Change Your Image
Zed1999
The magic of film-making is something that has intrigued me ever since I decided to pop in the mysterious DISC 2 of a Star Wars D.V.D when I was a young teen. Whether it was Phantom Menace, Revenge Of The Sith or A New Hope, I was turned off at first (it seemed at the time to just be a bunch of old people talking about how they did this and that to make *that*), but after a while, seeing how words on a piece of paper could blossom into the brilliance of movie-making is something that began to inspire me. It showed me that - even in the case of some of the greatest movies to grace this Earth - the scenes unfolding from BEHIND the camera lens were actually more interesting than the films themselves.
A movie like Toy Story 2 may seem like just another Pixar classic, but the events that took place within the hectic Disney/Pixar offices is truly one for the books. Other noteworthy occurrences in the seemingly chaotic world of Hollywood are equally as daunting: George Lucas being briefly hospitalised for hypertension in the middle of the stressful shooting of 1977's 'STAR WARS', Robin Williams being falsely offered the role of the Joker in Tim Burton's 1989 'BATMAN' by Warner Bros. executives in order to bait Jack Nicholson into accepting the role, James Cameron fighting off Orion executives who were trying to change the ending of 'THE TERMINATOR'... there's a million eyebrow-raising stories out there that really made me realise how there's more to movies than just two hours of entertainment.
It is, in every sense of the word, an art. Some of the movies we take for granted today almost never happened. If you think it's just a bunch of actors getting all dressed up to get in front of the camera waiting for the word "action" then you're dead wrong. Movie-making wasn't - and isn't - a straightforward process, and that's particularly the reason why I never decided to invest in a career aimed at putting myself in a director's chair. It's not only expensive and mentally demanding, but the sad reality is that even if you pour your very soul into your film, that doesn't necessarily make it good. A more technical reason for my apprehension is that, honestly, it seems to me a very mad industry - where one must slip between the cracks to really make a living at it. Not all are lucky enough to make it big like Steven Spielberg or Ridley Scott or Martin Scorsese, and I'm perfectly fine with that.
I may sound like I'm rambling, but my point is that films are truly something to be appreciated. In some cases they are even genius.
I love movies (except the ones I DON'T) and that's why I've made it my mission to watch damn near everything I can, both good and bad - from The Shawshank Redemption to Plan 9 From Outer Space. And I watch the credits, too, to allow the movie to sink in and the dust to settle.
I very much enjoy the sheer unquestioned POWER (yes, POWER in full capitals) of being able to brand a film with the hot iron that is my rating. Whether it's Forrest Gump that earns a golden 10/10 stars, or the Star Wars Holiday Special that barely earns 1.
I watch all sequels and remakes these films get, and I rate each and every one fairly. A reminder that these star-ratings are simply my opinion, and you may not agree with all of them, and that's okay.
Here is a list of the rules my rating system abides by:
- No foreign films: I don't watch anything that wasn't originally released in English. The primary reasons for this is that it is A) not always easy to get your hands on foreign films, and B) it's very difficult to draw the line on what counts, especially in utterly ludicrous series like the Italian Zombi movies. Ugh. And I'm not discrediting foreign movies, as I know the original Godzilla and the more recent Parasite are both highly-acclaimed. But I can live without them. Even animated films that are re-dubbed in English do not count; it must originally be English.
- No fan films: for obvious reasons, these do not count. You may have heard of a great classic horror movie Night Of The Living Dead, directed by George Romero. This movie actually never received a copyright stamp and so therefore any fool and his grandmother can buy a camera and make their own 'sequel' under that title. That film is literally plagued with a hundred remakes, sequels, requels, and re-what-have-yous. So finally, the decision came to me quite easily and I still feel liberated by it. It's a simple rule - THEY DO NOT COUNT.
- No public domain films: going off of what I mentioned above, I cannot allow myself to count films made after a work has entered public domain in that respective country. Look, I know that means missing out on classics like Dracula and stuff like that, but when you look at ALL the films scummy opportunists have made over the years based on that one movie, I'm reminded that my time is much more valuable than the crap some people have made. Take a look at the ungodly amount of Wizard Of Oz films made simply because there is no legal owner. Gross. RULES FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN: unfortunately, public domain rules vary from country to country and even then the rules themselves are blurry. This poses a real issue, but I've laid out rules below that should keep my viewings consistent and equal. So, if a movie is based on a book that has expired, then NO movie can be considered valid after date of expiry, even in the case where the copyright has 'mutated' and is solely for the film rights. I don't care. However, an example of where this becomes tricky is The War Of The Worlds, published by H.G Wells (in the U.K) in the late 19th century. Wells' work expired in the U.K in 2017 about seventy years after his death, as per the copyright rules in Britain. Yet in the U.S.A, works published before the mid 1920s are all considered public domain. So in this scenario, only BRITISH movies made before 2017 would count, yet any American movie made after the 1920s cannot count. As such, I cannot find any British movies of TWOTW and so that means that the only ones out there are American (from 1953 onwards) which cannot count and therefore will not be rated. It's as simple as that. You can tell a lot of the 21st century TWOTW films are definitely not held together by any real copyright (as far as I can tell) because some independent studios crapped out their own versions. Another example is Dracula, which famously was not submitted for copyright in the U.S, which means that absolutely no movie from over there could ever possibly count as a valid LEGAL entity. Yet in the U.K, where it was originally published, the copyright finally officially expired some time in the 1960s, which meant two movies made before that point (by British film companies) were valid and have been rated. I am not a legal lawyer, but all the same I feel I am being more than pragmatic with this system I've invented. But wait, I'm not done yet. In extreme cases, there are times I simply cannot find any concrete proof that either supports nor specifically denounces a film's status as legally protected, so in this case I will default to it NOT being in the public domain and I will rate those movies.
- No movies that are literally just episodes from a show stitched together to create a 'full feature'. Yes, this does exist. For example, Spider-Man The Dragon's Challenge may seem like an old Spidey movie, but it is simply just two episodes mashed into one. These do NOT qualify as real films.
- No non-fiction movies. Because then it becomes a documentary, not a movie. Simple. However, movies that use real-life people or things is fine.
- A movie must be - at minimum - sixty minutes to qualify as a feature film. I know this may seem the most unreasonable of all my rules, but it's perfectly justified. You have to draw the line somewhere, and I think I'm honestly being generous here.
Before I wrap this bio up, I want to say a little thing about myself. Films are fascinating. I personally love the soundtracks and the practical effects of movies from the 1980s, and I really believe that that decade truly had something special about it.
Zed1999 ~ 28 July 2020 0253