Modern Exploitation

[BioZombie]

I just watched the Bai Ling sci-fi/explotation film The Gene Generation and I found it a lot harder to get into than more vintage stuff with similar production values. I stuck with it though and eventally enjoyed it dispite the large of amount of really shitty cgi shots (Bai Ling being super hot helped a bit ). Though I will admit some of the cgi tenticles were cool.

Does anyone else find it harder to take shockingly bad acting and obvious low budget in more recent films?

[The Reaper Man@Cult Labs]

Yeah,I do BZ.When it's an older film it's sort of retro/nostalgic.
When it's recent films,well that's a different matter.....

[BioZombie]

I guess in 20, 30 years time people will look back at exploitation made now (while their flying their personal rocket packs and surfing the net via chips implated in their brains) and think its nostalgic.

[The Reaper Man@Cult Labs]

They will mate,and films from the sixties and seventies etc will be vintage.Wonder what that'll make the Nosferatu's and Dr Caligari's?

[BioZombie]

Originally Posted by reaper72

what that'll make the Nosferatu's and Dr Caligari's

Relics!!!!

[Make Them Die Slowly]

Originally Posted by BioZombie

Relics!!!!

I feel like one now whenever I watch a modern film!

[Peter Neal]

I only have a problem with modern exploitation if the hammy acting, bad photography, lousy direction etc are a desperate, INTENTIONAL move to jump on the "retro Grindhouse" bandwagon (though I quite liked "Werewolf in a Women's Prison") instead of making the most out of what little resources there might be. That totally seems to be missing the point of "B-C" film making, at least from my pov.

[Make Them Die Slowly]

I think one of the problems with modern exploitation is that it is too easy for people to make films hence the mountain of crud produced by fan boys going for that retro grindhouse feel.Sadly there is an audience to lap it all up and keep the crap coming.

[herman]

I read an interesting comment somewhere once online. I thought this summed it up: "The modern exploitation film is the blockbuster". It has all the characteristic of classic exploitation- the sensationalist marketing and the exploitation of themes and trends. So taking this to its conclusion- remakes would be the new exploitation cinema, those blockbusters that latch onto a trend- in this case the fashion for grindhouse type film or the zombie movie.

Maybe I seem a little pedantic here because I know that when people say exploitation they often mean genre film. But when you consider that when these old "grindhouse" classics were new they were often not far from the mainstream and responded to the popular crazes of the time (surf movies, rock n roll flicks, kung fu flicks and so on)- the current thing seems to be 3d movies.

There is a lot of z grade trash out there but these can only be considered exploitation cinema in the sense that they exploit the current fad for grindhouse. I tend to stay way clear of those films.

[Philleh]

I think a lot of the problems can be found in the fact that people can make digital films now.

Way back when people had limited film stock and HAD to make sure they got the best they could. Now they can shoot forever and a day and not care. Restrictions have always aided production.

I think the fact the older films were actually shot on film helps as well. This cheap digital crap that’s floating around hurts my eyes to be honest, as did the old VHS schlock of the 80's and 90's.

If you look at a film like Shallow Ground, made for $72,000 but they used film and the quality of the product has been boosted to make it look a hundred times for expensive than far bigger budgeted material like Murder Set Pieces, that despite the $2.2 million budget looks cheap in comparison, and that was also shot on 35mm!

It all comes down to the talent dealing with that restriction of a low budget and how they choose to overcome it.