Posts
I've just been e-mailing with pop culture observer (and folk musician...) John Voorhees over at Soundacious, where he's posted an interesting theory on Geeks that fits right in with the Geek Conversation I had with the Flick Filosopher yesterday at Geek Philosophy. Yikes, is that a sentence or what?
Anyway, John has assembled a sort of Geek Movie Paradigm (in other words, the necessary ingredients of a Geek Movie success). Among his components are: A formerly fallen-franchise, now in disrepair but still beloved, a grown-up fan-boy-style director, a critically acclaimed actor (but not someone too famous, like say Tom Cruise), and a new focus on dramatic elements of the franchise, rather than the traditional fantasy aspects. I think he's got a pretty good point, and the blog is a valuable addition to the Geek Debate.
Anyway, John has assembled a sort of Geek Movie Paradigm (in other words, the necessary ingredients of a Geek Movie success). Among his components are: A formerly fallen-franchise, now in disrepair but still beloved, a grown-up fan-boy-style director, a critically acclaimed actor (but not someone too famous, like say Tom Cruise), and a new focus on dramatic elements of the franchise, rather than the traditional fantasy aspects. I think he's got a pretty good point, and the blog is a valuable addition to the Geek Debate.
He's already mentioned in the post how it applies to Batman, Battlestar, and Doctor Who, and I thought immediately of Sam Raimi's Spider-man.
But I'll tell you something - Star Trek (one of my all time favorite franchises...) needs a face lift. We can't keep having replicative fading like Enterprise. Imagine Sam Raimi or Christopher Nolan on that project? Paramount, are you listening? Not likely, given my current traffic, but it's still a good idea...
