They are so used to these brooding comic book heroes that they can't come to terms with a man who is aggressive and, par
-
psychoanalysis86 — 13 years ago(February 17, 2013 12:09 AM)
"Bad action films are just bad action films. Nothing to do with hipsters or pussification of society."
I suggest to you that action films that were "good" in the 80's wouldn't stand a chance today. If The Last Stand was released in the 80's with a younger Schwarzenegger, then it would be a hit. Hipsters, like I said, do have something to do with it.
I don't hate hipsters, by the way. This is just an observation. I didn't throw out the word "pussification either." -
Prismark10 — 13 years ago(February 17, 2013 04:32 AM)
I actually did watch action films in the 1980s. I think people suffer from the memory cheats syndromes.
Let me mention a few good action films that did poorly in the box office. Nighthawks and First Blood. Both found a renewed lease of life on VHS. Then there were other Stallone disappointments which again only seem to find an audience on video release such as Cobra, Over the top.
Charles Bronson, a character actor who became an action star from the mid 1970s onwards. His 80s output were basically short run film releases that would find a following on video. I know I used to watch his films on VHS.
Arnie and Chuck Norris began to do B action films that did well on VHS and migrated to better cinema films. This is especially true of Arnie with Predator, Total Recall and Terminator 2. In fact despite my dissing of Arnie in other threads on this board, Total Recall is one of the best action films I have ever seen with magnificent special effects.
Yet at the same time there were some really dumb actions films made throughout the 80s and 90s and that was the advent of straight to video.
Its that man again!! -
XSIV4C — 13 years ago(February 19, 2013 07:04 AM)
hey psychoanalysis86, after having seen the box office numbers for the new Die Hard movie, I wonder if my theory holds any water at all. 25 million opening in February is not bad at all. Those are the numbers that Arnold and Sly should have gotten. Any thoughts?
-
Prismark10 — 13 years ago(February 22, 2013 03:42 AM)
The success of Die Hard 5, not only in the USA but worldwide rather flies in the face of this 'pussification' theories.
Die Hard is an established franchise, but it has done well despite getting mixed reviews and maybe overachieved. Also Willis has been a more consistent presence in the box office, even though the last few years have been more erratic.
Its that man again!! -
Electric-101 — 13 years ago(February 17, 2013 01:02 AM)
OP is correct. Too many nerds/geeks/hipsters are pussfying this generetion with there need for comic book superheros with powers and vulnerabilities trying to be gritty and realistic while remaining metrosexual tone in PG-13 with lots of crazy CGI in 3D. Thats what dumbass airhead teens want these days. If this keeps up and Arnie/Stallone cant pull profits or even break even with there next projects then offically gone are the days of the mans man alpha male action films.
Say 'No' to rubber generic Robots as seen in RoboCop 2014 -
MadDog-ThrashTillDeath — 13 years ago(February 19, 2013 12:21 PM)
I couldn't agree more teenagers these days seems to avoid real toughness at all costs . and are very hungry for big CGI scenarios and fantasy tales that is the hit right now but again new generations are born with big fancy video games and are idiotized by social networks all day long so this is the ffect we are getting . so dissapointing.
-
XSIV4C — 13 years ago(February 21, 2013 06:00 AM)
i have to agree with psychoanalysis, it wasnt the CGI, as CGI is prevalent in other action movies that have done better. this post wasnt about "what is distracting to any particular person" cause i am sure it was distracting to you johnyflame. what i think this post was trying to figure out is WHY this movie and Arnold's movie flopped. my first thought was the "pussification" of society as i stated originally. but i must reconsider as the new Die Hard made close to 25M in the first weekend, which is what I thought Bullet and Last Stand would have made, as did Expendables.
-
psychoanalysis86 — 13 years ago(February 21, 2013 10:21 AM)
Twerp? I'm sorry, I thought I was discussing this with people who were old enough to go see the movie. I don't tend to argue with children.
Johnnyflame, please start getting to bed on time and quit watching R-rated movies until you're old to get on an internet forum without insulting people.
Anyway, the new Die Hard film isn't just a stand alone film. It is a franchise that's in its 5th installment. That has more fan base than just Bruce Willis alone. I don't think Bruce Willis' "Hostage" took in too much money either and that was an action/thriller. These guys don't hold a movie alone anymore. Stallone's Rocky and Rambo made money because they were franchise films that pulled in a huge fanbase. Several fans of the Rocky films don't give a flip about Stallone's other films. It is the closest thing to comic books that these actors have gotjust look at the new Die Hard film and the amount of CGI it had. And as I said earlier, just look at the Expendables(also comic book style) film and the amount of CGI there.
Bullet to the Head was too grimy looking to be a comic style film(It looked more like Stallone's Nighthawks) and the action set pieces were more visceral one on one encounters which made it too small scale for audiences who won't accept alpha males anymore. -
slade4ever — 13 years ago(February 21, 2013 10:43 AM)
psychoanalysis86:
They are so used to these brooding comic book heroes that they can't come to terms with a man who is aggressive and, partially, arrogant in his machismo.
First off, I love your name man.
Second, just to let you know, not EVERY comic-book fan is against Stallone-type action movies/characters.
Even though I'm a BIG comicbook fan, I LOVED Bullet to the Head as well as other great action masterpieces (i.e. Predator, Terminator 1/2, Enter the Dragon, Ip Man, Fearless, Unleashed, Rambo series, Die Hard 1/3, Lethal Weapon series, Shoot em up and MANY others).
I totally understand where you're coming from psychoanalysis86, just remember, some of us "nerds" are actually on your side.
Well, I've got news for you pal, you ain't leadin' but two things: Jack and sh*t and Jack left town -
slade4ever — 13 years ago(February 21, 2013 01:45 PM)
To be honest psychoanalysis86, I would say that your beef is with the general audience, NOT the comic-book nerds.
It's the general audience that are pushing for PG-13 comic book movies (or STUPID 80s cartoon remakes like the Transformers series).
Comics have actually grown up quite a bit (
many
comics today, if actually translated correctly would be R-rated, but the studios won't have any of that)
Well, I've got news for you pal, you ain't leadin' but two things: Jack and sh*t and Jack left town -
psychoanalysis86 — 13 years ago(February 21, 2013 09:01 PM)
I didn't say anything about Nerds. Comic book films are, in fact, general audience material these days so the audience for these films is basically comprised of both comic book fans and general audiences. Both are eating up pg-13 material and material devoid of this sort of alpha male pride. And I'm not beefing really, I'm just observing. The audience is responsible for the shift in desired filmsI'm just offering my reasons for why I think the shift occurred.
There is plenty to like in Comic book films, but I'm definitely saddened at what the PRIMARY FOCUS on comic book films as blockbuster entertainment has done to more explicit material in blockbuster entertainment. I also find it very interesting that male characters are so full of self-pity, self-deprecation and devoid of arrogance. I think that sort of character(the prideful alpha male) is very interesting and not being explored any further since this new type has arrived and set up camp. If we do receive an alpha male, he is portrayed as a dunder-headed non-threat when, lets be honest, those guys are full of threat ESPECIALLY for smaller, more humble/meek ryan reynolds types. Ryan Reynolds is in shape, but Stallone had more testosterone in his pinky finger that Reynolds has in his whole body.
I stand by my suggestion that general audiences(including comic folks) have a certain need to have characters up on the screen that they would want to hang out with, and the other alpha male characters must be emasculated/discredited in the name of hipster irony, in my opinion, to neutralize a threat that hits too close to home. -
psychoanalysis86 — 13 years ago(February 24, 2013 01:54 AM)
"You don't know what a hipster is. "Hipsters" are a very small minority. Your problem is with the general public."
Well you're wrong about them being a very small minority, but I doubt there are any studies to back you, or I, up about that. I'll just say that its quite obvious that hipsters are a huge subgroup of the late teens/20's crowd. Anyway, you didn't seem to read my last post. Why would you choose to enlighten me on my observation involving the general public when I've already said:
"Comic book films are, in fact, general audience material these days so the audience for these films is basically comprised of both comic book fans and general audiences."
"People don't want 65 yearold action stars."
I've already pointed this out, and the reasons I think this is true. Why are you saying anything if you're not going to even read what I've put out there?
"Pull your head out of your butt and recognize that."
A reaction that is perfectly in line with what I've been saying. This is a little too much for a response to a post without any insults. And you have basically not elaborated on anything you've said so you, by far, appear to be the one with your head up your "butt."
"Drive and Django Unchained had action and alpha male stars. They were critically acclaimed and did well at the box office."
Django did well because of Tarantino and a MASSIVE advertising push by Weinstein. "Drive" features a prideful alpha male? Are you kidding me? A yellow haired, blue-eyed calvin cline looking model boy who has issues even speaking throughout the film. He's the very definition of the brooding hero with demons that I've been saying has taken over these films. Quiet, humble, thinyou don't know what you're talking about. How can you say its ridiculous that Stallone is in action films when Stallone looks like he could snap Ryan Gosling in two?
http://www.beyondhollywood.com/uploads/2011/01/Ryan-Gosling-in-Drive-2011-Movie-Image-7.jpg
http://stallonezone.com/imgs/news/2013/jan/010613sly_btth.png
"It's ridiculous." It is no more ridiculous than a millionaire playboy dressing up like a bat and fighting crime for a whole city. For that matter, its no more ridiculous than a millionaire playboy who creates a super robot suit and flys around fighting crime. You say they're comic book films, so they're allowed? Bullet to the the Head is based off a Graphic novel smart guy.
"your points are not valid. Please grow up."
Well at least I'm familiar with the socratic method. I'm guessing you're not even 17 years old are you? Anyway, I think its funny that the guy telling me to grow up is having trouble typing and insulting people for no reason.
