|
I don't think Schlock could ever be made now, under any other genre title. It was one of a kind film making from a primitive era of cnema. The budgets were abysmally low, the talent nonexistant and the quality mostly absent. What schlock(or grade B-Z) did usually have was enthusiasm for the material. An "I'll get this thing made if I have to kill somebody to do it!" mentality. Sometimes you got a Jonathon Demme or Coppola rise from the pack. Sometimes you got Ed Wood. But you always got entertained, for good or bad. Trying to capture that era is almost impossible now. Even low budgets are huge by schlock standards(even by porn standards). Many of those films could be made on Blair Witch Project's budget alone. To compare say, direct-to-video(which is regarded as schlock now) to that era, you can see a distinct difference in acting style. B movie actors WANTED to become stars, and it showed. Dtv actors seem merely to show up and read the lines, as required. They don't even attempt to do a bad job. You also don't get those quirky moments now, that you used to get. The mike visible in scenes, messed up continuity(someone wearing a black shirt, then a red shirt in the same scene), ridiculous special effects or horrendous line deliveries. Remakes of those films are not nearly as good, because they tend to hold up the source material in too high esteem.
I don't think I'd consider most of what's on that list as schlock. It's just made too well. As for Splatterpunk Cinema, it will probably get it's own genre, but I doubt it would qualify completely as schlock.
|