Miscellaneous Movie Musings

Alex · 05-24-2006, 01:00 PM

1) I left out a word. FedEx officially began using the FedEx name in 1994 (though the FDX Co. was the owner of it all until changing that name in 2000). So the name and logos were accurate for 1995.

2) On the Stephen King thing, if it only bothers you if the "author" was paid for the placement, when you see products in a movie do you have to wait until you get home to see if money changed hands before you decide whether it was annoying?

3) Even in low budget movies pretty much everything and everybody involved is only there because money is changing hands. Hardly any of it is not-for-profit, just-for-the-hell-of-it community theater.

4) But it is ok, we can disagree. I just don't understand how or where you draw the line. Does it bother you that pretty much all of the cars in movies are real-world cars and generally identifiable as such? I just watched Last American Hero (one of the only truly good redneck movies to come out of the '70s) and they actually mentioned Ford and Chevy by name. And NASCAR (as does the upcoming Cars). It would have been easy to create a fictional stock car racing circuit but the shorthand is certainly more convenient and effective, even if it was paid for in the case of Cars (and I'm sure permission was at least given for logo use in Last American Hero).

5) There isn't a bit of "rah-rah patriotism" in United 93. It is a barebones attempt at recreating the events of that morning. Causes, reasons, and results aren't mentioned. The movie literally begins with the hijackers leaving their hotel room, ends with the last plane hitting the ground and never wanders into any side discussion. It is one of the most impactful films I've seen in a long time and nothing about it sinks to the quality of a TV movie.

6) I think it didn't do well because most people aren't really interested in seeing the story recreated, no matter how well it is done. For most people older than 15 when 9/11 happened they'll probably never be quite ready but for younger people it will just be an incident in history or a dimly held memory from their childhood. I think the movie will go down as one of the great reportorial pieces of moviemaking ever but it will have to wait for that next generation to do so.

05-24-2006, 01:00 PM	#10
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	1) I left out a word. FedEx officially began using the FedEx name in 1994 (though the FDX Co. was the owner of it all until changing that name in 2000). So the name and logos were accurate for 1995. 2) On the Stephen King thing, if it only bothers you if the "author" was paid for the placement, when you see products in a movie do you have to wait until you get home to see if money changed hands before you decide whether it was annoying? 3) Even in low budget movies pretty much everything and everybody involved is only there because money is changing hands. Hardly any of it is not-for-profit, just-for-the-hell-of-it community theater. 4) But it is ok, we can disagree. I just don't understand how or where you draw the line. Does it bother you that pretty much all of the cars in movies are real-world cars and generally identifiable as such? I just watched Last American Hero (one of the only truly good redneck movies to come out of the '70s) and they actually mentioned Ford and Chevy by name. And NASCAR (as does the upcoming Cars). It would have been easy to create a fictional stock car racing circuit but the shorthand is certainly more convenient and effective, even if it was paid for in the case of Cars (and I'm sure permission was at least given for logo use in Last American Hero). 5) There isn't a bit of "rah-rah patriotism" in United 93. It is a barebones attempt at recreating the events of that morning. Causes, reasons, and results aren't mentioned. The movie literally begins with the hijackers leaving their hotel room, ends with the last plane hitting the ground and never wanders into any side discussion. It is one of the most impactful films I've seen in a long time and nothing about it sinks to the quality of a TV movie. 6) I think it didn't do well because most people aren't really interested in seeing the story recreated, no matter how well it is done. For most people older than 15 when 9/11 happened they'll probably never be quite ready but for younger people it will just be an incident in history or a dimly held memory from their childhood. I think the movie will go down as one of the great reportorial pieces of moviemaking ever but it will have to wait for that next generation to do so.
	Submit to Quotes