Lately, a lot of movies are coming out and do not end the way that viewers hope: everyone together and happy. While this seems like it would turn a lot of people away from movies, especially those about love and relationships, it actually is improving ratings and gaining more viewers because many of those in the audience can relate to the negative life events. Is this bringing us closer as a society and enhancing reality, or have we lost the original goal of movies which was to give viewers an escape from reality?
I think it's an interesting issue, one worth researching further. I do not agree, however, with the generalisation. There are movies which are simply for entertainment (escapism), but there are also other ones which are very thought-provoking. It is difficult to take a stance that argues one or the other. I would suggest, instead, looking into some examples from both poles and exploring the effects and goals both types of movies have. :)
– Kaya6 years ago
I love the idea of this topic, especially now that The Avengers series has come to an end. Although "End Game" ended relatively happily, major characters were still sacrificed and lost, something superhero fans are not accustomed to (and "Infinity War" had everyone shook). Another good example is the popularity of Game of Thrones where death is ever present and characters perpetually suffer through tragedies. I especially like you bringing up romance movies, and personally think the sad endings are grounding people to reality and feeling more for the situations. Are we as a culture, growing up? – Slaidey6 years ago
I really like the idea of this post, but I am not so sure that all viewers are actually expecting or 'hoping' a movie to be ending a particular way ('together and happy'). Yes, a lot of movies are created with the intent to create some Utopian, idealised fantasy of happily ever after, but I also think that in the past there has been a lot of movies created along the romantic-comedy genre that end this way, and may be just what people expect to see sometimes. I think that the creation of movies that do not end in happy bliss are a good thing; maybe because it shows that in life things are not so perfect (and thus people can relate). But also, it may be a good thing as far as movies go in general, as variety in movie endings is always new and exciting. So, in fact, it may just be that viewers are just liking the different 'end' of movies, or it could be, like you said, because it relates to their own personal life. Regardless, movies are not real, they are art forms, depictions, and products of society and culture, and they take on different meanings to whomever may be viewing them. – jessicarealist6 years ago
It is a very interesting issue and agree that it is something to look further into! And also I agree that some people are just liking the different end of movie or somehow related to their life and personal issues ! – sunshinemegz896 years ago
With art now mirroring real life where not every ending is a happy fairy tale one, it offers more solace and acceptance to those who are really struggling with severe problems when not everything goes their way. It is okay to win and many times, lose. Not great endings allows people the chance of having something/one relatable to them and their fates in current times of increasing loneliness. For example, if a character they cared about failed miserably and then, a similar situation befell them, it will not prove as devastating as compared to having plots where everything is always happening perfectly as people on social media and increasingly in real lives, are trying to portray. – Dr. Vishnu Unnithan5 years ago
You don't need to be a dead rockstar to be martyred anymore! Rocketman (the film) is being released May 31, documenting Elton John's rise to fame. Bohemian Rhapsody (the film) came out last year, depicting Freddie Mercury's tribulations. This is It and Leaving Neverland offer some disturbingly different accounts of Michael Jackson's career. The Dirt (Motley Crue film) was torn to shreds for its authenticity shortly after its release. Compare and contrast rockumentary films and discuss what impact these glorified stories have on fans. Does it matter whether a rockstar is alive or dead when the film is made?
A legend in his own lunchtime! Nice idea for an article. Good luck to whomever picks it. You have my vote, emaglio. Approved. – Amyus6 years ago
No, it does not matter if the musician is dead or alive and it is essential that we show successive generations the musical talent of artists who played instruments because music is something which is disappearing form the curricula of schools across the United States and unfortunately commercial successes are almost never musicians anymore. Rockumentaries are essential to introduce new generations to the alternative to rap, to show them how Freddy Mercury was so talented at piano and how a beautiful melody enhances well-written lyrics. I know this is not what you asked but I wanted to comment on the importance of these biopics in the revival of real music not synthesized detritus. All of the musicians you mentioned played at least one instrument and it is VITAL that we continue to educate successive generations about the beauty and artistry of music. – youngmollflanders6 years ago
Analyse how the male characters are perceived in Avengers Endgame; especially the character of Thor. The movie breaks down conventions surrounding strong, and stereotypically masculine characters showing Thor in despair and defeated unable to deal with his 'failures'.
One scene that I feel is relative to this is Captain America being part of a support group for survivors of The Snap incident. – Kevin Mohammed6 years ago
This is a good topic as it talks about a serious issue as it relates to a popular film with a large reach. I think it would be good to also address how it shows Thor's mental health in a more comedic light and whether that is good or not for mental health awareness. – TheDude6 years ago
We’re seeing an increasing number of movies where the majority of the music is unoriginal, but the music is one of the best parts of these movies for many people. Examples include both Guardians of the Galaxy movies, the Shrek series, and Gnomeo and Juliet. For the movie Baby Driver, action scenes were carefully choreographed to match the soundtrack, rather than music being composed or selected to match the action. Movies about musicians, like Bohemian Rhapsody and the upcoming Rocketman and Yesterday, are in similar situations. Can we call these films Art Films? Is their unoriginality a flaw? Can they be compared to movies with iconic, original scores by John Williams or Michael Giacchino? Are they only becoming more popular because we are in an era with so much good “classic” music to fall back on?
Something interesting to look into would be artists chosen to compose these "various artist" soundtracks for movies: such as how Lorde was in charged with the Hunger Games series. Another interesting thing to note is that many of these movies now have two OSTs -- one with orchestral music and the other with a compilation of more "pop" tracks. – Pamela Maria6 years ago
Definitely something to look into is why these are so popular psychologically for the public and its most likely to do recognition and glossy easy watching. They make the most money but are films that are structurally disorganized, though are constantly stimulating bc of everything visually pleasurable and most importantly: a song we recognize.
Think about why films like pitch perfect or Sing were successful... it could be because the time we just wanna sing along because its one big nostalgic throwback.
Guardians of galaxy example taking tracks that were canonized by past films, knowing people will love them but give the image of being ‘retro’ hits even tho we didnt grow up hearing those songs on the radio.... we just watched pulp fiction or virgin suicides – ariannacancian6 years ago
I agree with the notes about nostalgia and how OSTs are being carefully crafted to fit films that rely so heavily on songs that are not originally created for the film. More specifically, to the question of art, I'm not sure if comparing them to original scores would be beneficial, but viewing them as a different form of art could be extremely interesting since it does take a lot of thought, time, and artistic skill to select and place songs that will effectively improve certain scenes within films. Baby Driver is a great example that you note because it is a little jarring at times when some songs don't seem to fully fit or hit nostalgia as much as others, showing how the artistic slip-ups can have an impact on the structure of the visuals. Something that affects your engagement with a film so much deserves recognition as art, especially when it is done well. I would love to see this topic fully researched and expanded! – Aaron6 years ago
I have to say that original music is vital to a good movie and I cannot think of one great movie that was written for a soundtrack. I know of a great work in which a director and songwriter collaborated but the screenplay was brilliant and nominated for an Oscar. It is in my top ten American films: P.T. Andersen's:Magnolia. – youngmollflanders6 years ago
Christopher Nolan's epic 2010 blockbuster Inception drew on centuries of literature and philosophy. From Zhuangzi's ancient Chinese story of a man who dreamed of being a butterfly to the dream labyrinths of Borges to the work of Philip K. Dick, there is a rich literary history of ideas tucked inside this movie. Analyze the influences and help readers find the books that helped inspire this great film.
Cool idea! Maybe dig deeper for the 'why' of performing this task: does it reveal an overarching theme or format for these genres/styles of texts? What is the message here? – Heather Lambert6 years ago
Awesome idea! I love knowing the little contextual Easter eggs hidden in films. This article could give Inception some more weight (i.e. it's based on real ideas, not just made up for entertainment purposes). – Gemma Ferguson6 years ago
You can look upon the films of Luis Bunuel- Un Chien Andalou, Discreet Charms of the Bourgeoisie. Most of his works are based on the complexity of dreams. – Azira101phale6 years ago
It's also worth noting that Nolan admittedly drew upon the works of Satoshi Kon - in particular, the surreal and somewhat disturbing anime feature film 'Paprika' - for 'Inception'. – Amyus6 years ago
While it may not be literature, Paprika, a 2006 Japaneses film, could also be an interesting comparison to Inception. Paprika Deals with a machine that you allow someone to infiltrate another person's dreams. – Sean Gadus6 years ago
There have been many wonderful adaptions of popular novels, and also many terrible ones. What story elements must be kept faithful in order to appease fans and draw in new viewers. Is it important that the characters look the same? Does symbolism have to be exact?
An interesting topic. Your question own symbolism, well we know from past adaptations that change is likely. – Joseph Cernik6 years ago
The biggest element the film adaptation needs to have is keeping the heart of the story. Whatever made the book work should be applied to the film. The Harry Potter films take a lot of liberties but they make sure to keep the magic of JK Rowling's writing alive. – cbo10946 years ago
It is important to acknowledge the bias of the fans. Their views may lack knowledge or understanding of the movie making process. It is cheaper to mass produce a novel than to create a movie, and the staff have a demanding job of keeping with the main plot points while on a budget. In short, fans may have a different take on the novel than both the author and director, causing a disconnect between them. – Keithwcic6 years ago
The actor puts on a memorable performance on stage, by television, through radio, in film, and at times even the political or business arena. Shirley Temple started frolicking before the camera at the age of 3 by mesmerizing both young and old with her voice, dance, and then with her diplomacy for the United Nations. In the 1930s, Lucille Ball captured the attention of men, women, and children by her stage debut, modeling exploits, and as a studio executive. Carol Burnett entered the stage in the 1960s and endeared a generation of fans through televised comedy, earning her a Presidential Medal of Freedom for her unique brand of entertainment. Explore these unique facets of showmanship; child actor, slapstick comic that harkens to the burlesque of yore, public persona as a venue beyond conventional female roles, as a transformative mechanism of expression, realization, or determination.
This is a fascinating topic. I'm looking for a common thread between these actresses, and curious about what your main thesis/question would be. Is it specifically that these women defied conventional roles for women, and used this defiance of expectations as part of their "act" on stage or in film? How much of that was in their control? Or is it simply the fact that they, as women, being on stage/in films in these roles, defied conventions? Or are they more like case studies for a broader phenomena of women onstage, changing the industry? This is going to be such an exceptional article and I'm very eager to read it! – Eden6 years ago
The carhop made its debut in the 1920s alongside the advent of the early automobiles. It would been forgotten were it not for having a part in the 1973 film, American Graffiti. The concept quickly evolved from customers who preferred to dine inside their car, to initially male carhops that were later replaced with female carhops in order to increase profits. The Sonic Drive-In restaurant is a return to this novelty of yesteryear. More to the point, cinema has catered to the inclination of many people over time. The earliest attempts involved storefronts that were converted to impromptu movie houses. A motion picture was projected onto a wall for viewers who were charged a pithy entrance fee; hence, the name Nickelodeon. This popular diversion led to larger movie palaces (doubling the entrance fee) due to the demand for more comfortable viewing accommodations when longer shows became the attraction. A pattern that has elevated from the mime street artist, to the flea sideshow that was part of the traveling circus, to the theater. Indeed, the theater itself has undergone a plethora of embellishments in order to dominate its market and to stave the onset of competing technology. It has experimented with silent actors, 3D renditions, Dolby sound, CGI animation, IMAX, to name some of the more popular effects. One cinematic event did create a noteworthy following, for all the hurdles it endured. The drive-in theater required mere open land, a wall, and window-mounted speakers to attract moviegoers. This setting appealed to families, teenagers, and film enthusiasts alike. Relive the nostalgia as well as the monumental challenges (nationally or internationally) that drive-in promoters tolerated in order to deliver the show: inclement weather, night cover restriction, and overall outdoor nuisance in order to mount the ultimate movie experience of that era. Was it a sign of the times, a shift from convention, or an industry in flux?