Weekend Ests. (p19): SOC 13.2M|War Room 11|MI 8.3|No Escape 8.29|Sinister 4.65 |UNCLE 4.41|JW 3.12|AM 3.03|Minions 2.9|WAYF 1.8

[filmlover]

He should try to get a lead in a franchise, people will get tired of him in just comedies. 

I think the problem is that he's still stuck in that awkward phase of his career where he is trying to transition into a respectable actor as his Disney teen idol years fade away yet he's still not quite landing the right roles that would elevate to a higher level quicker.

[Webslinger]

I still have no idea what happened in Tree of Life.

 

Life. Dinosaurs. Pretty cinematography. Possibly a glimpse of the afterlife. Whispers. 

[Ethan Hunt]

He should try to get a lead in a franchise, people will get tired of him in just comedies.

He already is... High School Musical

[CJohn]

He already is... High School Musical

He is never gonna return to that and you know it.

 

He needs to stick with comedies. He is pretty good in those, I thought he was good in Neighbors. 

[filmlover]

He already is... High School Musical

LOL no. Nice try.

[tonytr87]

The complaints about the "preachiness" of these Christian-themed films are legitimate. It's not that these movies have explicitly Christian themes; it's that they deal with them in such a sloppy, over-the-top, and uncomfortably ultra-conservative manner (see: Fireproof - but only if you're ready to have an abundance of laughs that the filmmakers absolutely did not intend for viewers to have).

 

On the other hand, look at The Tree of Life and Life of Pi, two very spiritual films that garnered critical praise and Oscar nominations. While neither movie commits completely to explicitly Christian ideology (Tree of Life is non-committal about what exactly is happening in the third act, and Life of Pi embraces Hinduism and Islam in addition to Christianity), each one taps into prayer and spirituality in an effective manner without sacrificing character development or storytelling momentum.

 

Yeah. Outside of Mel Gibson no hardcore Christian filmmaker has any talent. It's strange. You would think some of these people would be able to write or direct something good, but nope. It's not impossible to make something "faithful" and good at the same time, but most of them can't hack it for some reason. 

[scoobysaurus]

Take care F7, IO is coming for your place.

Yeah, take care F7.. It's not like F7 made twice as much as IO WW..

[filmlover]

These low-rent Christian movies mainly exist to appease the God Warrior segment of the Christian population.

 

 

"GET THE HELL OUTTA MY HOUSE, IN JESUS' NAME I PRAY!"

[TServo2049]

I read an article about how modern Christian movies are mostly sermon first, movies second, contrasting it with the approach of the old-school Biblical epics back in the day (Ten Commandments, Ben-Hur, The Robe, etc.) that had religious messages certainly, but also far stronger filmmaking techniques. Not just from a budget perspective obviously, but in terms of acting/directing/script, the quality was far higher and it wasn't just an exercise in crafting a plot around a sermon. Now, the big budget religious films are things like Noah and Exodus, which weird out the religious audience that would otherwise go for them, and on the other side, there's the low budget stuff like War Room and God's Not Dead or the Tyler Perry morality plays that will never appeal to critics. If a director could come along and strike the right balance of artistry and message, he/she could make a fortune in the domestic market.

Nobody wants to make those kinds of movies. You have the people like Aronofsky and Scott trying to do edgy revisionist versions to show the rest of Hollywood and the critics they're intelligent and modern and iconoclastic and radical and not beholden to outmoded backwards religious dogma (in other words, simply reaffirming what the rest of the critics and Hollywood already know about them). The general moviegoers who don't want to see those interpretations reject it, and Hollywood laughs/sneers/laments that middle America is so backwards and conservative and narrow-minded to have rejected these "intelligent" "challenging" "brave" films which seem to have been explicitly designed NOT to appeal to them, and almost to deliberately provoke them.

And you have the small-time faith-based filmmakers doing their "preachy" films, certainly not that well-made, certainly ham-fisted, but they are a reaction (regardless of how warranted) to what Hollywood is doing to faith. "If they won't do it, we will." And they are trying to send a message BACK to Hollywood. And the critics trash these films not just because of the quality of the films, but because they seem incensed that films with these kinds of messages even EXIST. The reviews are as much a rejection of the films' world views as they are a criticism of the films themselves. Hence these films get single digits or even zeroes on Rotten Tomatoes. There are non-faith-based/non-conservative-oriented films of about equal quality, but they do not seem to get as much venom from the critics even if they get scores as low. Yet the public sometimes responds favorably. And when they do, the critics are appalled that these films are succeeding, and are apoplectic that paying audiences would be so "stupid" to want to see these movies. On the other hand, when the films flop, the critics point and laugh at the films for their failure, in a "serves you right for having such a backwards dogmatic point of view" way.

And when someone does make a film that hits big with middle America and the Bible Belt, the knives go out even if the film initially got good reviews on the merits of the film itself. The Passion of the Christ, The Blind Side, American Sniper, they all got trashed in a how-dare-this-film-be-this-successful way. I brought this up in the Inside Out thread, but I am absolutely convinced that The Blind Side singlehandedly killed the 10-nominee Best Picture slate simply by being nominated, pissing off the critics and Hollywood insiders who seemed to believe that its presence on the BP nominee list was besmirching the very name of Oscar.

There seems to be little interest in making an earnest, DeMille-type film that mixes faith and good filmmaking. People of "culture" love to bag on The Ten Commandments, its hammy acting, its morality, its "outmoded" values, but that film still gets great ratings on TV every Easter, even as less and less people watch conventional TV. But nobody wants to go that route. The people on the inside of Hollywood want to make films that basically pick apart and question their own source material, the people on the outside make their films which are naked displays of faith as a retort to what they perceive coming from the people on the inside. I agree, I think if someone tried to do a new big-budget epic in the vein of The Ten Commandments and Ben-Hur, something which took a traditional approach to faith but still had big scale and production values and actors behind it, it could do very well indeed.

Edited August 30, 2015 by TServo2049

[filmlover]

I disagree with the notion that The Blind Side killed the 10-nominee Best Picture slate, especially when it was the first year of the new rule and they brought it back the following year (it was 2011 when the change was made). It was a once-in-a-blue-moon BP nominations where the box office created the nomination ala Ghost, The Sixth Sense (two movies everyone can agree would've never caught on with voters if they hadn't become such phenomenons) instead of the other way around. Besides, it wasn't even close to the only Best Picture nominee that year that was subjected to endless backlash.

[Mr Terrific]

Tservo nails it.

[TServo2049]

I understand it took another year, I understand The Blind Side was not the only film people carped about (Avatar definitely got its share too), but when the rule change for the 2012 Oscars was reported, most of the articles still singled out The Blind Side as the kind of movie that would not get nominated now/that they hoped would not get nominated now, rather than any other beneficiary of the 10-film slate from either year.

As an outsider, not following the BO or awards very much, that was the title I remember hearing name-dropped most often. The only film for which I heard more "How the fuck did THAT get nominated" backlash was Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close - which was AFTER the current rules were implemented.

Edited August 30, 2015 by TServo2049

[Ethan Hunt]

The Blind Side was the best film from 2009.

[filmlover]

And yet the rule change still didn't prevent that !shock! Best Picture nomination for Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close (seriously, I still laugh thinking back to screams from the press room audience when Jennifer Lawrence announced it as the last nominee), so..

[Cochofles]

He is never gonna return to that and you know it.

 

He needs to stick with comedies. He is pretty good in those, I thought he was good in Neighbors. 

 

He'll be fine, no doubt. He is young, white, male, and hot. Hollywood will continue throwing movies at him until something sticks. If I were his agent, I'd make sure that he got into a Marvel or a DC film: that's a guaranteed multiple-movie paycheck and big audience exposure.

[CJohn]

He'll be fine, no doubt. He is young, white, male, and hot. Hollywood will continue throwing movies at him until something sticks. If I were his agent, I'd make sure that he got into a Marvel or a DC film: that's a guaranteed multiple-movie paycheck and big audience exposure.

I am not sure why but I don't see him as a superhero or an action star Sorry, but no. I am totally cool with him becoming a comedy star, tho. 

[kayumanggi]

Click to enlarge.

 

Edited August 30, 2015 by kayumanggi

[filmlover]

Efron might be too...pretty?...for Hollywood to ever consider him as a possible superhero type. Although he know doubt has the charm to play one with comic sensibilities.

[Cochofles]

Wait...are we really saying that Efron is too pretty to be believable as a superhero?  Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth, and Henry Cavill (and soon Jason Momoa) would like to have a word with you.

Edited August 30, 2015 by cochofles

[CJohn]

Wait...are we really saying that Efron is too pretty to be believable as a superhero?  Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth, and Henry Cavill (and soon Jason Momoa) would like to have a word with you.

I didn't said that. I just don't see him as a superhero at all. Just that. It is just my opinion, whatever.