Decline of entertainment?

[Super Scooter]

like, my favorite movies are all old. the goonies, grease, the wizard of oz, titanic.

Oh. That's right. Titanic is old now, isn't it?

*sigh*

*grabs dentures*

 

[Drtooth]

HELLO, HOLLYWOOD, GET A CLUE!

There are plenty of people out there who know and love the Smurfs! You don't have to "commercialize" them.

I just hope it's not as bad as it looks. I was really hoping this would be a more traditional (for lack of a better word) Smurf adventure, not "The Smurfs Take Manhattan".

I spent the betterment of this thread complaining about that, and It doesn't matter. Sony is run by idiots, and their crap CGI movies show it. It goes without saying, they just want to make another Chipmunks movie, but someone else has the license. And this script was written by the same virtuosos that made the Scooby-Doo movie, so even the Smurf segments will just be making jokes about the Smurf cartoon. And you can bet it's stuff family Guy did YEARS ago, and every internet cartoon has done up until 2008.

This project is going to F A I L. It really screams of "Okay, we bought the license and merchandising rights... this film's due in a year. Oh Yeah. We gotta get a script. Someone call someone with as little talent as possible to rush one out as soon as possible." "Oh Yeah! We know all about the Slurbs! They're those blue things we didn't bother watching. So let's get buzzed and watch one episode and toss something together. okay, we've seen 2 minutes of the opening credits and that Family Guy cutscene. That's enough to go on!"

GRRRRR! Paramount would have done a good job, but for some reason, they lost the rights. This is one of those times I wish someone was sitting on the license and not doing anything.

No wonder the Fraggle rock movie's never going to be made.

 

[Sgt Floyd]

What about video games? Video games today fall in one of 3 catagories

1. First person shooters (there are way way way to many. And they are allbasically the same. thers fifty gazzillion games based on some war with generic characters and enemies)
2. games that are "poop" because they were thrown together in one day and shoved out into the market. Games that seem to be unplayable because of glitches can also fall into this catagory as well.
3. Games that are targeted to old ladies, and 3 year olds or are so mind numbingly easy they can be beat in less than 2 hours

What happened to good platforming? honestly, you play one fps and you haveplayed them all.

And whats with this sudden surge of everything needs to be in 3d? people with glasses really ant wear the required 3d glasses. it doesntreally work.

(ps. Excuse words lumped together, my spacebar is broke)

 

[Drtooth]

The Video Game industry is hurting BECAUSE it's so successful. How's that for a paradox? The problem with EVERYTHING, games, books, movies, TV shows... the problem is that when something's popular, everyone copies the bleeding heck out of it, causing market over-saturation. And it winds up hurting the original, no matter if it's thrown together or well crafted.

What bugs me is that for YEARS Mario games such as Mario party and Mario Kart, while not original, they turned the genre on its ear and created something new. Since the 90's EVERYONE has had a Kart/Racing/Sabotage/competition type game, Muppets Included.

But the video game industry was ALWAYS plagued by this sort of thing. Once Super Mario Bros. came out, how many games with the same play controls were there? How many lame cartoon games have we seen that either copied something or tried too hard to be different?

Here's the thing... LJN has NEVER made a video game past SNES, and they'll never make a video game again. We'll never see their low quality junk resurface except for Angry Video game Nerd rants and occasionally Youtube poops and emulations. Fill the market up with Halo/Call of Duty/Secretly Brainwashing and Conditioning you to Fight Another Middle Eastern Quagmire 2: Revenge of the Bank Account for all I care. just NEVER make a game half as Bad as either Back to the Future game ever again. or the Atari E.T. for that matter.

 

[Skekayuk]

This might be me, but in my opinion it seems entertainment, that being movies, television shows, and music, has declined heavily in the last 10-15 years.
.

Routing around, the other day, by chance I came across a print out of a review I wrote two years ago (of a cabaret in Maidenhead), somehow parts of it struck a chord, and made me think of this discussion thread. Well since that review happens to be on the web, I thought I'd include a link to it here: http://www.qsulis.demon.co.uk/Website_Louise_Gold/James_Church_Presents_Cabaret_Night_Review.htm (note in particular the second to last paragraph)./

 

[Yorick]

No new film of A-Team, Karate Kid, or Smurfs for me. However, for those just joining the thread now, I love the A-Team show, and the Smurfs in all incarnations I know of (until this film)...

However, I have a comment on the first Bay Transformers movie: I never saw the show, (or the 80's animated film) just knew the catchy theme. I watched the original Transformers...the Go-Bots! But I finally saw the Bay Transformers movie, and I thought the robots themselves were cool, and I liked their personalities...Optimus Prime had real depth, and he was great. However, as for the rest of the film, I wish it had been set in the 80's - otherwise, it was good. Not the best movie as some people said when it came out, but, good indeed...and as I said, there was some heart in it with the way OP spoke.

But again, I would just change the time setting. And I wish it had an 80's film feel to it with the dialogue and everything. (But oh well. Everything is a product of it's time, I guess.) As much as people bash the Masters OF The Universe (he-man) film, (and i agree, it's not as good as the show) it was at lease made in the 80's and set in the 80's - the same decade the show was created in, so that's a big plus for me.

 

[Drtooth]

To be fair, I've heard nothing but good things about Karate Kid. Other than the fact it's the wrong martial art, it look like it's actually BETTER than the source material. I'll try to see it in theaters at some point.

A-Team... well, considering the source was basically a macho action adventure TV show, expecting great things from a movie version of it is a stretch.

But Smurfs... every day I hear something that makes the film seem worse. Jeff Foxworthy's signed up to do a voice for it. George Lopez AND Jeff Foxworthy. yeah...

 

[Super Scooter]

But Smurfs... every day I hear something that makes the film seem worse. Jeff Foxworthy's signed up to do a voice for it. George Lopez AND Jeff Foxworthy. yeah...

Besides the fact that I don't particularly enjoy either Lopez or Foxworthy's "work," I want to give Smurfs a chance... that could be because I never really enjoyed the Smurfs either... Wait, why am I giving it a chance?

Anyway, I feel for you, Drtooth. This trend is getting rather tiresome.

 

[Drtooth]

Besides the fact that I don't particularly enjoy either Lopez or Foxworthy's "work," I want to give Smurfs a chance... that could be because I never really enjoyed the Smurfs either... Wait, why am I giving it a chance?

I really don't mind George Lopez that much, but I think he has about as much business being the voice of a Smurf as Michael Bell has being the patriarch of a sitcom about a Hispanic/Latino family.

Even then, I don't care who they get as voices of the Smurfs, the entire movie plot sickens me. I wish Paramount retained the rights and did it themselves. They had REAL plans. Sony just wanted to cash in off of something, and clearly had second thoughts. Their lack of confidence shows in the August release date.

EDIT: I don't trust Wikipedia at all, but:

Set in the Middle Ages, the evil wizard Gargamel (Hank Azaria) discovers the Smurf's village and chases them into some woods. The Smurfs get scattered and Clumsy Smurf (voiced by Anton Yelchin) wanders into a "forbidden" grotto and some of the other Smurfs follow. Since it's also a blue moon, a magical portal within the grotto transports them into Central Park in New York.[3] They take shelter with a married couple (Neil Patrick Harris and Jayma Mays) and try to find a way back to their village before Gargamel finds them.

I still think this is a stupid idea, but they THANKFULLY took the little girl crying them to life aspect out of the movie. Maybe I WILL give it a shot. That was the deal breaker for me.

 

[Yorick]

In addition to the plot and setting of the Smurfs movie (yes, yuck to them) and the whole CGI (yuck - leave them animated without CGI) and live action mix (what is going on?) my main problem is the lack of respect and/or decency of the Smurf Movie people to ask the original Smurf voices still among us. They always seem to have to cash in by using film and TV actors instead of voice actors. But if we accept that, (as most have, I know) then George Lopez and Jeff Foxworthy aren't a problem for me. Their usual style, or nationality doesn't mean they can't do the roles right. Doesn't mean they will do it right, but...

A-Team... well, considering the source was basically a macho action adventure TV show, expecting great things from a movie version of it is a stretch.

A-Team wasn't that macho, I feel. They had heart, and fun, and yes, action/adventure! But I agreem expecting great things from a movie version of it is a stretch - but that's only because they don't have the original cast - of course minus George/Hannibal, sadly. I thought thay could have explained he had passed...even if it was with as little detail as in Blues Bros 2000 - ("Sorry about Jake, Elwood").