(Continued)

Use more nudity.

Here's an idea: To paraphrase John Cleese in "Monty Python's The Meaning of Life": What's wrong with some graphic nudity? Those gory physical effects are really convincing (most of the comic-book CGI stuff noticeably less so), but why do adults in Hollywood movies still behave as if they're on "The Dick Van Dyke Show"? (Nothing against "The Dick Van Dyke Show," which is one of the great achievements in television history, but you know what I mean: Rob and Laura not only slept in separate twin beds but they always wore pajamas.)

Sex in the movies seemed like it was going somewhere in the '70s, with "Five Easy Pieces," "Last Tango in Paris" and "Don't Look Now." In 1993, the great Julianne Moore played out a full-frontal scene -- an argument at home with her husband -- in Robert Altman's "Short Cuts," and it wasn't the nudity that was shocking, it was the physical and emotional reality of the scene. Do you know people who pop out of bed after sex sporting underwear? Who's in such a blasted hurry to get dressed?

The best special effect in the history of movies is the human face, with the human body coming in a close second. Use it. You think torture porn sells? The audience for porn-porn is exponentially larger. (Have you heard of this thing called the World Wide Internets? It revolutionized a whole lucrative section of the movie industry -- mostly the one located beyond Warners, Disney and Universal in the farther reaches of the San Fernando Valley.)

Watch HBO.

"The Sopranos," "Deadwood," "The Wire," "Entourage," "Six Feet Under," "Sex and the City" -- you already know that's exactly the kind of stuff you should be doing. (And you're planning to make feature films out of some of 'em already.) Don't be afraid of cuss words, genitalia or blood-n-guts -- but try something a little more engaging than a hollow three-act structure without story or characters. Memorable, complex characters (without their edges polished off) are probably more compelling than structure, story or profanity-nudity-violence combined.

By this I mean characters who don't always announce to the audience what they're doing and why, because they don't always know. Leave a little room for mystery and ambiguity, give the audience half a chance to pay attention, and you may just pull them deeper into movies. (Ooops -- that last phrase was the title of a book by a film critic, Pauline Kael. I don't mean "deeper" as in "unfathomable"; just "deeper" as in "more involving.")

Recycle the stars.

It's easy to get famous. The hard thing is staying there. But there are so many charismatic stars who've still got some oomph left in 'em and are just waiting to be rediscovered. Right now you can get 'em pretty cheap and, if you're smart about casting, reap the rewards. Classic example: John Travolta in "Pulp Fiction." (Heck, Bruce Willis in "Pulp Fiction.") I happen to think that Harris Yulin and Mary Kay Place should be in every movie that comes out, but that's me.

I'm talking about more popular names. Except for director Paul Thomas Anderson's "Boogie Nights," nobody has quite rediscovered the magic of Burt Reynolds. We need Mimi Rogers right now. And Keith Carradine and Tom Hulce and Timothy Hutton. You would have thought that Kathleen Turner died with "V.I. Warshawski" -- but it was only the movie that died. She's due for a juicy part. Geena Davis, too. You can't blame "Cutthroat Island" on her.

Rob Lowe bounced back. What about the rest of the "Brat Pack"? I'd rather see Molly Ringwald again than Winona Ryder (though Ryder's been "over" almost long enough for her to come "back" again). Emilio Estevez: Get him out from behind the camera and put him in front of it again. His brother, Charlie Sheen, is doing a sub-"Full House" sitcom with Jon Cryer (who deserves so much better). Bring back Emilio! And Anthony Michael Hall. (OK, you can leave Judd Nelson and Ally Sheedy where they are.)

Put Sean Penn back.

Don't let technology bury you.

You've not only got one foot in the grave, but you're also already buried up to your spleen. In 1995, Bill Gates wrote a now-famous Microsoft memo called "The Internet Tidal Wave" in which he said it was vital that the company embrace the Internet. Twelve years have passed, and where's Hollywood? Who didn't get the memo?

Digital production, digital projection, digital distribution -- you guys are so far behind the curve you aspire to be Luddites. Look, you've wasted fortunes delaying and resisting every technical innovation that's come along: television, cable/satellite, home video, pay per view, DVD, HDTV... And what do they all have in common? They've made you, or are making you, even greater fortunes. Every one of them has opened up a whole new business for you.

The Santa Monica cops may let you off with a warning, but your customers won't. Sober up.

Sincerely,

Jim, your biggest fan

Jim Emerson is the former editor of Microsoft's online/CD-ROM movie encyclopedia, Cinemania. He has written a lot through the years, mostly about movies, for many publications and Web sites, and is now the editor of RogerEbert.com, where he also publishes his blog, Scanners.

What advice do you have for Hollywood? Write us at heymsn@microsoft.com.

More reflection on blockbuster season: The Best and Worst of Summer '07

Sound off: Comment on this story | Also: Features archive