I know what you mean. I can't see Lindsay Lohan playing world weary (even though she probably is with the life she is leading)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > that's my point. I liked movies and books about people my age, but a good > scifi/fantasy film starring "old" folks would draw me just as much. And > sometimes I like older characters because I like to see some of the > experience, wisdom, or world-weariness they can bring to a role, while still > being effective and vigorous. > > -------------- Original message -------------- > From: "Tracey de Morsella (formerly Tracey L. Minor)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > good assessment. Since I was in the target demographic at the time, I > remember being drawn to those movies. Please note: most were a > disappointment and did not compare to my favs which were Hitchcock, > Barbara Stanwick, Jimmy Stewart, Betty Davis, Glenn Ford, Ida Lupino, > Sofia Loren, Henry Fonda, Charleton Heston, Joan Crawford, type of > movies. Ironically, all those people were in the wrong demographic. > So, we should be blaming John Hughes, huh? > > Mike Street wrote: > >> This pretty much started with the 80's moves that started Molly >> Ringwald and the likes in the Brat Pack. Those movies where so popular >> that more and more of them started to be turned out as marketers saw a >> new market as the baby boomers started getting older and older. >> >> We can move forward to Gen X, Gen Y, and now the MySpace/YouTube Gen >> where all of the money is being made and spent. It all has to do with >> where you should be spending your ad dollars at. Right now the big >> spend is all for online social media and that demographic is mainly >> 18-25. >> >> On Dec 28, 2007 8:28 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>> >>> >>> see, that's what confuses me. When i was younger, i of course related to >>> films and TV shows that had people close to my age. But at the same time, i >>> absolutely enjoyed movies and shows that had people significantly older than >>> i was then. i didn't have an issue when i was 19 watching a James Bond who >>> was clearly in his late '30s or early '40s. Didn't complain about Kirk being >>> 34-which is old to some---when i was only 14. Never said "McCoy is too old" >>> about Bones. Even in the comic world back in the day, the typical age for >>> many superheroes was around 28, some a bit younger like Peter Parker, some a >>> bit older like Stephen Strange or Reed Richards. But still, that's darn >>> close to 30 and i never had a problem with it. Now, the likes of Alias, >>> Buffy, and others seems to focus more on kids 18 - 25, with 25 being at the >>> high end. And contrast Wonder Woman, where Lynda Carter was 25 when the >>> series started, with Joss Whedon's goal when he was on the project to craft >>> a Wonder Woman barel >>> y out of her teens. >>> >>> I went back and looked at classic action and scifi films from back in the >>> day. From "The Towering Inferno" and "The Poseidon Adventure" to "The Omega >>> Man" and "Bullitt". In many, many of those old films--which set the standard >>> for their day--the stars were typically middle-aged. I found ranges from >>> early 30s on the low end to mid-50s in the likes of Ernest Borgnine and Paul >>> Newman. There were of course youngsters, but even the lesser known stars in >>> these films are about a decade older than the characters Abrams and crew >>> seem to favor. >>> >>> So what changed? Is it just the likes of Abrams and Joss Whedon who love >>> the younger stars? Is Hollywood more focused on younger stars because kids >>> have more disposable income nowadays and thus support movies with these >>> characters more? >>> >>> >>> -------------- Original message -------------- >>> From: "Tracey de Morsella (formerly Tracey L. Minor)" >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> ain't gonna happen. It seems to me, he is keeping to the studio >>> demographic formula applied in Star Trek. Maybe some of the supporting >>> characters will be a little older. Let's face it. Most of us over 28 >>> are not going to the theatre every week, where the initial bulk of a >>> studios money is made. >>> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> >>>> yeah, though i still wonder, why is Abrams so fascinated with young >>>> >>> people. all the main stars in Cloverfield seem to be in their early to >>> mid-20s. Even the little blurb I read describes it as "Five young New >>> Yorkers". Hopefully, like with "Lost", there'll be some old fogies my age >>> who get meaty roles! >>> >>>> -------------- Original message -------------- >>>> From: "Tracey de Morsella (formerly Tracey L. Minor)" >>>> >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>>> >>>>> maybe he is returning to his roots as a master storyteller >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Wanna see an exciting trailer? Then you must check the trailer for >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> "Cloverfield", the top-secret monster movie from JJ Abrams (Lost, Alias, >>>>> >>> MI-3, >>> >>>>> Star Trek). The monster(s) isn't(aren't) shown, but talk about a >>>>> >>> suspenseful >>> >>>>> buildup! Seeing the freakin' Statue of Liberty's head come sailing >>>>> >>> through the >>> >>>>> air *all the way from the water* to crash into the street? Awesome. >>>>> >>> There's also >>> >>>>> a scene showing the military firing like crazy at something we never >>>>> >>> see. It >>> >>>>> reminds me of the great scene in Spieldberg's "War of the Worlds" when >>>>> >>> the >>> >>>>> military attacks the Martians on that hillside and the whole area >>>>> >>> literally >>> >>>>> lights up with weapons fire. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> The Apple site has two trailers. The one labeled "trailer" is longer >>>>>> >>> and shows >>> >>>>> more stuff. it's the one you'll see at many other sites. The one labeled >>>>> "teaser" gives a slightly different angle. Check 'em out. If you can't >>>>> >>> see the >>> >>>>> Apple trailers, try the second link below, which is to a MovieWeb page >>>>> >>> with lots >>> >>>>> of videos, including a two second glimpse of the monster (can't see a >>>>> >>> darn >>> >>>>> thing, though). Hard to find a lot of stuff on this film, as there's no >>>>> >>> real >>> >>>>> officiall movie site, but i included some info from a blogger below the >>>>> trailers. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> If nothing else, Abrams knows how to tell an exciting, fast-paced >>>>>> >>> story, and >>> >>>>> he actually believes in good plotting and acting as well. he also is a >>>>> >>> fan of >>> >>>>> old-fashioned monster flicks like "Godzilla". So this looks to be a fun >>>>> >>> ride. >>> >>>>> The fact that the script has been kept secret, along with any view of >>>>> >>> the >>> >>>>> creature, is only heightening the anticipation. I'm looking forward to >>>>> >>> this >>> >>>>> movie! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Trailers: http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/cloverfield/ >>>>>> http://www.movieweb.com/movies/film/53/5153/videos/ >>>>>> >>>>>> ******************************* >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.boxofficeprophets.com/column/index.cfm?columnID=10118 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> What is Cloverfield? >>>>>> >>>>>> This is the question that has been debated across North America in the >>>>>> >>> hours >>> >>>>> since Transformers debuted the teaser to this upcoming 2008 release. >>>>> >>> Shrouded in >>> >>>>> mystery since its inception, the plot of Cloverfield is one of the most >>>>> carefully guarded secrets in Hollywood right now. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> BOP is generally not in the business of breaking news as it generally >>>>>> >>> leads to >>> >>>>> more aggravation than it's worth, but for the first time since we >>>>> >>> unveiled the >>> >>>>> voice cast of The Incredibles, we are going to make an exception and do >>>>> >>> so here >>> >>>>> in order to clear up some of the mystery. Cloverfield is a J.J. Abrams >>>>> production, so it should not be surprising to hear that a couple of key >>>>> >>> players >>> >>>>> from Abrams' television shows are on board. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> The writer is Drew Goddard. Goddard has been a producer on both Alias >>>>>> >>> and Lost >>> >>>>> and served as co-executive producer for the latter show's 2007 episodes. >>>>> >>> Fans of >>> >>>>> Joss Whedon (and BOP knows there are a ton of you out there since we >>>>> >>> sometimes >>> >>>>> double as a Firefly fan site) also know him as a writer for several >>>>> >>> episodes of >>> >>>>> Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel. Goddard was the principal scribe on >>>>> >>> Dirty >>> >>>>> Girls, the episode from Buffy season seven. This episode featured the >>>>> >>> return of >>> >>>>> Faith as well as the transition of Nathan Fillion from the recently >>>>> >>> canceled >>> >>>>> Firefly to Buffy wherein he portrayed a nefarious, misogynistic man of >>>>> >>> the >>> >>>>> cloth. Goddard's work on Angel primarily occurred during that show's >>>>> >>> final >>> >>>>> season as well. He wrote the World War II submarine epic, Why We Fight, >>>>> >>> and >>> >>>>> earned his place in permanent Whedon-lore for his invention of The >>>>> >>> Immortal in >>> >>>>> The Girl in Question. Clearly, he is one of the most inventive and >>>>> >>> imaginative >>> >>>>> young writers in the industry. His presence alone is >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> indic >>>>>> ative of a quality work in the offing. >>>>>> >>>>>> Abrams has not left anything to chance, though. He has also hired one >>>>>> >>> of his >>> >>>>> most trusted co-workers from the early days of Felicity for this >>>>> >>> project. BOP >>> >>>>> has confirmed that Matt Reeves is the director on this project. Reeves >>>>> >>> is the >>> >>>>> writer/director of the 1996 David Schwimmer comedy, The Pallbearer, and >>>>> >>> he >>> >>>>> served as executive producer during the run of Felicity (pre- and >>>>> >>> post-Keri >>> >>>>> Russell haircut). Reeves and Abrams created that project together with >>>>> >>> Reeves >>> >>>>> even writing and directing the pilot, so their working relationship goes >>>>> >>> back a >>> >>>>> decade now. When Goddard came up with the premise for Cloverfield, >>>>> >>> Reeves was >>> >>>>> the easy choice to helm the project. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Yahoo! Groups Links >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Yahoo! Groups Links >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >>> >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
