Are some things better done retro?
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
^^ More at:
http://imgur.com/a/W4XKk
http://imgur.com/a/W4XKk
^^ Groovy. 
James Bond is one of those characters like those I cited above who belongs in a particular era-- in this case, the Cold War. Saying that we can't have a story about fighting communists during the Cold War is like saying we can't have a story about fighting the British during the Revolution.
James Bond is one of those characters like those I cited above who belongs in a particular era-- in this case, the Cold War. Saying that we can't have a story about fighting communists during the Cold War is like saying we can't have a story about fighting the British during the Revolution.
I certainly have a lot more than that, but you're entitled to your opinion.
Spending several hundred million dollars on a movie is obscene to begin with, and nobody will ever raise that much on Kickstarter. What I'm looking for through Kickstarter is movies that focus on story and characterization, not vapid studio blockbusters full of CGI explosions. That's pretty much the whole point.
I respect modern films, particularity sci fi films, that seem to be done in a more old-school style in terms of the production.
My example, IN TIME, which was a film that was sold entirely on it's concept - that it was an allegory of economics and class and what would happen if you try to flood the market to change the system. They say it's set in the future, but it only makes sense if it takes place either inan alternate present of alternate future (because this monetary system would have to be around for along, long time).
However, for a modern science fiction film in an era where even moderate films can afford decent CGI, allowing the producers to really liven up the scenes and put more people in the seats, this film doesn't go there. They obviously had a limited budget, and the people involved didn't spend the money they had on a lot of CGI, or to really fancy up the environments. So the filmed it in a style that was more reminiscent of science fiction films of the 80's and the 90's, where the production designers would find unique, even plain-looking locations which would have a vaguely futuristic look to it. In the original Total Recall, the Earth scenes were filmed using the unique, stark, and monolithic architecture of Mexico City, but it kind of looked futuristic. In Time played by the same rules, filming many scenes near empty buildings, storage units, and underpasses. They didn't want to sell this film as a SFX blockbuster... they wanted to sell it on it's concept. You either want to see this film for it's ideas or you don't.
Whether you think it failed or whether you liked it as I did, I really respected this retro approach to science fiction film making, where the ideas were far ahead of the special effects in terms of priority.
My example, IN TIME, which was a film that was sold entirely on it's concept - that it was an allegory of economics and class and what would happen if you try to flood the market to change the system. They say it's set in the future, but it only makes sense if it takes place either inan alternate present of alternate future (because this monetary system would have to be around for along, long time).
However, for a modern science fiction film in an era where even moderate films can afford decent CGI, allowing the producers to really liven up the scenes and put more people in the seats, this film doesn't go there. They obviously had a limited budget, and the people involved didn't spend the money they had on a lot of CGI, or to really fancy up the environments. So the filmed it in a style that was more reminiscent of science fiction films of the 80's and the 90's, where the production designers would find unique, even plain-looking locations which would have a vaguely futuristic look to it. In the original Total Recall, the Earth scenes were filmed using the unique, stark, and monolithic architecture of Mexico City, but it kind of looked futuristic. In Time played by the same rules, filming many scenes near empty buildings, storage units, and underpasses. They didn't want to sell this film as a SFX blockbuster... they wanted to sell it on it's concept. You either want to see this film for it's ideas or you don't.
Whether you think it failed or whether you liked it as I did, I really respected this retro approach to science fiction film making, where the ideas were far ahead of the special effects in terms of priority.
(Go on, admit it: you really want to hear the line "Kneel before Zod!" delivered through clenched teeth.)
That'd almost be worth the price of admission on its own.
All of those are brilliantly and enviably well done!
I like The Fifth Element poster but Sean Connery should always have a mustache when doing science fiction. 
I have to disagree that Bond's appeal is a generalized alpha male fantasy. However it is true that this is where we disagree on the specific Bond issue and barring an extraordinaily elaborate, timeconsuming and expensive social science survey, we aren't going to find definitive answers.
I don't consider Mad Men retro, but a period piece. A period Bond done like this might even be good.
Making up your own facts doesn't mean you're making an argument. The notion for instance that Chavez shut down TV stations for disagreeing with him? That's a lie. The majority of TV stations in Venezuela have always disagreed with him. Some of the TV stations that openly supported a coup had problems, as they should have. You're like a guy who claims to have been jailed as a political dissident instead of a bank robber.
However, the notion of Bond films having more nuance given your crazy ideas seems quite unlikely.A reversal of the discussion.
So, someone took a bunch of today's movies back into the past...
(Go on, admit it: you really want to hear the line "Kneel before Zod!" delivered through clenched teeth.)
Quite amusing, congrats to the creator.
But not even Sean Connery could make The Fifth Element enticing to me.
Care to share any of it?
If you're thinking kickstart will let you make a Trek movie, I hope you relize that Paramount and CBS can say no.
Last edited:
At least we have proof now that being dour and stuffy is not limited to one political persuasion.
^^^We've been dissed!
This one's especially funny given how dour Bruce Willis' life is in The Fifth Element!
This one's especially funny given how dour Bruce Willis' life is in The Fifth Element!
I can't even begin to imagine how fucked up that would be.But "John Wayne Superman" can piss the hell off.
A reversal of the discussion.
(Go on, admit it: you really want to hear the line "Kneel before Zod!" delivered through clenched teeth.)
"Kneel before Zod...punk..."
Great site! Thanks for sharing.
I would point out to you that Mao was very much the darling of the Western media and that he rose to power mainly because the western newspapers had Washington convinced that he was a reformer and that backing Chiang was not an option. You could certainly say the Americans were more responsible for his murders than the Russians. But of course it's just another statistic to most Americans unless they want to get outraged about Obama/socialism/income redistribution.
But China doesn't do that. It's censorship is aimed mainly at information that could create mass gatherings and threaten the public safety. It certainly doesn't censor ideas.
Not a fan of Chavez, but most of the tv stations he shut down were owned by plutocrats who were opposed to him in the beginning and were disseminating lies and falsehoods about him. In most nations there are restrictions about the media outright lying, I know you aren't use to that in America with the hyper-partisan media such as Foxnews.
No.
But of course, using an historical setting is not the same thing as "retro."
But of course, using an historical setting is not the same thing as "retro."
No.
But of course, using an historical setting is not the same thing as "retro."
Yes, you are correct. The recent Captain America, for example, was not retro. Doing a Flash Gordon or Buck Rogers movie in the style of the original serials would be--and that would be kind of a cool movie to see as well.
I've often thought that the Bond books done as a period piece, one book per (6-7part) series would be pretty good, especially as that guy is different to the one we see in the movies. The movie Bond has parts of the same character, but not all at the same time, and moist don't look like, as Fleming suggested, Hoagy Carmichael.
Mostly what's obvious: TOS is an iconic and instantly recognizable part of pop culture that has been around for nearly fifty years, and inspired several generations-- not only with its optimism and social allegory, but it also inspired many to pursue careers in science and engineering and even politics. Its fans have included people from Carl Sagan to Stephen Hawking to Barack Obama to the King of Jordan to all those talking heads on Science Channel. It has a unique and engaging aesthetic. Plus, even in this day and age, a large audience can be found for colorful and Humanistic stories, as evidenced by the success of, for example, the works of Pixar.
Well, I never said anything remotely like that, but thanks for the digression into obviousness.
Similar threads
