Movies that have continous action shots do best at box office. i think i see a pattern here. ( spoiler aletr star trek into darkness talk as well ) - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 9 Old 09-10-2013, 02:04 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
d3code's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,685
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
today i checked out star trek into darkness and story is as good as part 1. no complains there, but there is only 1 continous movie shot. and that is at the beginning when they jump from the cliff into the sea. all the other action shots are all cut, show something cut, show something cut. it is tiresome! and this will work really bad for the upcoming star wars movies. you can see it even at the box office.

so then i started thinking about this some more. checked box office. and what do i see. the movies who brought into the most money were movies with continous action shots.

the Avangers, Titanic, Iron man 3 all box office smash hits. i believe that it is of the continous action shots. it sticks in your mind.

so all the box office smash hits have continous action shots. remember james bond quatom of solace. why did it do badly? because of the action scenes. remember bourne 3. same problem. cut and showsomething. cut and show something.

so i think there is a pattern here.

now why does this worries me so much. well J.J abrams is directing star wars. and while i have no doubt he can create an incredible story to screen. what i have not see him do yet create a movie with lot of continuos action shots. and i believe that is why his movies dont do record braking business.

lets look at star trek into darkness some more.

for example the fight on the garbage ride near the end with spock fighting Kahn. even here the picture goes all shakey. why? why cant he just create this ride in 1 continous shot without having it to shake and cut and cut.

another great example is in star trek 1. when sulu , kirk fighting on the mine. again the action gets cut so fast the whole time you have no clue anymore what is going on. imagine this was a lightsaber fight in star wars,i would have been pissed watching that.

remember transformers 2 were all the action gets cuts fast and shakey cam. well in transformers 3 this was gone. because people complained so much about it. and boom transformes 3 did better at the box office too.

so that brings me to James Cameron. why is he the worlds greatest director?

to think of it some more. his movies all have continous action shots.

Titanic, Avatar, True lies, terminator 1 and 2, aliens. it has continous shots. it will stick in your mind an dyou want to experience that again and again.

this is just my experience overall. but wonder what other people think.
d3code is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 9 Old 09-10-2013, 10:46 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,086
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 291 Post(s)
Liked: 357
I don't necessarily disagree with your dislike of shaky-cam and frantic editing. However, there is no direct correlation between long, continuous action shots and box office.

All of Michael Bay's Transformers movies have been massive box office hits. Bay is incapable of holding a shot on the screen for more than 1.5 seconds before cutting to the next one. Kids today with terrible ADHD love that s***t.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
)
Curator,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #3 of 9 Old 09-11-2013, 01:33 AM
AVS Special Member
 
tenthplanet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: North of Mexico, South of Oregon, Not as far east as Vegas
Posts: 1,419
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 94 Post(s)
Liked: 159
Quantum of Solace was sunk by it's script.

"Bring out yer dead!".."Wait I'm not dead yet!"..(Sound Austrian here) "WRONG !!" (You know what happens next..)
tenthplanet is online now  
post #4 of 9 Old 09-11-2013, 06:34 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Morpheo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Montreal by day, Paris by night...
Posts: 6,573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 117 Post(s)
Liked: 305
Quote:
Originally Posted by d3code View Post


so all the box office smash hits have continous action shots. remember james bond quatom of solace. why did it do badly? because of the action scenes. remember bourne 3. same problem. cut and showsomething. cut and show something.

so i think there is a pattern here.

Quantum of Solace made 586 millions worldwide. While it did underperform in the U.S, it was still a very successfull 007 film. The Bourne Ultimatum made 2x its budget in the U.S alone. I don't see the same pattern. wink.gif
Morpheo is offline  
post #5 of 9 Old 10-21-2013, 01:36 AM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
d3code's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,685
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Quantom of Solance underperformed a lot compared to other james bond movies.

Bourne 3 did way worse then the other bourne movies. same for part 4.

the latest star trek movie also underferformed.

now look at gravity.

this is the movie precisly as i meant to say. the movie is shot in 1 continous motion.

it is wrecking the box office at the moment.

it it also an orginal movie. does not come from books or comics.

script is razor thin. but it succeed, because the movie is shot in 1 continous motion.

now imagine the new star wars movie shot like gravity.

now imagine you rewatching it a few times and exploring new details.
d3code is offline  
post #6 of 9 Old 10-21-2013, 05:18 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Morpheo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Montreal by day, Paris by night...
Posts: 6,573
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 117 Post(s)
Liked: 305
Quote:
Originally Posted by d3code View Post

Quantom of Solance underperformed a lot compared to other james bond movies.

Bourne 3 did way worse then the other bourne movies. same for part 4.

confused.gif
I'm not sure what you mean by "way worse" considering The Bourne Ultimatum was, and still is, the most successful Bourne film.

I KNOW QoS underperformed in the U.S., but like I said it still made 586 million worldwide...


Now don't get me started on the "razor thin" plot of Gravity, it's NOT. It's not shot in 1 continuous motion either, but it's close yes. Which means the action takes place in a rather short period of time compared to what happens in films like Star Wars or Star Trek. Filming them like Gravity is not possible. I still agree with Josh, not direct correlation between continuous action shots and box office. Transformers 4 is already guaranteed to be a success, and I'm sure it's not being shot like Gravity...
Morpheo is offline  
post #7 of 9 Old 10-21-2013, 11:30 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,086
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 291 Post(s)
Liked: 357
Quote:
Originally Posted by d3code View Post

script is razor thin. but it succeed, because the movie is shot in 1 continous motion.

You're drawing conclusions not supported by the evidence.

I could say that Gravity has been so successful because it only has two actors in it, and movies with just two actors are always massive blockbuster hits. While there is indeed a concurrence of this movie having only two actors, and this movie also being a blockbuster hit, one is not directly responsible for the other. Many movies with just two actors have been flops, and many movies with huge casts have been blockbuster hits.

Yes, Gravity is shot mostly in long, continuous takes.
Yes, Gravity is a blockbuster hit.

However, these factors are coincidental. There is no direct correlation between them.

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
)
Curator,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
post #8 of 9 Old 10-21-2013, 01:44 PM
AVS Special Member
 
iamian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Burbank, CA
Posts: 1,044
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 25

Haven't there been some movies shot on one continous take? Can't remember any ot them though. Speak volumes for this theory.



iamian is offline  
post #9 of 9 Old 10-21-2013, 02:09 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Josh Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Planet Boston, source of the spice, Melange.
Posts: 20,086
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 291 Post(s)
Liked: 357
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamian View Post

Haven't there been some movies shot on one continous take? Can't remember any ot them though.


Russian Ark

Hitchcock's 'Rope' was also shot to look like it's all one long take, but some edit points are hidden when the camera moves behind furniture and so forth. (Cameras of the day couldn't actually hold enough film to shoot the whole movie in one take.)

Josh Z
Writer/Editor, High-Def Digest (
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
)
Curator,
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily reflect those of my employers.

Josh Z is offline  
Reply Movies, Concerts, and Music Discussion

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off