Since its release in 1976, the academy award winning Rocky has received six sequels (Rocky II-V, Rocky Balboa, and Creed). The original Rocky was a relatively low budget film focused on a down in his luck boxer with an extraordinary chance to prove his worth inside and outside of ring. It was hailed for its underdog story, acting, and its iconic training scenes. The subsequent sequels often opted to forgo many of the ideas and the low budget style found in the original film. Sequels sometimes included cartoonish villains and other elements that would be out of place in the grittier original Rocky. When Creed was released in 2015, it received near universal acclaim for its story and acting (especially by Stallone and Michael B. Jordan in the title role), which focused on a hungry fighter working to prove his worth to the world. Like Rocky, the film was a character study of a box working to confront his issues within and outside of the ring. Is Creed the closest thing in style and tone to the original Rocky?
How important is the soundtrack in a film? The selection or creation of soundtracks is big business in the movie industry, but how important really is it? Movie goers today are fairly savvy creatures and understand that particular scores match particular scenes. But what happens to a scene when a contrasting score is played to the expected tone of the scene? Does this change the entire "feeling" of the scene or can it offer a more complex examination of traditional representations of emotion in-situ? What happens when no music is used in an emotionally wrought scene? Or what happens to scenes when music is removed – are the scenes still able to portray the emotional depth of the moment?
Compare the box office success of movies with the rising prices of tickets and concessions. Is a really great movie worth the price for a "luxury" experience of reclining seats, Real-D 3D movies, and now food delivered to seats? Or are movie theaters just trying to stay in business while competing with online streaming services.
Perhaps add to this a look at how smaller independent theatres are also staying in business? – SaraiMW3 months ago
Given home theatre experiences, Cineplex does have to compete with offering a different type of viewing. Of course involved with this is the increasing costs of movies. But the deals keep com8n* so it looks like the death of cinema has earned a stay for another season. – Munjeera2 months ago
Maybe discuss the cultural history of movie theaters? For my part, I know that trips to the movie theatre were a staple of my early life, and it makes me more inclined to pass that to my own children as well. – ValleyChristion2 months ago
I'm not sure. I feel like they would have more business if they charged less. Maybe you could add features they could add to compete with online streaming services. – theWreader2 months ago
I would love for this topic to be explored, and I think a huge discussion point is the rise of Moviepass and such payment plans, that draw more people to the theater for a monthly fee. Also would be interesting to bring up Netflix wanting to buy theaters. – calvinIGH2 months ago
This is a difficult matter, especially since it's Hollywood and the MPAA that dictate ticket prices. Theaters barely make any money on tickets and thus have to charge exorbitant fees at concessions. I would thus say that the only films worth seeing in theaters are those you have a strong interest in; otherwise, wait for them to come out on Netflix. – LaPlant01 day ago
As soon as technology introduced the idea, movies have been wrestling with what to do with artificial intelligence. Once they are thinking on their own, do they have rights as a sentient being? This is seen very clearly with Data in the Star Trek: The Next Generation Series. It is also seen in animated films such as Astro Boy when the audience comes to see the robot more as a real child. The list goes on: AI, even Terminator 2 as the audience mourns the first Terminator’s demise, iRobot, Dark Matter (a Netflix series) etc. Since this is a very real part of our future, the varying views on this would be interesting to consider.
I think this topic could dip into real life exams such as with AI and even the creation of Sophia -- a real life AI who was even granted Saudian Arabian citizenship – Pamela Maria6 days ago
Wow--I didn't even know about that! I find that most responses, at least in the film industry, have been fearful about this topic. There's so much to discuss here! – tclaytor6 days ago
An additional suggestion. Look in to Ray Kurzweil and his Frankenstein like 'Transhumanist' agenda. It may not be a case of 'Once they are thinking on their own', but once we have been forcibly fused with AI (as Kurzweil wants), will we still be sentient humans in our own right? Now, where's my sabot? – Amyus4 days ago
The films Blade Runner and Blade Runner 2049, are focused on the concept of what it means to alive or "human". It is the one of core theme of both films. – Sean Gadus3 days ago
Discuss the history of CGI, it’s greatest accomplishments, as well as comparing this method of filmmaking to more realistic props that were used in the older age, as well as today (Nolan films being a huge point of reference). As well as cosmetics (LOTR v The Hobbit Trilogy) and shooting on location or on set (The Revenant) and how each of these mediums have their ups and downs, and which one produces the better film for select genres. For example, could we even produce an Avengers film solely using real props and make-up? Or are big blockbuster films like that doomed to be plagued by CGI?
A good topic and there are some really interesting discussions undergone throughout the development of CGI and the pros and cons from different directors. – SaraiMW2 months ago
One cannot mention CGI without Jurassic Park and how it can be used in conjunction with animatronics. – platinummad2 months ago
I believe a good path for this topic would be to focus on a certain genre, such as action or horror, etc. And compare the effect of CGI vs traditional stunts or props/make up. I think a narrower focus would allow for a more in-depth analysis – Sery8012 months ago
I think when a film uses real props, it adds more of an imaginative feel to a movie. For example, a lot of 80s movies like the Goonies, The Lost Boys and so on, have a different kind of feel to them because of the hand made touches. I think it makes things feel more realistic even though that is the whole purpose of CGI. It also makes viewers feel that a lot of personal time and effort went into the movie. Not that CGI doesn't take an extreme amount of time an effort, I just mean that it adds more of a personalized effort. It seems as time goes on the industry, it is relying on CGI more and more. Realistically, I think CGI is going to be the way the industry goes whether we like it or not. – Melissa6 days ago
CGI is an inevitable and unavoidable part of the big budget film making experience, especially in sci fi and fantasy films. I think what is more important is how filmmakers are using CGI in ways that doesn't detract from the film. George Lucas, one of the founding father of digital cinema (Look up the Star Wars prequels and you will see how many technique ILM helped pioneer for better or worse), talked about how CGI should is used to tell a story and how it really isn't different from practical effects, because they have the same goal: to help tell your story. – Sean Gadus3 days ago
Clint Eastwood in five movies between 1971 and 1988 (Dirty Harry, Magnum Force, The Enforcer, Sudden Impact, The Dead Pool) did what has to be seen as a guilty pleasure: Here was the law dispensing justice in a way that often bypassed the complexities of the legal process and in the end the problem was solved. Villains came across in these movies often as caricatures where the audience could easily get behind Harry as he did his thing. When looking at these movies from the present, in one way, they seem to come from a different era, a different time, yet, at the same time, the simplicity of justice seems to echo Donald Trump’s approach to basically any policy he wants to address: There will be no consequences, we do something and suddenly the problem is solved and America is a better place. If only things were that simple, the Dirty Harry legacy lives on.
A poignant scene in Django Unchained, directed by Quentin Tarantino, is when the free slave Django rides his horse alongside Calvin Candie’s carriage and henchmen. The rap song complementing the scene -100 Black Coffins by Rick Ross – is a stark historical juxtaposition. The song is certainly attractive to the ear, but does this choice of music go deeper than aesthetic? Does it allude to both the enslaved plight of African Americans whilst also drawing parallels to their modern plight (one often expressed through Hip Hop culture)? Does this ring true for other films? If so, what films and why?
Yes, this is a great topic. Hope I'm not overstepping here, but I think the word you're looking for anachronistic: when does an element in a work of art, whether editing, sound, lighting, etc. seem out of place or out of context? In Django it appears to enhance the experience, but perhaps in other films, in the hands of someone differently skilled, the use of anachronistic music might instead alienate the viewer. Really interesting topic. – Matchbox3 months ago
Thank you for that correction and insight - makes things much more succinct! – danielleraffaele3 months ago
Although the idea of "winning" is complicated, the female cast of Ocean’s 8 "win" in so far as they are successful in their heist (even beyond their original expectations), form a strong alliance and friendship, and, in the case of Debbie, get their revenge. Although the film originally foreshadows the heist plan backfiring due to Debbie’s desire to get revenge on her ex-boyfriend by framing him, this expectation is not fulfilled as he is sent to jail. What does the film’s conclusion mean in terms of the film’s conception of feminism?
I think feminism is integral to the film but also the theme is not portrayed in a straight forward way. Think about the humour at the end when Sandra Bullock's character talks about how they are inspiring young girls to steal. This speech anticipates how the film will be thought of as an empowering feminist manifesto and makes a joke of it. We are reminded that the film is a comedy and just because of a heavily female cast we should not only think of the film in terms of a political agenda. It is a good film in its own right. – elizask7 days ago