[DsBlu01CivEX]

I tend not to look at the quality of movies when I go see them. I tend to look at entertainment value....which is also what the directors/producers/and film companies are looking at as well. I can normally tell by a movie's trailer if I'm going to enjoy it or not. Some have fooled me (The Royal Tennebaums being one of them...that was a horrible horrible movie) but not too many. Some movies aren't made to be the best quality (best actors, cinematography, etc.) they are made to be entertaining. I think people look way to into fictional movies and try to make them real life. Sure half the stuff that happens in say XXX would never ever be able to happen in real life....THAT'S THE POINT!!!! Movies like that are supposed to take you by surprise, make you sit on the edge of your seat....you get the idea. I could see you basing this thread on non-fictional movies...say Ali. I haven't seen the movie, I'm not a fan of Ali myself nor do I like the sport of boxing. I have no desire to see it what so ever....but my point is....that movie should be something of high quality because it's based on someone's life. It needs to be 100% accurate. It has to capture the feeling and angles ect that it did in real life. Standards such as acting, cinematography, plot, everything you guys think that makes a "good/great" movie should be applied to non-fictional movies, not fictional ones. I do think quality movies can be made with less of a budget...but it depends on the type of film you are doing....action flicks are definitely going to need a bigger budget otherwise they are going to look like they were made in the 80s....and we all know how we feel about the quality of 80s movies.