'OBLIVION' Despite having Tom Cruise, will this flick be any good?
- Thread starter YJ02
- Start date
mzzz
Well Known GateFan
Who were you directing this to?
I do watch some movies for the story. But most stories have already been told in most movies so the only new things are superficial aspects such as acting, setting, CGI, sci-fi elements, etc. And you know, there do exist just bad stories and/or bad presentation of stories. It's not enough to just watch a movie for the story, most of the times. If the characters are downright unlikable, then the story gets lost due to the unlikable characters. And from reading books, I think you'd agree that most movies have thin story-lines. TV format lends itself to better storytelling.
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
TV lends itself to "epic's", as opposed to "one shots", you are quite right Mzzz, I ALSO agree that you have to give a toss about the characters to make it worth watching in such a format. This week I was trying to read "threads of magic" by Mike Jefferies, and I am now 80 pages in and ready to throw it. The writing is bad, the characters are boring and I don't care what happens to them. The STORY however is LOTR redone, and I sorta like LOTR.
The stories ARE the same, it's just how we tell them.
The stories ARE the same, it's just how we tell them.
shavedape
Well Known GateFan
I'm not sure this directly relates to what you guys are talking about, but your posts did make me think of it. I've noticed that if a story is told well it doesn't need action to keep me interested. For instance, I just watched Lincoln with a friend and I found it fascinating from start to finish despite the dearth of physical action. Believe it or not I found the legislative scenes to be riveting. My friend on the other hand found the movie boring, mostly because the movie demands that one pay attention and think. In a way I resented the implication that one needed to be an intellectual to understand what the movie was about and why it was so exciting (despite knowing how it would play out). To me, the movie may have been lacking in "action" but it was loaded with "movement". How my friend didn't see that is beyond me.
Now I haven't seen Oblivion yet (I will later this week) but I'm hoping that the story is intelligible and interesting and not just a nonsensical action orgy. We shall see...
Illiterati
Council Member & Author
I got dragged into watching the goddamned thing. If I'd had my druthers, I'd not have watched it in the first place.
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
Bingo dude.
Tell me a good story, that's what really matters.
Its all about what the story is actually about. I rag on transformers because it turned a "hero journey" into a CGI action orgy. Optimus prime DIED in the original movie because he played the sacrifice, and Transformers cheapened that sacrifice.
They changed the story.
Imagine a "Lincoln" remake where he does not die the way he actually did.
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
Your Druthers??
Shit dear, you are either older than you say, or have a expansive knowledge of double damask dinner napkins
Illiterati
Council Member & Author
It's my seedy past involving all that reading. It helped to expand my vocabulary and introduced me to otherwise archaic language.Your Druthers??
Shit dear, you are either older than you say, or have a expansive knowledge of double damask dinner napkins
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
So, you don't know double damask dinner napkins??
I am younger than you by some minus years, but now I feel old
BAHAHAHAHAAAAA
I am younger than you by some minus years, but now I feel old
BAHAHAHAHAAAAA
shavedape
Well Known GateFan
Your Druthers??
Shit dear, you are either older than you say, or have a expansive knowledge of double damask dinner napkins
It's my seedy past involving all that reading. It helped to expand my vocabulary and introduced me to otherwise archaic language.
That's sort of like when I encountered the works of Elizabeth Peters, most notably her Amelia Peabody mysteries. Since the series of books takes place in the latter part of the Victorian era the vocabulary is something to behold. I learned such words as "detectival" and "criminous" are/were actually legitimate words in the English language. Sadly they have fallen out of usage and not even spell check on a computer will recognize them.
At any rate, three cheers for writers who do their homework (including our resident scribe)!
Illiterati
Council Member & Author
I enjoy using archaic language. I figure that as long as I can work "Halberd" and/or "lochaber" into a conversation, the day isn't completely lost. <grin>That's sort of like when I encountered the works of Elizabeth Peters, most notably her Amelia Peabody mysteries. Since the series of books takes place in the latter part of the Victorian era the vocabulary is something to behold. I learned such words as "detectival" and "criminous" are/were actually legitimate words in the English language. Sadly they have fallen out of usage and not even spell check on a computer will recognize them.
At any rate, three cheers for writers who do their homework (including our resident scribe)!
shavedape
Well Known GateFan
Bluce Ree
Tech Admin / Council Member
"fuhgeddabahdit" isn't a real word, dude.
Says you, smarty pants.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
Gatefan1976
Well Known GateFan
B
Backstep
Guest
"fuhgeddabahdit" isn't a real word, dude.
Isn't that the American spelling of Fahrvergnügen?
Your friend is representative of the New Audience. The New Audience are usually people from the younger generations who are not even familiar with more intelligent fare. Others are so inundated with the stupid media blitzes on talentless hacks "acting" in dreck like reality shows and watching the dumb drama shows on CW and A&E, and their bar is lowered significantly. Or, they are visually oriented people who dont really pay much attention to the story. My brother frequently tells me he finds things boring that I find fascinating. But he is an artist and his judgments are always based on how something "looks" and not the substance of it. He buys things based on their design rather than the function (which is why he was always a Mac user), and he is a sucker for the "look" of sophistication over ACTUAL sophistication.
You are an intellectual, and your friend is not...in a nutshell.
Last edited:
YJ02
Well Known GateFan
Your friend is representative of the New Audience. The New Audience are usually people from the younger generations who are not even familiar with more intelligent fare. Others are so inundated with the stupid media blitzes on talentless hacks "acting" in dreck like reality shows and watching the dumb drama shows on CW and A&E, and their bar is lowered significantly. Or, they are visually oriented people who dont really pay much attention to the story. My brother frequently tells me he finds things boring that I find fascinating. But he is an artist and his judgments are always based on how something "looks" and not the substance of it. He buys thing based on their design rather than the function (which is why he was always a Mac user), and he is a sucker for the "look" of sophistication over ACTUAL sophistication.
You are an intellectual, and your friend is not...in a nutshell.
I am starting to believe that when the "majority" says a movie sucks then it is probably good as this "majority" is increasingly comprised of those of the "new audience"\\the kind that watched nu ST just for its SFX
shavedape
Well Known GateFan
Okay, I finally saw Oblivion. It wasn't as bad as I expected but it wasn't great either. It smacked of being a typical, formulaic Tom Cruise movie if that makes sense. I had much of it figured out early on (I mean really, "radiation zone"? 
).
It also had some bad editing and direction in parts. Minor things but enough to be annoying I found. Like when his partner releases the killer drone from the basement and it begins shooting you don't see what happens to her. I had to guess that she got blown away by it even though that wasn't clear.
At any rate, it was definitely a movie not worth seeing in a theater.
).It also had some bad editing and direction in parts. Minor things but enough to be annoying I found. Like when his partner releases the killer drone from the basement and it begins shooting you don't see what happens to her. I had to guess that she got blown away by it even though that wasn't clear.
At any rate, it was definitely a movie not worth seeing in a theater.
YJ02
Well Known GateFan
After having watched it, I can answer my own question with a "Yes"-Oblivion is good despite having Cruise in it.
It is one of those movies where I don't think it would have mattered who was in it. The story didn't depend on the actor(s) in it, There was no quasi super hero to save the day-it was a team effort.
Just seemed to me that it showed ordinary people doing their best to survive and coming together to pull off the difficult, but right, thing to do.
I read some of the negative criticisms of the movie-many of them were similar to "the plot and backstory was not deep enough; characters were not developed properly". Don't really see how they could have developed them more without ruining the story. IMO, they told just the right amount of personal history and the "what happened" to Earth issue. Perhaps some of these critics were not paying close enough attn?
Liked how we never saw any aliens, just their presence-kept the movie from becoming a SFX digitized cheese-fest. Could very well be that the "aliens" were actually nothing more then machines.