In a time where media is huge influence on most people we are seeing movies like The Notebook,Serendipity, and pretty much any other Nicholas Sparks movie you can think of or any Romantic movie (not to hate on Nicholas Sparks he has written some books that were turned into some fantastic movies.) All these films put that lackluster ideas in the minds of the viewers. Dr Bjarne Holmes, a psychologist who led the research said in an article in the Times (click on link to see the article) “Relationship counselors often face common misconceptions in their clients — that if your partner truly loves you they’d know what you need without you communicating it, that your soul mate is predestined. We did a rigorous content analysis of romantic comedies and found that the same issues were being portrayed in these films,”
So then we have to ask ourselves where is this false idea of Romance and dating coming from? Is it pre incorporated in our minds or installed by the misconceptions we find in these films. Personally I think it is installed in our minds by these romantic comedy idea of finding the “Perfect” love and that if its meant to be then it will come around to the guy magically sweeping the girl off her feet and or coming to her rescue from the wrong guy. While I think these movies are great (my favorite movie The Adjustment Bureau is a Romantic kind of action combined movie.) I just think they portray the wrong idea to the viewers. Not many if any relationship is going to be you meet once a spark starts and you magically fall head over heels for each other. (Being a realist here!) It will take time and effort for that relationship to grow and become great. We as a generation need to start focusing on building strong relationships rather than hanging on this false idea of the “perfect” relationship. This may be a real shocker to some but there is no such thing as a perfect relationship every relationship has their ups and downs and thats what in the end will make them stronger.
Now I am not saying that movies are the cause of bad relationships but if you look back at your parents generation, your grandparents generation they had much stronger relationships where guys came to the door with flowers and they focused on building a solid foundation rather than look for perfect from the start. They also did not have movies influencing their idea of what “Love” and dating so that probably helped too.
Over the last 53 years 23 phenomenal James Bond films have been released with 1 more film to come soon. Most people would say that Bob Simmons was the original James Bond as he created the first scene where you’re looking down the barrel of the gun and you see Bond walking then he pulls a gun and shoots the henchmen then blood goes down the screen. This has become the typical starting scene for every Bond movie for the next 50 years to come.
Over a great 53 years 8 characters have played the role of James bond.
So the question which one of this guys played the bond role best?
Personally I would say Pierce Brosnan makes the best Bond he fills the role as a strong kick ass MI6 agent who gets all the ladies! He just looks like a spy and fills the roll so well. Unfortunately the media does not agree with me if you take a look at the a poll taken by the Guardian a news website on Who is cinema’s ultimate James Bond? Sean Connery receives 46% of the votes, while Daniel Craig comes in at second with 22% of the votes and finally at 3rd is Roger Moore at 12%. The other 20% goes to the the 5 actors.
I just really do not understand how Daniel Craig beats out Pierce Brosnan. If you look at the other 7 Bond characters all have dark hair and have this tough no emotion, job oriented persona. While if we look at Daniel Craig he is a blonde more of a wear your emotions on your sleeve kind of actor bent on revenge. Daniel Craig just does not fit the bill as a Bond but apparently the movie community thinks otherwise. So who do you think deserves the title as Bond.. James Bond?
I saw the picture above on twitter and it really got me thinking. In the last few years we have lost some of the greatests actors we will see in any of our life times. A few of the most prevalent names being Robin Williams, Bernie Mac, Heath Ledger and Chris Farley. Here is the question… if you could bring back one person to make one final film who would it be??
For me this is a really tough choice. If i had to pick from that list i would say my first pic would be Robin Williams. From Good Morning Vietnam where Robin Williams plays a Radio voice in Vietnam that during a really tough time for the soldiers helped ease their minds through his hilarious comic radio show to Mrs. Doubtfire where Robin Williams gets his kids taken away and then goes in disguise as their nanny to spend more time with them! Like David Steinberg his manager of 35 years said: “Nobody made the world laugh like Robin Williams. My brother, my friend, my soulmate, I will miss you.” Personally my favorite quote came from Penny Marshall director of 1990’s Awakenings starring Robin Williams said: “There will never be anyone like him; he truly was one of a kind.”
My second option for one more film would be Paul Walker though he is no Robin Williams his role the six Fast and Furious is just phenomenal and to get to see him be Brian O’Connor for one more role would be a dream. My generation grew up on these two phenomenal actors and to get to see either one on screen again would be great.
No matter what actor you choose whether they are in this picture or not this is a way to common of an occurrence in the film industry of losing actors and actress way to young due to drug overdoses, fatal car crashes, and suicide. As such studios and managers should do more to help these actors and actress on a physiological and emotional level to help keep them stable and if they cannot do that then at least help them to get the help they need. This is an epidemic that we cannot let go unnoticed.
As the years have gone by growing up with movies being a big part of my life I cannot help but to notice that over the years films are getting more and more violent and sadly the ratings are getting more and more lenient. Unfortunately this is a ploy the studios are using to make an extra buck. If the film gets an R rating that greatly decreases the films viewership and ultimately the net profits for the studio where as if you give a film a Pg 13 rating that greatly increases the viewership and ultimately the net profits.
Tim Winter, a writer for fox news wrote an article entitled “It’s time to get real about R ratings.” The example he uses in this article is one of the better examples I have seen. He compares 2 films the first is The kings Speech a true story about King George VI and speech therapist that helps him get ready for the throne. This film was given an R rating because of Language (the F-word is used a few times) there is no sexual content or any violence. The second film is a fiction starring Angelina Jolie entitled Salt is about russian moles implanted in the United States waiting to be activated. This film on a constant basis show Angelina getting the snot beat out of her, multiple assassinations, and multiple scenes of torture and waterboarding and only receives a PG-13 rating. (click on links to see why each movie received the rating it received.) So why is a movie about a king preparing to lead a nation and has no nudity and nearly zero violence getting a worse ranking then a film that constantly shows waterboarding, violence and torture.
There is no doubt that if we take a look at what films are rated now compared to what they were rated back when we were kids films now receiving PG-13 ratings may receive an R or even NC-17 back then. Movie ratings are becoming more and more lenient but is an extra buck really worth allowing these poor ratings to taint the mind of our kids. I certainly do not believe so.
Do you ever wonder why Marvel and DC is so widely successful? Some say it is the vast amount of entertainment these two company provides in movies, action figures, and comic books. Others like me say its because they provide something that no other company of this magnitude can provide! They provide characters that everyone can relate to no matter what race, gender or sex you are. They provide you with superheros that represent bigger and better views.
For example Wolverine represents never giving up. Throughout his life he has lost family members, his girlfriends, had memory wiped and was brainwashed to be a mindless killing machine and yet he never gave up. Green Arrow represents that any family body can change and become a better person as Oliver Queen started out a spoiled teen who had everything handed to him then after a few drastic changes in his life he came back with nothing but a compassion for humans and a dream to help make society a better place. Finally my personal favorite Batman, he is the wealthiest men in Gotham City, he could live his life and not have a worry in life. Yet as we see in all of the movies he uses his money to create an awesome bat suite, bat cave, and lots of neat gadgets which he uses to help create a better Gotham City. To me and most avid movie watchers Batman represents selflessness and humbleness (As he risks his life on a nightly basis but never once expects a thank you or for any kind of retribution for his help.) Click here and you can see more of peoples perceptions of some of the greatest super heros.
Another key thing that Marvel does so well to be successful is create lines some of the most memorable lines that everyone can relate to that viewers of all age can take to heart. From the Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D Phil Coulson “Don’t ever tell me there is no way” to Spider Man’s Uncle Ben “With great power comes great responsibility.”
As I have said a few times in this post it is Marvels and DC Comics ability to create heros that every person can relate to is the key to their success. If they continue to create relatable heros then they will continue to have nothing but success.
On December 27th 2014 Sony received a lot heat for the film they produced starring James Franco and Seth Rogen called The Interview. For those of you that have not heard of this film James Franco plays Dave Skylark a comedic celebrity tabloid show with his producer Aaron Rapoport (Seth Rogen). The two get the interview of their lives when the interview the leader of North Korea Kim Jong-Un and as they prepare for their interview the CIA intervened and asked them to assassinate Kim Jong-Un. Of course this movie was going to get some heat and cause some waves but the director (Also Seth Rogen) did not know how many waves it would really cause.
So did Seth Rogen and James Franco act ethically when by releasing this film? Some say yes because its just a film and nothing more. Others say absolutely not that film was borderline an attack on North Korea’s leader and caused so many issues that this film was not worth the risk of an international incident. I personally lean towards the the group that says this was ethically wrong for them to produce. While I understand cracking a joke here and there about a dictator here and there in your film but making a film about killing the leader of a major nuclear country that we already have major international problems with then you are just asking for problems.
The thing that I am most shocked about is in an interview with The New York Times (Click on link to see the whole interview with The New York Times) Seth Rogen was asked ” was there anything the studio wouldn’t allow?” Stating “They’ve threatened war over the movie. You kill him [Kim Jong-un]. Would you consider not killing him?” Rogens reply: nope! Implying that even though this country has threatened war over this movie they were going to kill him. This also raises the issue with the ethics of Sony, this film was causing a lot of term oil and at the point where this film could cause a war you would think the executive board of Sony would say “hey maybe we should not release this or at least tone it down to not cause an international incident.” But instead of course money came first. Lucky after a lot of threats and a lot of heat from the media the film was released in certain theaters and no war was started (Thank goodness!). Was this release ethical? This will continue to be debated for years to come.