Fifty years after its release, The Sound of Music remains one of the most beloved musicals, its appeal ranging across all ages and generations. What are the sources of its magic?
Would be interesting to explore the misogynistic undertones as part of the appeal. – Mrainey9 years ago
Screenplays are often given any sort of attention when they make the transition to a completed film; they're seen as companion pieces. Even then their value as literature is overlooked or plainly not considered. All films are adaptations of their source scripts. Should screenplays be judged as independent works separate from the finished films? Are they worthy of the same critical attention given to other works of art? Is there a difference between a filmed screenplay and an unfilmed one in this regard?
I think there is an unfair advantage and large difference between filmed and unfilmed screen plays because made films have inherently more content just because of scenes. A screen play could be minimal but because of staging or prop choices the film could be overflowing with symbolic imagery the screenplay never specified. I don't know how often this happens... this is also because no common person has access to original screeplays of their favourite films. Should we? – Slaidey9 years ago
It is important to remember that screen plays are not intended to be the final product, and that they do not include all of the nuances that are in the final film. Actors ad-lib or try several ways of delivering lines. Further, screenplays differ from stageplays in a vital aspect: consistency. Every time you watch a film, the same lines are delivered the same way and each shot is the same, compared to a stage play where even the same run with the same actors may have different deliveries between performances. Films, are the full package and are the product that has longevity, so it is the film, not the screen play, that is studied and analyzed. For stage plays, the performance has the full package, so to speak, but has no longevity, and so it is the script that is studied because it is the only part that will be the same between viewings/readings. Your idea of an unfilmed screenplay raises new ideas, though. There are plenty of examples of literature that are written as plays but weren't intended to be performed. In that way, I would see an unfilmed screenplay as the literature to be studied. Some authors use the screenplay format in novels, such as Walter Dean Myers' Monster. – nsnow9 years ago
I'm afraid to tell people I love "Super Mario Bros." It's awfully made, awfully told and awful in everyway. Yet in the same vein groups are popping up all over celebrating bad films and defending their right to enjoy them, from "Clue" to "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" (yes, the original one). Many movies are considered poorly made, yet enjoyed by devoted followers, cult films if you will. Many more are seen as completely wasteful and the ultimate "bombs". Yet still many people find great entertainment in these films that the majority have written off as bad, naming them "guilty pleasures", i.e. something bad they are only allowed to like because they can't help it. Can the public judge a film as not worth being made? Or should people be accepting of different tastes and try to remove the stigma "bad films" have (especially for those who enjoy them)? Can humanity ever look at all films as equal, and just rate by taste or is there an intrinsic human nature to defend ourselves from majorly disliked themes or techniques in filmmaking? Can explore evolving film methods (examining old films and how some stand up despite current technologies), notoriously "bad" films that have cult followings (Ed Wood's works, films that are "so bad they're good", etc) and/or personal moments of feeling shamed for liking something different than the mainstream.
See if you can't mention, "Manos the hands of Fate" as you do this write up. – ajester9 years ago
In keeping with the Manos the Hands of Fate suggestion, I think this could also provide an interesting discussion of the popularity of riff-tracks or other movie commentaries such as Mystery Science Theater 3000. Why do we seem to enjoy bonding over showing how clever we are by making jokes about a show that is enjoyable precisely because it is bad? Is this ironic enjoyment really any different than the sincere entertainment derived from a "guilty pleasure"? – bam2169 years ago
Sometimes called the "French Hitchcock" — a term also applied to Henri-Georges Clouzot — Chabrol had a propensity for the thriller genre, though his style was undeniably more detached than that of Hitchcock. His debut was 1958's "Le Beau Serge," modelled loosely on Hitch's memorable "Shadow of a Doubt" (1943). Discuss Chabrol's career, his films and his legacy on the international filmmaking community.
What I am interested in reading about is how horror films have evolved over the past century. The original horror films were primarily based on suspense. Later, the slasher films of the 70s and 80s reigned supreme, and more recently, torture films in line with the Saw series of films had their time. While it is easy to trace what types of horror films have come and gone over the years, what are the cultural backgrounds that tie to the rise of different sub-genres? Do these films comment on society or are they the product of society? Both?
I RECOMMEND DISCUSSING THE POPULARITY OF GHOSTS AND DEMONS IN RECENT YEARS VERSUS SLASHERS AND CREATURE FEATURES – Joseph Manduke IV9 years ago
I would suggest looking at the frequency with which horror movies have spawned sequels. They have become less concerned with making a social point and more concerned with making money. – Widdicombe9 years ago
It would be interesting to take a closer look at cultural stereotypes in American films. It is often seen as uncreative to cast conventional roles, but what about cultural preservation? Is making the Asian character skilled in martial arts cliche or does it show a powerful tradition passed from generation to generation? Is dressing the Saudi Arabian woman in traditional clothing stereotyping or does it represent respect towards her culture? When does it change from cultural appreciation to stereotyping and what are some ways stereotyping in a movie can be harmful to a people group? What are some ways to communicate the value of other people groups without stereotyping? It might also be good to mention cultural appropriation versus cultural appreciation.
Would also be very interesting to take a look at exactly WHEN the stereotypes appeared and if they changed throughout history. – rp929 years ago
The Orson Welles of low budgets and poor taste would have turned 91 on October 10. This seems like an appropriate time to examine his films and their impact on other filmmakers — most notably Tim Burton, whose lovingly comedic 1994 biopic starring Johnny Depp brought films like "Plan 9 From Outer Space" and "Glen or Glenda?" back into the popular lexicon.
I agree that Mr. Wood's filmography needs a re-evaluation due to how his work may or may not have influenced modern directors and filmmakers. But you say he'd be 91 years old tomorrow. It's not a closed age with a 0, and it's not an age that ends in 5. We're also still a few weeks away from Halloween. So I don't get what you mean by right now being the "appropriate time" to examine his films. Wouldn't last year have been a more appropriate time when he would have been 90? Or when it eventually becomes his 100th birthday. He's already dead, so waiting until his 100th would clearly have a better ring to it. Not that this really matters when discussing his works. But your turn of phrase seems misplaced when trying to convince others to write about him. – Jonathan Leiter9 years ago
Today, film trailers are longer than ever, and the editing often takes the most important moments of a film and throws them at the audience. They often show too much and we get the impression that we have seen the whole film just by watching a condescended 3 min version of it. How have trailers evolved through film history? Look at the trailer for Anatomy of A Murder for example, when director and producer directly address the spectators to promote their film. What happened to voice-over? How are they aesthetically different today?
There are a great many trailers from the early days of cinema, especially for B-movies, where all they were were a carefully condensed version of the film, just as they are today. They could range from one and a half up to even four minutes. They almost always had an excited voice over artist speaking about the characters, the locales, and the ups and downs of the plot. They even revealed big twists just like they do now, completely ruining most of the suspense just so people will know what they're getting before they go in the theater. I think the strange thing is that this style of trailer design has always been a part of the movie industry, but always for the lesser quality projects. Only now has this style of trailer moved into the mainstream except for the most special of occasions: causing our enjoyment of these arguably better quality films to be ruined before we get to see them from beginning to end. So although movie trailers for the A-list projects have undoubtedly gotten worse and less "teaser" like, disallowing us to be mystified before sitting down for the real thing, I think an article on this subject just might a bit more revealing about Hollywood's standards of the past than one might realize. – FilmmakerJ9 years ago
I like your initial question, "How have trailers evolved through film history?" By itself, that is an interesting topic to address, and I believe needs answered. However, I do wonder if a more complex analysis - such as a content analysis - is needed to fully answer the question. An exchange of opinions does little to provide an answer. In addition, I suggest that you avoid the latter questions posed at the end. Dealing with voice over and aesthetic changes are much more specific questions that can be dealt with, and deserve to be dealt with, on their own merits. Focusing on a historical trajectory of film trailers is a good place to start. The other questions can be branched off on their own. On a separate note, be sure you spell correctly. I do not believe you meant "evolitin" in your title. =) – Mark9 years ago
