a kid) appears on the cover artwork!

Now as for parody films, there is one parody film I do love which has become classic in its own right: Young Frankenstein.

Then, of course, there's a movie made by a parody artist with a parody video inside it: UHF. The critics hated it, but it's become a favorite among many a Weird Al fan (like me).

But there's a difference between these films and the stuff churned out of Hollywood. The above films were made with and by professionals who knew how to make movies. They have talent and know what it takes to make a movie with quality.

The movies out now just repeat each other, hoping to make more money with toilet humor and no quality. The ones mentioned before (Epic Movie, etc.) certainly do. The premise of "incredibly dorky guy is the star" happened in the Austin Powers movies, then in "Master of Disguise", then in Napoleon Dynamite. Now we have "Love Guru"...

Nowadays, for a "comedy movie" to pass in modern day Hollywood, the requirements seem to be:

1. Toilet humor
2. Overdone sexual innuendo
3. Guys getting hit in the groin
4. Mix and stretch the above items to 90 minutes
5. If the movie does well, rehash it for a sequel. But put two or three new jokes in the trailer to fool the audience into thinking this is a "new" movie.

I'm very glad the live action Cat-in-the-Hat crushed the trend in making live action Dr. Seuss movies. The Seuss classics were beautifully done as books. Then when master animator Chuck Jones teamed up with Seuss, timeless specials and cartoons were made (Grinch, Lorax, Horton). The CGI Horton I have not heard anything about since it premiered and maybe this is a good thing. Chuck Jones animation, like many illustrators, painters, etc. has it's own flavor. Excessive CGI is just too...artificial. (I'll hold my Star Wars rant for another time).

Perhaps Phillip J. Fry put it best: "That's not why people watch TV. Clever things make people feel stupid and unexpected things make them feel scared. You see? TV audiences don't want anything original. They wanna see the same thing they've seen a thousand times before."

Looks like this applies to films, too.

Convincing John

 

[JJandJanice]

Yeah these spoof movies are getting out of hand.

I'm just wanting for a spoof movie of spoof movies, and that's what it will be called too "Spoof movie."

I think I just gave Hollywood an idea that will get them to print money.

 

[Vic Romano]

Well...as for the versions of "A Christmas Carol", there are two I always will love. One of course is the Muppet Christmas Carol. ... The second Christmas Carol I loved is the Patrick Stewart version.

What about "Scrooged" with Bill Murray? That's probably my favorite.

Then, of course, there's a movie made by a parody artist with a parody video inside it: UHF. The critics hated it, but it's become a favorite among many a Weird Al fan (like me).

Oh man, one of the most over-looked, underrated comedies of all time. Sometimes I wonder if the lack of success of this movie made Al decide not to do any more movies.

 

[Ilikemuppets]

The only thing Hollywood needs to remake, from the horror films to whatever, is crappy movies that no one cares for. Like "Glitter" with Miriah Carey, or "From Justin To Kelly", or any of the sequels for "A Nightmare On Elm Street", the "Fright the 13th" films, etc.

I've never got why people take films like "Gigli" that nobody has ever watch or seen before and it pretty obvious they haven't because of it box office performance and laugh when you just so much as mention it's name.

Its movies like scary movie where everything is poking fun at another movie is what I dont like

The funny part is and I don't mean haha funny. But it's that it is a movie parodying movies that parody movies. I found this odd myself when it first came out.

Then, of course, there's a movie made by a parody artist with a parody video inside it: UHF. The critics hated it, but it's become a favorite among many a Weird Al fan (like me).

That movie was perfection to me,And so was "Hot Shots"

The movies out now just repeat each other, hoping to make more money with toilet humor and no quality. The ones mentioned before (Epic Movie, etc.) certainly do. The premise of "incredibly dorky guy is the star" happened in the Austin Powers movies, then in "Master of Disguise", then in Napoleon Dynamite. Now we have "Love Guru"...

Tell me about it... Like Austin Power though.

Nowadays, for a "comedy movie" to pass in modern day Hollywood, the requirements seem to be:

1. Toilet humor
2. Overdone sexual innuendo
3. Guys getting hit in the groin
4. Mix and stretch the above items to 90 minutes
5. If the movie does well, rehash it for a sequel. But put two or three new jokes in the trailer to fool the audience into thinking this is a "new" movie.

I think you said it put it perfectly!

Perhaps Phillip J. Fry put it best: "That's not why people watch TV. Clever things make people feel stupid and unexpected things make them feel scared. You see? TV audiences don't want anything original. They wanna see the same thing they've seen a thousand times before."

Looks like this applies to films, too.

Convincing John

Words to live by! He could not have put it better!

 

[Drtooth]

1. Toilet humor
2. Overdone sexual innuendo
3. Guys getting hit in the groin
4. Mix and stretch the above items to 90 minutes
5. If the movie does well, rehash it for a sequel. But put two or three new jokes in the trailer to fool the audience into thinking this is a "new" movie.

I don't mind anything if it's at least done cleverly. If you're gonna have someone fart, at least have it serve a purpose.

I have to say, lately in kid's films I've seen less and less poop and fart jokes. Even in Dreamworks's Kung Fu Panda, which shocked and amazed me. (see Dreamworks, you can make a great film without pop culture jokes, random, poorly inserted pop music bits, and toilet jokes). That impresses me so much. Seems like every non-Pixar movie in recent years had to make fart jokes to make idiot kids giggle. Sure, that was funny when I was 5 too... They even had to alter a scene in the commercial for the classic good animated version of 101 Dalmations to have a horse fart. Thankfully they didn't kill the movie by re-editing the scene... but to add a scene that wasn't there for a commercial...? Balderdash.

 

[Ilikemuppets]

(see Dreamworks, you can make a great film without pop culture jokes, random, poorly inserted pop music bits, and toilet jokes). That impresses me so much.

Yeah! I mean Disney learn to do it and they've had their share of that stuff before. It's just they they don't thrive off of it.

 

[Vic Romano]

If you're gonna have someone fart, at least have it serve a purpose.

This is my life's mantra.

 

[Ilikemuppets]

I don't mind anything if it's at least done cleverly. If you're gonna have someone fart, at least have it serve a purpose.

You mean like to put out a fire? *shrugs*

Anythings more tolerable then Shreks Burping.

 

[wwfpooh]

If you're gonna have someone fart, at least have it serve a purpose.

But then, sometimes, it's just in good fun, like when Yakko & Wakko made a lewd reference or two in A!

 

[CensoredAlso]

"I hate a dirty joke I do, unless it's told by someone, knows how to tell it."

Julius 'Groucho' Marx