Username Password Remember me Forgot password?

Wanna join? Sign up

Find movies you'll love

B Movies

Created on 4/22/2008, last active awhile ago.

"B is for better"

Join this group

Description:

B movies are like the original Not Ready for Primetime Players--funny, brave, brainless, learned, rowdy, rough, ribald, and dangerous.

B movies can be like a seven dollar bottle of champagne, miles away from the real thing but every bit as fun. (Semi-Pro)

They can be like absinthe, so bizarre you wonder if you're actually enjoying yourself. Nobody else will be able to tell you. (Eraserhead)

They can be like moonshine. Lightning in a bottle, you wonder how the maker captured it, you wonder if they even know how good it is or if they could do it again. (The Night of the Hunter)

They're like surprise hard cider. Something that's been set aside, and then you find it by accident, take a tentative sip, and it knocks you to the floor! (Voyage to the Planet of Prehistoric Women)

They're like straight Yagermeister, the kind with deerblood and mercury in it. An acquired taste that never lets you forget how dangerous it is, and others can't fathom why you're in love with it. (Wicker Man--1974).

[more]

"B" flicks created on an "A" budget?

Note: you must join this group to add to this discussion.

Sort discussion:

seely
Posts 402

10/15/2008 11:22 AM
posted awhile ago

"B" flicks created on an "A" budget?

There seems to be a bit of a trend today with post-modern cinema to create a film that has the traditional look/feel of a "B" flick of days past, but really was carefully designed and crafted to give that impression, using big name actors, state of the art filming, etc.

Curious what everyone thinks about this? Is it disingenuous, dishonest, or a great homage to the almighty B flick...? Why are filmmakers choosing to create something with a low-budget look when they have all the resources they need to be the next Michael Bay? I have plenty of my own theories, but am curious to hear everyone else's first...

----

Just some easy examples I can think of would be almost any Tarantino film (Kill Bill being a solid example), or a lot of Wes Andersen's post-"Bottle Rocket" work.

Under discussion:

Bottle Rocket (1996)

Kill Bill Vol. 1 (2003)

Risselada
Posts 2068

10/16/2008 5:01 PM
posted awhile ago

Re:"B" flicks created on an "A" budget?

seely:

There seems to be a bit of a trend today with post-modern cinema to create a film that has the traditional look/feel of a "B" flick of days past, but really was carefully designed and crafted to give that impression, using big name actors, state of the art filming, etc.

Curious what everyone thinks about this? Is it disingenuous, dishonest, or a great homage to the almighty B flick...? Why are filmmakers choosing to create something with a low-budget look when they have all the resources they need to be the next Michael Bay? I have plenty of my own theories, but am curious to hear everyone else's first...

----

Just some easy examples I can think of would be almost any Tarantino film (Kill Bill being a solid example), or a lot of Wes Andersen's post-"Bottle Rocket" work.

Maybe what you are thinking of as a look/feel of a B movie, actually means the director is just being innovative. A lot of times when you don't have the money you have to be innovative to make your ideas work or be original. If people have a lot of money usually they just throw more money at a problem instead of comming up with innovative ideas. Also when more money is involved usually more businessmen are involved and things usually go with what's conventional and has worked in the past instead of something innovative. So maybe you are just naming filmmakers who are innovative but also happen to get a lot of money. I'm sure that's an oversimplification and there are other aspects, but just a thought.

Under discussion:

Bottle Rocket (1996)

Kill Bill Vol. 1 (2003)

seely
Posts 402

10/17/2008 10:31 AM
posted awhile ago

Re:"B" flicks created on an "A" budget?

Definately some good points there. I guess what I am getting at is there something appealing or more authentic about a 'B film' that directors are trying to recapture? I almost feel like its a sense of honesty and raw truth that directors are looking for, and appropriating the B-film as a way to recapture that.

Risselada:

Maybe what you are thinking of as a look/feel of a B movie, actually means the director is just being innovative. A lot of times when you don't have the money you have to be innovative to make your ideas work or be original. If people have a lot of money usually they just throw more money at a problem instead of comming up with innovative ideas. Also when more money is involved usually more businessmen are involved and things usually go with what's conventional and has worked in the past instead of something innovative. So maybe you are just naming filmmakers who are innovative but also happen to get a lot of money. I'm sure that's an oversimplification and there are other aspects, but just a thought.

Dr_Gor
Posts 1207

11/15/2008 7:20 PM
posted awhile ago

Re:"B" flicks created on an "A" budget?

Maybe not exactly what you guys are talking about but I feel that ANY movie starring Arnold Scharzeneger or Charles Bronson or Jason Stathom or Chuck Norris or Jean Claude Van Damme or Steven Segal etc., etc. ... is a "B" movie disguised as a "Grade A" Hollywood motion picture. (or visa-versa, depending on your viewpoint). These are my favorite types of movies. Along with, of course, all of the original "B" movies from over the years...

< GOR >

seely
Posts 402

11/19/2008 2:43 PM
posted awhile ago

Re:"B" flicks created on an "A" budget?

Yeah, that definitely falls in line with what I am getting at... they aren't always made to look or actually be all that great--and I'm sure the director and producer know it. You have a huge A-list budget but then fill your roles with B actors who act like they came from the highschool drama club. I can't understand funneling so much money into a production knowing you're going to only get a B-quality flick in the end.

Dr_Gor:

Maybe not exactly what you guys are talking about but I feel that ANY movie starring Arnold Scharzeneger or Charles Bronson or Jason Stathom or Chuck Norris or Jean Claude Van Damme or Steven Segal etc., etc. ... is a "B" movie disguised as a "Grade A" Hollywood motion picture. (or visa-versa, depending on your viewpoint). These are my favorite types of movies. Along with, of course, all of the original "B" movies from over the years...

< GOR >

Dr_Gor
Posts 1207

11/19/2008 8:54 PM
posted awhile ago

Re:"B" flicks created on an "A" budget?

seely:

Yeah, that definitely falls in line with what I am getting at... they aren't always made to look or actually be all that great--and I'm sure the director and producer know it. You have a huge A-list budget but then fill your roles with B actors who act like they came from the highschool drama club. I can't understand funneling so much money into a production knowing you're going to only get a B-quality flick in the end.

I had a clever comeback for this one... something about getting "... a B-quality flick in the end." ... but I will refrain...