Would it bother you if it were a movie about philosophy and was called "The Nietzchian Kid" but was actually all about Kant? (For the record I had to google philosophers names to put them in here, in case you feel like explaining...something about those particular ones).
I find a lot of movies now fall down on being slaves to formula. For example, nearly every one I have seen recently has been far too long - the average length of a film is about two hours these days and the makers seem to stretch things out to get there. Usually to the detriment of the film.
This is a similar case, the scene you describe (I assume, having not yet seen the film) sounds like the more important fact was that Han went with Dre and not that he formed a bond with him. More focus on effect than cause, if you like.
I am reminded of the Jean Claude Van-Damme film "Maximum Risk". It's not a bad romp all in all and it comes to a satisfactory conclusion. Then, as you expect the credits to roll, there is an extra scene where he is at his brother's grave and the girl approaches him. There is a "moment" and it is revealed that they are together. He has gotten the girl. The girl he had no chemistry with and that the movie didn't need him to end up with. It plays like a scene glued on at the end because "the hero has to always get the girl"...even if it makes no sense.
The sad thing?
They're probably right from the point of view of making money and making movies successful. It's probably a better idea to stick to a formula that works than to go out on a limb, especially when so much money is at stake. I suppose that's why you look to indie movies for originality.
I mean, if I was asked "Would the hero not getting the girl make it a better movie?" My answer would be "Hell yes".
If I was asked: "Would you bet ten million dollars that the hero not getting the girl make it a better movie?" My answer would be "No".
So we go with the safer bet. Just one of many reasons I hate money.
If the movie was actually *about* Karate, then yeah, it'd bother me. But it's not.
I know what you mean about formula, but I think that this was really just about sticking to the script. It's the exact same script as the original movie, with some minor variations. The variations in that scene just made it unbelievable, plus zero chemistry.
(For the record I had to google philosophers names to put them in here, in case you feel like explaining...something about those particular ones).
I find a lot of movies now fall down on being slaves to formula. For example, nearly every one I have seen recently has been far too long - the average length of a film is about two hours these days and the makers seem to stretch things out to get there. Usually to the detriment of the film.
This is a similar case, the scene you describe (I assume, having not yet seen the film) sounds like the more important fact was that Han went with Dre and not that he formed a bond with him. More focus on effect than cause, if you like.
I am reminded of the Jean Claude Van-Damme film "Maximum Risk". It's not a bad romp all in all and it comes to a satisfactory conclusion. Then, as you expect the credits to roll, there is an extra scene where he is at his brother's grave and the girl approaches him. There is a "moment" and it is revealed that they are together. He has gotten the girl.
The girl he had no chemistry with and that the movie didn't need him to end up with. It plays like a scene glued on at the end because "the hero has to always get the girl"...even if it makes no sense.
The sad thing?
They're probably right from the point of view of making money and making movies successful. It's probably a better idea to stick to a formula that works than to go out on a limb, especially when so much money is at stake. I suppose that's why you look to indie movies for originality.
I mean, if I was asked
"Would the hero not getting the girl make it a better movie?"
My answer would be "Hell yes".
If I was asked:
"Would you bet ten million dollars that the hero not getting the girl make it a better movie?"
My answer would be "No".
So we go with the safer bet. Just one of many reasons I hate money.
Reply
I know what you mean about formula, but I think that this was really just about sticking to the script. It's the exact same script as the original movie, with some minor variations. The variations in that scene just made it unbelievable, plus zero chemistry.
Reply
Leave a comment