NationStates Jolt Archive

For the past few years, whenever I watch an action movie and an explosion occurs I feel no emotional excitement, no interest, and I generally do not care. Does anybody else feel the same way? Is it truly possibly for explosions to be unnecessary in action movies these days?

I never found them particularly interesting, unless there was an actual point to the explosion (rare). Same with the endless shootouts/sword fights/battle scenes.

Yes I will have to agree with you on all those points. Martial arts in films is also getting on my nerves, not every damn movie can have martial arts in it.

Yes I will have to agree with you on all those points. Martial arts in films is also getting on my nerves, not every damn movie can have martial arts in it.
And don't even get me started on the ridiculous attempt by Hollywood to integrate the impossible flying and fighting stunts of Asian movies into the repetoire of their non-Asian actors...

...these are all reasons I avoid Hollywood. I love foreign films that focus on an actual plot over pyrotechnics and other special effects.

And don't even get me started on the ridiculous attempt by Hollywood to integrate the impossible flying and fighting stunts of Asian movies into the repetoire of their non-Asian actors...

...these are all reasons I avoid Hollywood. I love foreign films that focus on an actual plot over pyrotechnics and other special effects.

I HATE that fake flying on strings crap, however I nonetheless enjoy action films that are done correctly without going over the top but I prefer a good old Sidney Potier movie over an Bruce Willis one any day.

Haha. Ever seen 'Bulletproof Monk'? Sean William Scott (Stifler) plays a Martial Arts protegé to a famed monk.
That is exactly the movie I was thinking about. GAG!

Yeah, explosions, gunfights, shootouts, etc. etc. etc. are getting a bit boring. They need something more subtle.
I'd like a return to the strong, competent and understated hero/heroine. Humphrey Bogart and such...Tom Selleck is a good example of that. Yum. Now we just need some younger ones:)

Yeah, explosions, gunfights, shootouts, etc. etc. etc. are getting a bit boring. They need something more subtle.

I agree with you. Bring in the swordplay (:

Lord of the Rings was hot because they didn't have guns. Just one little explosion that blasted a wall in Helm's Deep, but otherwise, it was pretty clean.

But I don't think the gunfire is getting 'boring' per se. They're overused and overrated, but if there's actual reason for it, by all means, go ahead and blast someone's head off.

And don't even get me started on the ridiculous attempt by Hollywood to integrate the impossible flying and fighting stunts of Asian movies into the repetoire of their non-Asian actors...
Haha. Ever seen 'Bulletproof Monk'? Sean William Scott (Stifler) plays a Martial Arts protegé to a famed monk.

Yeah, explosions, gunfights, shootouts, etc. etc. etc. are getting a bit boring. They need something more subtle.

What I hate (aside from the most badass shot in the world character trying to get into guiness for blinking) is the digital fire. What the hell ever happend to just setting a bunch of stuff on fire carefully? God damn, look at the end of Full Metal Jacket. Computers have their place, but doing really bad fire isn't one of them.

I think the new thing is things (particularly vehicals) shattering ala The Island.

I agree with you. Bring in the swordplay (:

Lord of the Rings was hot because they didn't have guns. Just one little explosion that blasted a wall in Helm's Deep, but otherwise, it was pretty clean.

and that explosion really meant something, too


i don't think i've ever felt excitement at move explosions - i grew up in the era of Arnie's biggest action-fests so i've always been pretty much used to em

worst action move i've seen: mission impossible 2. just fucking awful

The problem isn't with the explosions themselves--although I tend to think that in many films they've gone past ridiculous to ludicrous in terms of effect--it's with the fact that they're used to cover for things like plot and character development. Same goes for CGI and any other special effect, like the flying fighting style mentioned above.

There are great films that use special effects to good use--The Matrix (the original one) is a perfect example of that. Sure, the effects it used were groundbreaking at the time, but that wan't going to last, since they'd be copied. But the film endures, because it had a compelling story (at least, compelling by today's standards--it's not Casablanca or anything, but you take what you can get).

There are great films that use special effects to good use--The Matrix (the original one) is a perfect example of that. Sure, the effects it used were groundbreaking at the time, but that wan't going to last, since they'd be copied. But the film endures, because it had a compelling story (at least, compelling by today's standards--it's not Casablanca or anything, but you take what you can get).
exactly - plot still counts for more than anything else, dispite the recent trend to the contrary in Hollywood.
but it also depends how CG is used. if its all there is in the movie (like i'm starting to think is the case with Star Wars, though the plot is still decent) then thats bad; however if the CG is simply used as a tool to liven up or make more realistic the other storytelling aspects, as per The Day After Tomorrow, then thats how it should be used. i picked that movie because the CG is not clearly noticeable dispite how many CG shots there must be in it

exactly - plot still counts for more than anything else, dispite the recent trend to the contrary in Hollywood.
but it also depends how CG is used. if its all there is in the movie (like i'm starting to think is the case with Star Wars, though the plot is still decent) then thats bad; however if the CG is simply used as a tool to liven up or make more realistic the other storytelling aspects, as per The Day After Tomorrow, then thats how it should be used. i picked that movie because the CG is not clearly noticeable dispite how many CG shots there must be in it
Well, the trend toward lack of plot has been around since the first time someone figured out how to make moving pictures, and it doesn't figure to end any time soon. What's happened is that there are now more ways to disguise the fact that you don't have a story, and you can get away with it for a while--Lucas has been doing it for years now--but in most cases, it won't fool people for very long, not if they care about the quality of their entertainment.

Pyrotechnics died when CG first came into major use.
I personaly never saw the point of blowing something up without really blowing it up. Plus you cant say "Wow, thats freakin' awsome! I wish I had been there for that!" or some sort of equivalent.
Of course, I think the main detractor from the 'goodness' of movies is the computer generated horror movies that never see the silver screen. "Frankenfish" caused something to die inside of me.

EDIT:
As to action movies lacking a plot...
If I want an interesting intellectual experience, Ill read a book. If I want explosions, gunfights and assorted violence, Ill watch a movie. Plot is a nice bonus though.

I never found them particularly interesting, unless there was an actual point to the explosion (rare). Same with the endless shootouts/sword fights/battle scenes.
Amen to that, sister :D

There's gotta be a good reason for an explosion to occur.

Other than that - what's even worse than explosions in action movies is that countdowns are usually stopped within the last 10 seconds before anything goes kaboom. I mean, come on - how come there's never like 2 minutes or half an hour before anything bad happens? That is even more dull than random stuff blowing up!!!

The overwhelming need for Hollywood to fit explosions into every movie takes on absurd tones when you watch 'period' movies like Troy or Last Samurai, for example. Often these movies are set in times when a large pyrotechnic explosion would be a fairly rare thing, yet we are frequently treated to the sight of things like barns and boats exploding as if they've had barrels of C4 stuffed in them.

Sick as we are of pointless explosions... which movie explosion would you rate as most memorable/impressive?

I remember first seeing the Cyberdyne explosion in 'Terminator 2' and thinking that looked truly awesome (and knowing what I do now about how they built the set around an existing building, I'm inclined to be more impressed). The helicopter explosion in 'The Matrix' was damn good also - not a huge explosion but punctuating a neat scene. 'Returner' has a great explosion in it where a spacecraft explosion is rendered in slow motion (thanks to a time-slowing bracelet thing), and the main characters are able to use the flying debris as stepping stones so that they.. well, hard to explain, but it's cool :D