Rob, you are stark raving mad!!!
You just said that character and plot doesn't matter in the movies. I totally disagree.
You also were the one to infer I said old (as in 20- or 40- or 75-year old) movies were better. No, I referred to modern movies that only pay attention to special effects.
I am not saying special effects are always bad. I am saying that in the absence of substance beneath those special effects, the movie will be hollow. For example Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (watch the entertaining and scathing 7-part critique of how bad this movie is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI) was awful, despite awesome special effects. Recent movies like The King's Speech or Black Swan establish that you can make a quality movie without an excess of implosions (it is no longer enough to have EXplosions, now we need IMplosions).
Great photos need character and plot (literally or metaphorically speaking). Special effects and filters need to reinforce their essence and substance, not distract from them.
ďYou just said that character and plot doesn't matter in the movies. I totally disagree.Ē
I accept your disagreeing, but that doesnít make me wrong. I explained my rationale in my post and wonít repeat it here.
Movies need action pretty much by definition. Movies that attempt to limit themselves to talking heads or stage plays are probably best not made as movies but presented as stage work or book. I watched the King's Speech
thing over and over again on so many news shows on tv (couldnít escape the damned thing!) that I knew, and had confirmed for me over and over again, that I could never sit through such a film. If I did, then your opening line regarding my sanity would have been absolutely accurate! I canít abide those stilted English accents; I detest the current trend to provincialism and regional accents just as much. There exists a decent mid-point that, oddly enough, does sometimes appear in a place where one might not expect it: some good tv commercials!
I donít want to be bored by entertainment, a contradictory concept; real life can produce that effect all by itself and often does. I want to be uplifted, given a thrill and a buzz and allowed to fly with eagles, even if illusory ones.
I donít care
if cars donít explode in quite the manner they are shown to do; it doesnít break my heart if girls are impossibly beautiful on screen. I used to be absolutely delighted watching that gorgeous cousin in Dukes of Hazzard (Jessica Simpson), and would be tickled pink wondering how many cars they wrecked doing the jumps. It was a celebration of America and its ability to write off so much property in the name of cinematic joy. That was then. Today, we are all so much more world-weary; weíve mostly seen everything thereís to be seen, and so effects per se donít always do itÖ we require new ones that we havenít seen before, and thereís the rub: it takes imagination on an ever greater scale. And we often get that wrong.
My wife and I used to have a subscription to a movie channel. We let it drop because it had ceased to interest either of us. Why? Not effects, but tone. Neither of us enjoyed watching cruelty, blatant sex or pretentious guff. The sad thing is, I suspect, that movies are probably for the very young, the more easily shocked the better or, perhaps, there really isnít any real audience left: itís happening in the games world instead.