The mean side of good movies

[JesterFace]

Is this the right place for a movie thread?
Anyway....

You know the feeling when you have finished a great movie and start thinking about it. ”I wish there was more of this.”
But, there isn't.
I recently watched 'What's Eating Gilbert Grape', awesome movie but.... I want more.
This is where TV series is better, there's so much more of it.
What happened to Gilbert, his family and his brother, what about the thing with Becky, what happened....?

 

[auntiehill]

How exactly is that "mean?"

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Sometimes it’s just better off ending where it does. In some sequels they end up undoing happy endings to preserve the drama.

 

[JesterFace]

How exactly is that "mean?"

Maybe I chose the wrong word but I meant like they leave you wanting for more.

 

[auntiehill]

"Frustrating" is probably the word you were searching for.

 

[JesterFace]

"Frustrating" is probably the word you were searching for.

Well, if someone with the powers to change the title gets lost here for some reason, why not change it. =)

 

[auntiehill]

You'll have to ask a Mod directly.

 

[the G-man]

Sometimes it’s just better off ending where it does. In some sequels they end up undoing happy endings to preserve the drama.

Waaaay too many films that should have been a "one and done" (or maybe "two and done") are "ruined" by unnecessary sequels or prequels.

 

[Mojochi]

The whole point of many movies (over tv shows) is specifically that you don't get spoon fed every possible moment, and get to enjoy the process of imagining it for yourself. Those are my favorite movies, smart movies, that treat the viewer as a thought capable participant, & not just a passive witness

For example, you don't need to know what becomes of Anton Chigur in No Country For Old Men. It's not necessary for the narrative, & if you consider what you've seen, you can likely deduce it yourself.

Heck, there's a whole other story to tell about Leonard Shelby in Memento, after the primary killing, but it doesn't need to happen.

IMHO, the two main rules in cinema are #1 show, don't tell. #2 show only what is needed.

That is NOT the objective of TV at all, on the whole.

 

[flandry84]

Big trouble in little China.
I’d really like another trip on the ol’ Pork chop express.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

I have some great news about What's Eating Gilbert Grape, specifically. I don't mean that snarkily; it's even better as a novel (Juliette Lewis was good, but kind of miscast). It was a favorite back in the day.

 

[auntiehill]

The whole point of many movies (over tv shows) is specifically that you don't get spoon fed every possible moment, and get to enjoy the process of imagining it for yourself. Those are my favorite movies, smart movies, that treat the viewer as a thought capable participant, & not just a passive witness.........

THANK YOU!!

It is so refreshing to see a film that does this job well. A good film doesn't need MORE--it gives the audience what is necessary and not one drop more. A good artist knows when to put down the brush and step back.

 

[the G-man]

THANK YOU!!

It is so refreshing to see a film that does this job well. A good film doesn't need MORE--it gives the audience what is necessary and not one drop more. A good artist knows when to put down the brush and step back.

This reminds me of an interview with Clint Eastwood I read waaaay back in the day, where he was talking about some of his movies attempting to do just that. He specifically mentioned "High Plains Drifter" and how the original draft spelled out just who and what the stranger was/wasn't and how he revised it to make it more ambiguous. The original draft would have been a competent, but pedestrian, western, while the filmed version is a classic.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

The whole point of many movies (over tv shows) is specifically that you don't get spoon fed every possible moment, and get to enjoy the process of imagining it for yourself. Those are my favorite movies, smart movies, that treat the viewer as a thought capable participant, & not just a passive witness

For example, you don't need to know what becomes of Anton Chigur in No Country For Old Men. It's not necessary for the narrative, & if you consider what you've seen, you can likely deduce it yourself.

Heck, there's a whole other story to tell about Leonard Shelby in Memento, after the primary killing, but it doesn't need to happen.

IMHO, the two main rules in cinema are #1 show, don't tell. #2 show only what is needed.

That is NOT the objective of TV at all, on the whole.

I agree in most cases but I think there’s exceptions for deeply developed sci-fi universes.

 

[Owain Taggart]

I agree in most cases but I think there’s exceptions for deeply developed sci-fi universes.

Even then, sometimes it can be overdone and milked. I'm not a big fan of what Disney is currently doing with SW, for instance. Some things just need to be left to the imagination. Not everything needs to be filled in.

 

[Orphalesion]

The biggest problem I have with Disney's Star Wars sequels is that they basically undid the happy ending of the original movies in every conceivable way for what is, essentially, just a re-hash of the Rebellion vs. Empire plot-line.

The prequels were bad enough, but at least they tried to tell an original story and could have been much better with a bit of tweaking and changes.

 

[fireproof78]

You know the feeling when you have finished a great movie and start thinking about it. ”I wish there was more of this.”

Yes and I love that feeling. To me, that means the story did well. It hooked me in a way that left me wanting more, like a really good meal. My wife thinks I'm nuts but I love the smell of well cooked hamburger or steak, even after I've eaten and satisfied because it's just a fun reminder.

One of my favorite films is "The Ten Commandments" followed by "National Treasure." To my mind, neither needs a sequel. Do I feel like it would be great to have more? Yes, but I prefer that feeling.

The biggest problem I have with Disney's Star Wars sequels is that they basically undid the happy ending of the original movies in every conceivable way for what is, essentially, just a re-hash of the Rebellion vs. Empire plot-line.

Welcome to mythology.

And, honestly, it's where the EU books ended up too. If I want the happy ending of STAR WARS then I just watch the OT, and that's it. No books, no PT, no ST, no shows. It's a fairy tell end and I'll treat it as such. But, in mythology, rarely do heroes get the happily ever after that fairy tales have stated happens.

 

[Jayson1]

Not a good movie but Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes. It isn't till the very end when you realize you wished you had just watched a Planet of Apes movie using that setting instead of the one they did use.

 

[Mojochi]

The biggest problem I have with Disney's Star Wars sequels is that they basically undid the happy ending of the original movies in every conceivable way for what is, essentially, just a re-hash of the Rebellion vs. Empire plot-line.

The prequels were bad enough, but at least they tried to tell an original story and could have been much better with a bit of tweaking and changes.

Kind of exactly my point about tv vs movies. In TV it's actually encouraged to literally explore every possible nook for something to mine for content. It's kind of discouraging imho, especially since it had once been a movie without that goal

I'm actually kind of surprised no one has similarly taken the Alien franchise to tv & etched out every last cranny of that universe ad nauseum... until who'd even give a shit about Ripley

 

[Admiral2]

Not a good movie but Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes. It isn't till the very end when you realize you wished you had just watched a Planet of Apes movie using that setting instead of the one they did use.

The one virtue of that movie was the ending was adapted from the original book more faithfully than anything else in the franchise.