It’s TRUE OR FALSE – a feature that allows Warped Footage to contemplate the biggest issues in film.
Answering this week’s big questions are Graeme McKay, Saira Perwaiz and Paul McKenzie.
1. In a film that depicts historical events, historical accuracy is not the most important thing.
Graeme: DEPENDS – I think it comes down to the extent: is the film rewriting history or is it using poetic license. As long as the film gets to the same location as history did, it doesn’t really matter (for the most part) what route it took.
Saira: TRUE – I don’t think it’s the most important aspect but it’s pretty high up there – it depends on what’s being changed though. Outlaw King had some factual errors but was still a good watch so I guess anything goes in the name of entertainment.
Paul: TRUE/FALSE – Why let facts get in the way of a good story? I’m on the fence. If it’s something I have an interest in then I would be annoyed by this, but if it’s not something I have any weight in then entertain me. I can see why people think it would be a negative, though.
2.Spiderman films are generally failures; the concept clearly does not work.
Graeme: FALSE – The first two were great at the time and Homecoming was also a lot of fun. I’ve also heard good things about Into the Spiderverse.
Saira: FALSE – I think it does work because there must be a reason they keep churning them out. Also, there are so many Spider-Man versions it means that there’s something for everyone.
Paul: FALSE – They keep making them so something must work. To be honest, I think they have something that could work longer term as it’s tied in with Avengers and that has allowed them to move the story forward. I would say that it’s not the concept that doesn’t work but more poor stories and lack of creativity for sequels.
3. There is a snobbery towards fantasy, science-fiction and horror movies when Awards season comes around.
Graeme: TRUE –The only thing that the Oscars care about is Oscarness. The Best Picture award could essentially be renamed as the Most Oscary award. Drama comes above everything else.
Saira: TRUE – Yes and there shouldn’t be, but I think it’s possibly because the focus in these genres is usually on CGI/effects and maybe the awards focus more on actors’ work rather than behind the scenes elements.
Paul: TRUE – I would agree. I think if we can put comedy films in the spotlight, then why not films of these genres? But, if we look back, Lord of the Rings cleared up back in the day. So maybe there is some contention to this statement.
4.Tom Hiddleston should be the next James Bond.
Graeme: FALSE – I think he is too good an actor and I would miss him being in other things as Bond seems to be all-consuming for actors. I nominate Richard Madden.
Saira: FALSE – Tom Hiddleston isn’t suited to James Bond, he’s too much of a drip.
Paul: FALSE – I would would prefer a younger Bond. I think it would allow for some fresher stories, but I do understand that may go against what James Bond is as a character. I don’t really care if he’s black or white or a woman (although this would be ridiculous) either. If the story sucks, it’s gonna show.
5. Avatar was given too much critical praise.
Graeme: TRUE – Not sure how much praise it was given to be honest, but any praise is too much. Amateur dramatics in 3D.
Saira: FALSE – I remember it being a revelation at the time and it being a lot of fun. If it was given critical praise then that’s a good thing – you can’t get too much of a good thing.
Paul: FALSE – I don’t remember the critical praise it received but from a technical and creative stand point; I think it deserves everything it got. Did it look amazing? Yes. Was it made for 3D when 3D wasn’t a thing? Yes. Was it a great story? Not really, but it all came together and I enjoyed it. I do think the sequel budget and the time for production run the risk of killing them.