Are Movies Dying? (nytimes.com) 249
As viewership drops for Hollywood's annual Academy Awards ceremony, "Everyone has a theory about the decline..." argues an opinion piece in the New York Times.
"My favored theory is that the Oscars are declining because the movies they were made to showcase have been slowly disappearing." When the nominees were announced in February, nine of the 10 had made less than $40 million in domestic box office. The only exception, "Dune," barely exceeded $100 million domestically, making it the 13th-highest-grossing movie of 2021. All told, the 10 nominees together have earned barely one-fourth as much at the domestic box office as "Spider-Man: No Way Home." Even when Hollywood tries to conjure the old magic, in other words, the public isn't there for it anymore.... Sure, non-superhero-movie box office totals will bounce back in 2022, and next year's best picture nominees will probably earn a little more in theaters. Within the larger arc of Hollywood history, though, this is the time to call it: We aren't just watching the decline of the Oscars; we're watching the End of the Movies....
[W]hat looks finished is The Movies — big-screen entertainment as the central American popular art form, the key engine of American celebrity, the main aspirational space of American actors and storytellers, a pop-culture church with its own icons and scriptures and rites of adult initiation.... The internet, the laptop and the iPhone personalized entertainment and delivered it more immediately, in a way that also widened Hollywood's potential audience — but habituated people to small screens, isolated viewing and intermittent watching, the opposite of the cinema's communalism. Special effects opened spectacular (if sometimes antiseptic-seeming) vistas and enabled long-unfilmable stories to reach big screens. But the effects-driven blockbuster, more than its 1980s antecedents, empowered a fandom culture that offered built-in audiences to studios, but at the price of subordinating traditional aspects of cinema to the demands of the Jedi religion or the Marvel cult. And all these shifts encouraged and were encouraged by a more general teenage-ification of Western culture, the extension of adolescent tastes and entertainment habits deeper into whatever adulthood means today....
Under these pressures, much of what the movies did in American culture, even 20 years ago, is essentially unimaginable today. The internet has replaced the multiplex as a zone of adult initiation. There's no way for a few hit movies to supply a cultural lingua franca, given the sheer range of entertainment options and the repetitive and derivative nature of the movies that draw the largest audiences. The possibility of a movie star as a transcendent or iconic figure, too, seems increasingly dated. Superhero franchises can make an actor famous, but often only as a disposable servant of the brand. The genres that used to establish a strong identification between actor and audience — the non-superhero action movie, the historical epic, the broad comedy, the meet-cute romance — have all rapidly declined...
[T]he caliber of instantly available TV entertainment exceeds anything on cable 20 years ago. But these productions are still a different kind of thing from The Movies as they were — because of their reduced cultural influence, the relative smallness of their stars, their lost communal power, but above all because stories told for smaller screens cede certain artistic powers in advance.
The article argues that episodic TV also cedes the Movies' power of an-entire-story-in-one-go condensation. ("This power is why the greatest movies feel more complete than almost any long-form television.") And it ultimately suggests that like opera or ballet, these grand old movies need "encouragement and patronage, to educate people into loves that earlier eras took for granted," and maybe even "an emphasis on making the encounter with great cinema a part of a liberal arts education. "
In 2014 one lone film-maker had even argued that Ben Stiller's spectacular-yet-thoughtful Secret Life of Walter Mitty "might be the last of a dying breed."
"My favored theory is that the Oscars are declining because the movies they were made to showcase have been slowly disappearing." When the nominees were announced in February, nine of the 10 had made less than $40 million in domestic box office. The only exception, "Dune," barely exceeded $100 million domestically, making it the 13th-highest-grossing movie of 2021. All told, the 10 nominees together have earned barely one-fourth as much at the domestic box office as "Spider-Man: No Way Home." Even when Hollywood tries to conjure the old magic, in other words, the public isn't there for it anymore.... Sure, non-superhero-movie box office totals will bounce back in 2022, and next year's best picture nominees will probably earn a little more in theaters. Within the larger arc of Hollywood history, though, this is the time to call it: We aren't just watching the decline of the Oscars; we're watching the End of the Movies....
[W]hat looks finished is The Movies — big-screen entertainment as the central American popular art form, the key engine of American celebrity, the main aspirational space of American actors and storytellers, a pop-culture church with its own icons and scriptures and rites of adult initiation.... The internet, the laptop and the iPhone personalized entertainment and delivered it more immediately, in a way that also widened Hollywood's potential audience — but habituated people to small screens, isolated viewing and intermittent watching, the opposite of the cinema's communalism. Special effects opened spectacular (if sometimes antiseptic-seeming) vistas and enabled long-unfilmable stories to reach big screens. But the effects-driven blockbuster, more than its 1980s antecedents, empowered a fandom culture that offered built-in audiences to studios, but at the price of subordinating traditional aspects of cinema to the demands of the Jedi religion or the Marvel cult. And all these shifts encouraged and were encouraged by a more general teenage-ification of Western culture, the extension of adolescent tastes and entertainment habits deeper into whatever adulthood means today....
Under these pressures, much of what the movies did in American culture, even 20 years ago, is essentially unimaginable today. The internet has replaced the multiplex as a zone of adult initiation. There's no way for a few hit movies to supply a cultural lingua franca, given the sheer range of entertainment options and the repetitive and derivative nature of the movies that draw the largest audiences. The possibility of a movie star as a transcendent or iconic figure, too, seems increasingly dated. Superhero franchises can make an actor famous, but often only as a disposable servant of the brand. The genres that used to establish a strong identification between actor and audience — the non-superhero action movie, the historical epic, the broad comedy, the meet-cute romance — have all rapidly declined...
[T]he caliber of instantly available TV entertainment exceeds anything on cable 20 years ago. But these productions are still a different kind of thing from The Movies as they were — because of their reduced cultural influence, the relative smallness of their stars, their lost communal power, but above all because stories told for smaller screens cede certain artistic powers in advance.
The article argues that episodic TV also cedes the Movies' power of an-entire-story-in-one-go condensation. ("This power is why the greatest movies feel more complete than almost any long-form television.") And it ultimately suggests that like opera or ballet, these grand old movies need "encouragement and patronage, to educate people into loves that earlier eras took for granted," and maybe even "an emphasis on making the encounter with great cinema a part of a liberal arts education. "
In 2014 one lone film-maker had even argued that Ben Stiller's spectacular-yet-thoughtful Secret Life of Walter Mitty "might be the last of a dying breed."
What movies? (Score:3)
The Avenger Black Panther Spiderman versus the Iron Predator Alien Man?
Sorry, not movies.
And now get off my lawn.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And now get off my lawn.
You shouldn't shout at people on your lawn, instead ask them what movies are out. Clearly if you think every movie is some stupid alien or comic book flick then you're not actually looking for movies but rather specifically searching for something you hate.
Re: What movies? (Score:2)
Even with a 106" screen, 4K projector, 15 speakers, and UHD blu-ray bit rates, I don't think my home theater compares with a commercial theater experience. Especially not a properly maintained IMAX or Dolby theater room.
The main problem is that in the last decade, audiences in US theaters have taken to using their cell phones during movies, shining light around, making calls, listening to music, even smoking in public theaters. The movie going experience significantly degraded even in the years before COVID
Re: (Score:2)
"using their cell phones during movies, shining light around, making calls, listening to music, even smoking in public theaters"
Sorry, what?
How are these cave people not immediately ejected from the theatres and banned from returning!?
Re: (Score:3)
Because theaters have no interest in dealing with this problem whatsoever. They don't have even a single employee inside each room during screenings. That would cut into their profits, which comes from selling concessions, not tickets. If you want to get ahold of staff, the only way is to leave the theater yourself and look for an employee, which is usually at the front entrance, and miss a good chunk of your movie. I have done so on more than one occasion. The only thing that's ever accomplished is to obta
Re: (Score:2)
Not all theater chains are like that. Alamo Drafthouse has no-cellphone and no-talking rules, and they rigorously enforce them. They know that someone with squalling kids and yapping on a phone is bad for business, and ensure those types are shown the door.
Re: What movies? (Score:2)
Thanks. That's good to know. If I find myself up in SF again, I will check it out. It's 106 to 120 miles round trip from my home, depending on which freeway I choose to use. Minimum of 2 hours quoted by Google maps as of 1am sat night, which is one of my favorite times to be in a theater. Could be easily 3 hours when not at night, longer than most movies. Just too far to consider going there only for a movie, especially on a weekly basis.
There are a few theaters closer where the experience hadn't been so co
Re: (Score:2)
""using their cell phones during movies, shining light around, making calls, listening to music, even smoking in public theaters"
Sorry, what?
How are these cave people not immediately ejected from the theatres and banned from returning!?"
They always buy sweets for $50.
Re: (Score:2)
You know what? I don't want to hear people slurping, chewing or crunching when I watch a movie. And I don't want the smell of food.
When I used to go to a movie theatre, I went there to get a better picture and sound experience than I could get at home, and I wanted to see the movie when it was fresh together with friends.
What put me up against movie theatres the first time was that they degraded the picture experience with low-light, blurry 3D projection and charged more for it. They learned that lesson tho
Re: (Score:2)
"Now they want to lure audiences back with the promise of more food. No, I already said, that food will put me off."
How about a gin-tonic in a real glass?
Re: (Score:2)
"I haven't been in a movie theater in 15 years and probably never will again. With a good internet connection and a 70 inch television, there simply is no need to subject myself to all the downsides of going into a movie theater."
Exactly. We can get blowjobs on the couch instead of cinema seats.
Re: (Score:2)
"I pay $25/month for an AMC A-List subscription and see a movie every week. "
I pay $5 a month for a VPN and see a movie every day.
Re: Does Netcraft confirm it? (Score:2)
Considering digital delivery of movies and online sales of tickets you may have a point.
First you'd need to consider that the experience of a movie theater is now taken over by watching movies at home. Especially since Covid-19. So the box office numbers are less relevant. And this in turn kills opening week numbers.
Streaming of movies is a recent thing, but the movie industry is doing that so complicated that they instead make a market for pirated content.
The movie industry just need to adapt to the times
Yes (Score:3)
Yes, movies are dying slowly as the trend for shit ass movies keeps increasing. It the same as TV, greed of watchability.
Today I stopped my Discovery Plus sub as the bastards have now started to show ads midstream which are not able to be fast forwarded through so bye bye..
Way to much ads in content. I HATe sitting down just to grab 10mins of something whilst have a coffee only to find myself swamped in ads and no actual tv content, so the TV will will going soon.
Re: (Score:2)
So where movies might provide a more detailed story and a higher production budget, television leapfrogged that from the sitcom that resolves its conflict in a half ho
Miniseries (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, movies are dying slowly as the trend for shit ass movies keeps increasing.
Bingo. Nailed it. Didn't even need to elaborate further. Movies are shit. And no, this isn't just the "older" generation bitching about the good old days and people on their lawn. Hell, find an original storyline. Damn near everything is either a sequel, or on it's third remake.
Re: (Score:2)
I was not in a cinema since 4 or 5 years, probably longer.
8 -10 Euro for the film, 8 Euro for two drinks you want to take in. Now consider you do the unthinkable and buy a potion of Natchos with Cheese, another 5 - 8 Euro.
And now consider the impossible. You are the father of a family and come with two kids, god forbid: 3 kids. Gone are far over 100Euro for 90 minutes bullshit?
Only one out of 4 (or 5) liked the movie, the others only watched it "because they knew one might like it".
I wait till they are on
Re: (Score:2)
Or even, find some original IP. Look at all the new movies that came out in the 1980s which were completely original worlds and works. Now, look what we get now. Same old MCU stuff, darker and grittier reboots of DC, same old, same old. The last "real" new IP was Cameron's Avatar, with three new upcoming movies coming up.
Heck with all that. Find a good fiction or even better fantasy writer, and produce another Krull, Beastmaster, Dragonslayer, Legend, or something that isn't the same warmed over hot ga
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing is truly new in writing, really. Avatar is a skillful blend of many well-established tropes fitted in to a classic save-the-cat framework. When the story is well-written, the audience doesn't realise how cliche it is.
The Last Smurf Dances With Pocahontas In Fern Gully.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Nostalgia trip (Score:2)
Personally, I think what has been happening with TV miniseries is incredible. I don't think 90+ minutes is enough to do a good book justice - it's so difficult to cram a whole book into that time frame. Miniseries adaptations on the other hand, with hour episodes, going on for 6 - 12 episodes like chapters of a book, have been
Re: Nostalgia trip (Score:2)
They still make good films, just not in Hollywood.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah I think we're living in the golden age of TV. Its similar to what happened to video games with arcades. When people finally started expecting to play games at home rather than at a building elsewhere the arcades mostly died off (you can still find one but they're mostly there for quaint nostalgia). The death of the arcade didn't mean the death of the video game though.
Re: Nostalgia trip (Score:2)
The death of arcade did deal a strong blow to fighting games. While the genre did not die, it definitely shrinked.
Re: (Score:2)
The death of arcade did deal a strong blow to fighting games. While the genre did not die, it definitely shrinked.
Uh, in reality they simply got replaced with FPS games, which exploded into something several times larger.
That genre hardly died. The camera angle merely changed.
Re: (Score:2)
The idea that fighting games (1v1, reliant on high execution, many characters) are the same as fps games (1vmany, reliant on spatial perception, usually few characters) is roughly the same as saying that chess and settlers of katan are the same because both are played on a board.
Re: (Score:2)
Kinda disagree.
Part of the art to movies is the adaptation. It's a different medium rather than a moving picturebook.
For this golden age of television, let's not forget miniseries were a part of the landscape during the auteur age of movies. It's just there wasn't the money behind them as it is today.
And there were also serialized movies. Nothing has really changed except where the money goes.
Re: (Score:3)
I guess they don't make films like they used to then.
Actually, they kind of do. That is in fact part of the problem, since Hollywood has been quite busy making films exactly like they "used to", as they drop a third fucking remake of a recycled storyline.
One would have imagined we might still have writers capable of an original thought. Apparently not.
Re: (Score:2)
It's odd that I find myself on the exact opposite end of this justification. When I see a really good commercial for (new hotness), I get excited for it, right up until the last 5 seconds of the commercial when they say "Season 1, coming this fall."
"Well, shit. That looked like it was going to be a very good movie, but I really don't feel like watching them draw out that particular storyline, for an entire season or more. That's turning a 2-hour storyline, into a 40-hour marathon.
Sure, some books could
Re: (Score:2)
20 hours of footage is not a "mini"series. It's just a series.
Re: (Score:2)
20 hours of footage is not a "mini"series. It's just a series.
Given that a lot of entertainment has Gone With The Wind, reduced from 2 hour movies to 20-second YouTube shorts, with an equally "impressive" attention span, debating the definition of "mini" today, is about as easy as defining "hate".
And my point is reduced to this; if the storyline cannot justify the length, then it really doesn't matter if it's 2 extra hours, or 20. It tends to pervert entertainment into a money grab for commercial's sake. It's kind of like visiting those websites that literally have
Like good movies! (Score:3)
Fact: Movies are dying. (Score:2)
Netcraft confirms it!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Reality is... (Score:2)
... the internet made entertainment easily available, you got so much entertainment product we have an oversupply of movies, tv, music, anime and games when you get right down to it.
At this point in history, "piracy" is hardly a problem because there is so much content released every year, no one could possibly consume it all and still have a life. Someone should do a study on that when people bitch about piracy (aka how much content it's actually possible to consume in a single life time and still have a
Probably not.. (Score:2)
Fixating on pandemic-year box office as sign of a dying medium is fun and all, but I doubt the concept of a movie is dying. Theaters may be on borrowed time (lots of homes have large screens, sound systems, and furniture that rival the theater with more convenience of picking the time at will, knowing who will/will not be in the room with you, etc).
People still like standalone stories that are not constrained by fitting in an 'episode' but shorter than a mini-series or arc-heavy series. They might not wan
Re: (Score:2)
The issue for me is that TV, especially "prestige TV" is stealing so much of the oxygen - writers, actors,
Re: (Score:2)
Titanic is the only movie to win the Box Office and one of those big Oscars
Lord of the Rings: Return of the King. And the oscars there were really covering all 3 movies.
Everything is dying (Score:2)
That's just entropy, man.
Movies will never be the way they once were because society and technology are continuously changing. And the impact of film as a cultural touchstone will also continue to change in form or at least wax and wane in importance over time.
There is a certain art to a shorter story telling form that must be completed in 100 minutes. A TV series can wander around and not get to the point for multiple episodes. Wasting the viewers time but ultimately entertaining them. Multiple season stor
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, though regarding TV, I think we are living through the golden age of TV right now. I think the 20-30ish years spanning around nowish will be looked back on the same way people look back on golden age of movies.
I think you could argue that Babylon 5 was the herald of things to come and marked the beginning perhaps. Or at least the beginning of the beginning. It showed that a TV show could be planned beginning to end across multiple seasons with a coherent story and work.
But it's not just that. If you ex
Re: (Score:2)
I share your view on the golden age of TV, and I can name a few factors that contribute to it:
- Visual effects got cheaper. Not of much benefit to your suburban drama, but a real boon to sci-fi, fantasy or historical settings. Now it's affordable to have a proper alien planet or medieval castle. No more making do with the BBC quarry.
- Streaming and on-demand opens up the possibility for series with real continuity. Before that became common, it just wasn't an option for anything more than a mini-series: If
Same day release or 45day windows (Score:2)
That is what is fostering the decline.
Dune was a same day release on HBO Max. Was it worth seeing in the theaters? Absolutely. But how many people skipped the theater so they could watch at home for free (because they had HBO)?
As to the Oscars - you can blame Hollywood's ongoing obsession with giving awards to movies that people (aka the general public) dont like or care about.
Re: (Score:2)
My local theater smells like piss and it’s in a nice area. So no for a lot of people.
It's the Oscars that are Dying (Score:2)
The Oscars, and similar award shows, have always been Hollywood patting itself on the back for being so very clever. It was always about The Art, and never The Entertainment, so is it any wonder that people have learned to ignore the broadcast entirely? Besides, even if one liked a particular movie, why would they care who won what award? If they did care, they could find out the next morning on the Internet. The broadcast is a boring, overlong waste of bandwidth that would be better replaced by one of thos
Re: (Score:2)
Movies aren't dying, the waste-of-time award ceremonies are!
Get back to me when a completely original movie concept like the first Ghostbusters gets made in modern day Hollywood, complete with triple A cast. Or another Matrix.
Hollywood's refusal to produce anything original is slowly killing it.
Maybe this (Score:2)
Way better at home (Score:2)
Why would I go "to the movies"? It requires going out, paying a lot of money and then having to put up with annoying people sitting in the same room. The only people who benefit from this kind of a scheme are those selling stale popcorn and sugary drinks at ridiculous prices.
Yes; Explore vs Exploit-From Algorithms to Live By (Score:2)
In one of the early chapters about the explore/exploit balance, the author of Algorithms to Live By says that people that the balance of exploration vs exploitation depends on the expected timeframe of the subject. If you imagine someone's life, for example, people are more likely to explore (try new things) when they are younger, and exploit (stick to what they like) when they get older. When you apply the same mindset to the cinematic industry, you can clearly spot that they just keep producing more and m
Movies are dead (Score:3)
You can't make a movie any longer with ticking a whole bunch of boxes that say "appeal to market X", "don't offend group Y", and "be sure to be inclusive".
I'm not saying these are bad things-- but rather than focusing on good writing, current movies focus on "meeting targets".
There was a fantastic comparison on YT done by the Critical Drinker comparing the introduction of the Proton Packs from the original Ghostbusters, and from the.... other film. One was a short, quiet scene of about 30 seconds in a lift, the other was several minutes of shouted gobbledygook dialog combined with completely unrealistic slapstick animation. The 30 second scene conveyed far more meaning and a sense of danger, without the silliness.
I refuse to even consider seeing Uncharted, because while I enjoyed the game, Nathan Drake is not an 18 year old high school truant (Not to mention, 15th century galleons would never survive being airlifted).
Movies? (Score:2)
It's the Golden Age of TV. So many excellent shows. It is diluted as it's on multiple different streaming services, but it's available.
It's also the Golden Age of Radio with Podcasts giving Listen To On Demand on just about any subject.
Movies are just being squeezed out.
(And having cheap 1080P TVs are inexpensive sound bars doesn't help. Nor does extremely easy access to Pirated videos.)
It's the experience (Score:2)
When critics talk about the "small screen", they're out of touch in a lot of ways. Current tech has made the home-theater system screen about as large relative to the audience as a movie-theater screen would be. Combined with a decent sound system you get results equivalent to a theater.
Even for people who can't afford a home-theater system, a good large-screen TV with decent speakers isn't prohibitively expensive and combined with the better seating at home, better and cheaper snacks and not having to deal
Re: (Score:2)
You forgot one of the most important and welcome features that a home setup has that a cinema doesn't - the pause button.
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree. One of the nice things about the cinema is it doesn't have a pause button. You have to sit down and watch the film uninterrupted. That is often much better: when you can pause, you do and that can really lessen the experience.
No (Score:2)
But they couldn't just grow and grow in takings forever. I really enjoyed Dune, it had style. Heavily CG but didn't really feel that way. However, I'm not looking forward to a sequel. I'm happy to have dipped into that world, been entertained, and that's it. If it were told via a TV series, it would have been too long, too compromising, too boring.
Movies aren't dying, just changing. Like how they aren't the same now as they were in the 60s. IMO is that there will always be space for spectacle that you can o
Re: (Score:2)
If you are referring to the current Dune movie, there isn't a sequel, there's the 2nd half of the book yet to come.
Not a sequel, we are just in the intermission at the moment.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes I know. I mean, story wise the first half of the book was better than the second, imo. But what I mean is, I was happy enough with that one standalone. The stories in films don't necessarily need to be wrapped up to a grand conclusion. We can get immersed into a fantasy world, see a snapshot of it and come out of that without needing an ending. It is what it is. When added to with sequels, or second halves if you like, it'll always bear upon the original.
I'm not in any way saying that they shouldn't mak
Wouldn't watch even for free (Score:3)
Movie Award Shows are dying, not movies themselves (Score:3)
Movies are doing fine, but nobody wants to watch movie award shows anymore. They've become boring, hyper politized, and are completely out of touch with the tastes of the average movie viewer.
Hope not. I do like the format (Score:2)
I really do like the idea of a 1.5-2.5 hour escape from reality into a fantasy world of dynamic writing and special effects. I think we could get this same effect from streaming television (allows the consumer to elect their budget for experience based on equipment they buy), but I do still worry a bit that it will level the playing field too much, thus making mediocre content the norm. I've already seen this to some degree with streaming services -- in some places they do as well as high budget movies, but
Last movie I saw was the 4th Star Wars (Score:2)
This is the one that had Jar Jar Binks in it.
I think that cured me of going to movies. I don't think it is just me -- a lot of people thought that movie ruined the Star Wars franchise, long before the current run.
The last time I tried to go to the movies was for the Star Trek "Out of Darkness" reboot. I left work early that day, had some time on my hands, and I thought I would go see it at a Sundance theatre at the local mall.
Don't remember all of the details, because that too is some time ago. Th
Cinema going is dying, movies are fine (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
FTFY
If movies are "fine", then accept this challenge: Hollywood...you are forbidden from releasing any sequel or remake, for the next decade.
Let's see what happens first; bankruptcy, or an original profitable thought.
Here's why... (Score:4, Interesting)
1) Attention span. People would rather sit through a series of 5 minute YouTube clips than a 2 hour movie.
2) Everything old is new again. I think that a lot of people are tired of endless sequels. it seems that any successful movie now automatically becomes a "franchise" with the same basic story told over and over again.
3) Over reliance on technology. CGI is killing movies. Dial it back and let the story be front and center.
4) Too expensive. I haven't been to a movie theater in ages but I think it's around $20 per ticket. Plus concessions. And parking. And a sitter to look after the kids. And after all that maybe the movie stinks.
5) Netflix. For less than the price of a single night out at the movies you can stream as many as you can watch, when you want to watch it, and pause it whenever you want to.
6) Too political. Politics has invaded everything coming out of Hollywood. Even children's cartoons. Hollywood seems fine with the idea of alienating roughly 50% of the population, hence the lower box office revenue and declining popularity.
7) No more Stars. Where are the Clark Gables, the Katherine Hepburns, the Orson Wells, the Marlon Brandos of today? Tom Cruise, who has had a lot of box office success is fading. The James Bond franchise seems to be fizzling out. To be replaced by who? The Rock? He's probably the most successful box office star today but he's no actor. Certainly not in the class of any of those mentioned above. He's a jacked up, steroid guzzling jock. Mark Wahlberg? Hugh Jackman? Jason Statham? All in the same class. Good physiques but can't act.
Let the debate begin :-)
Re: (Score:2)
1) Attention span. People would rather sit through a series of 5 minute YouTube clips than a 2 hour movie.
that's why multi-season long form storytelling is a thing now. People won't watch a 2 hour movie, but they'll binge 10 hours of the Witcher in one sitting.
Pandemic + HDTV (Score:2)
The two elephants in the room, that these people never want to address as factors, are the pandemic and the evolution of the "home theater" experience in the past decade.
(And I have a "cinema buff" friend who keeps sharing articles like this, acting ignorant of those factors until you press him on it.)
First, over the past decade or so, the nature of the home theater experience has improved so dramatically that its almost unbelievable. You used to have to go to a theater to get a quality experience, and the
Fuck the Academy (Score:2)
Those awards have been nothing but a crappy inbred political ass-kiss contest for decades. They have nothing to do with which film is best, and the public is tired of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Was basically gonna say the same thing. The Oscars suck. Movies could get better and put more butts in seats, but the Oscars will continue to bleed viewership.
Re: (Score:2)
Was basically gonna say the same thing. The Oscars suck. Movies could get better and put more butts in seats, but the Oscars will continue to bleed viewership.
Don't care what you do in the movie or show. Not here to argue for censoring content. But at this point, there's only one true savior for awards shows in general. Just one small rule change.
For the hours preceding, during, and after any award show, you will shut the fuck up about politics. If you refuse, your award will be rescinded immediately, the "live" (delayed) feed will be scrubbed, and depending on hypocrisy level, an acting ban for 3-5 years.
Backups will be on standby if the host gets lippy.
No, they're not dying (Score:2)
Or. Who cares! (Score:2)
Listen...
I love watching movies, or TV shows. I love to listen to music while I work, drive of clean. But I have absolutely zero interest in watching celebrities pat themselves on the back and buy awards for things they did.
I doubt anyone cares about awards in my industry, we just don't televise it.
When I had live TV I hated award season.
the obvious (Score:2)
As viewership drops for Hollywood's annual Academy Awards ceremony, "Everyone has a theory about the decline..."
No shit. How about "interest in this particular awards ceremony has dropped" ?
I personally haven't given a fuck about any of them for many years now, and over that time I've noticed that my surrounding slowly stopped giving a fuck as well. Who won the Oscars used to be a conversation topic. Recently, nobody really cares.
That's mostly because it became too obvious that it's just Hollywood celebrating itself. Or in other words: A bunch of celebrities needed a reason to get together and have a drink.
DOA (Score:2)
Marvel and DC killed movies. There, I said it.
Not dying, just changing (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
High production costs make blockbusters risk averse. They have to pander to audience expectations, but that also means they rarely produce something new and interesting. It's the same reason why indie games tend to be more creative about mechanics--things that actually make games fun.
Consuming is so easy now... (Score:2)
Perhaps part of the reason that traditional cinema and thus traditional movies appear to be declining, the ease at which people can now consume content and the sheer volume of it.
I'd never count myself as an example of what is happening, because I exist in a small niche of "extremely fussy" movie watchers, having little attention span for anything that doesn't grab me in the first 20 minutes.
I have friends who are movie addicts, that can easily sit through 2 full movies in one sitting and frequent the cinem
Movies vs. series (Score:2)
Series are more enjoyable to watch than movies. The main reason for this is that episodes of series are shorter than movies. I prefer 20 minute episodes. The longer something lasts, more likely it is that someone interrupts you or you just get bored.
Relevancy of Oscar awards - check their rules (Score:2)
The Oscars are very much an American Centric awards night, so a great many foreign films can never win them.
Why? Rules 2 c, d & e which require that to be eligible a movie must be:
"c. for paid admission in a commercial motion picture theater in Los Angeles County (see Section g
below for additional 94th Academy Awards qualifying metro areas),
d. for a theatrical qualifying run of at least seven consecutive days in the same commercial motion
picture theater, during which period screenings must occur at leas
Maybe this is why I like old films (Score:2)
You had actors who could act, and the films were not just an excuse for showing off expensive CGI. The films had to be carried on the story and the characters. Mind you, with this Golden Age nostalgia, you have to be wary of survivorship bias. We still enjoy the films made by Alfred Hitchcock, but I am sure there was some total dross released at the same time, that has disappeared without trace. I do occasionally come across some of these lesser works. They can be quite interesting in showing how culture ha
Here's some clues... (Score:2)
Modern parody-of-woke hollywood is fundamentally incapable of telling a (good) story. To tell a good story, you need characters who have flaws, who grow, overcome, and get redemption. You need villains with sympathetic angles, who grow alongside the heros, who maybe get redemption, and who actually have a chance (and motivations that don't make them rejects from Captain Planet).
And how is any of *that* going to happen when your writing is being done by children-in-adu
What does watching Hollywood awards have to di wit (Score:2)
I love going to a good action movie in the theatre. Watching Hollywood d-bags congratulate themselves while spouting the latest leftie BS not so much. Who even has cable tv anymore to watch it if they wanted to?
Re: (Score:2)
$100 for 2 people to see a movie is a big factor.
You don't have to buy drinks and popcorn. You don't have to see the movie in 3D or in fancy seats. You don't have to go during a non-matinee time. I never in my life have spent anywhere near $100 to go to the movies.
Re: Its too expensive. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, he does, if he goes to the cinema. And I agree with him.
The cinema experience requires those concessions, because these are concessions we already have at home.
If the actual movie is the main priority, cinema is no longer justifiable.
Re: (Score:2)
The cinema experience requires those concessions,
No it doesn't.
because these are concessions we already have at home.
I don't compulsively eat when I watch movies at home. I often don't eat in fact. I mean don't get me wrong not always. And I have a local fancy cinema which is outrageously expensive and sells good beer and so on and it's still not £60 with concessions. This is overpriced London prices in a fancy cinema. Where the hell is OP finding a place to spend $100 at?
If the actual movie is
Re: Its too expensive. (Score:2)
There are other movies that should be seen in the theatre, imho. I remember in high school to see Schindlerâ(TM)s List with my family. IMNSHO, that movie must be seen as a collective experience, where we canâ(TM)t shut it off or pause it.
Conversely, in the complete opposite vein, it was a hell of a lot of fun to see Avengers Endgame in a theatre. The cheers that went up when Captain America picks up Thorâ(TM)s Hammer weâ(TM)re a hoot. Itâ(TM)s absolutely a popcorn movie thatâ(T
Re: (Score:2)
You don't have to buy drinks and popcorn. You don't have to see the movie in 3D or in fancy seats. You don't have to go during a non-matinee time.
I'd argue you don't have to go at all.
This is not about what you can or could do (or not do) to make it cheaper, it's about how does the experience compare against watching the same movie at home.
The only advantage a cinema has: very large screen and loud audio (which sometimes is also of good quality, but that's a lottery).
Everything else is a long list of disadvantages.
1. You spend way more time: trip to the cinema and back, waiting in a queue to buy food/drinks, pre-movie ads and promos.
2. You watch it t
Re: (Score:2)
Pick better theaters.
The cheapest tickets around here are $7.35 (actually $4.73 for a matinee but I'm going to compare evening prices. The most expensive was able to find was $13.27.
Now sure, cost of living is a bit lower here (near Charleston, SC), but even adjusting to Los Angeles while the average ticket seemed to be around $18 (and I saw as high as $23), I still saw plenty of options in the $12-13 range (and I saw one theater in the list with tickets for $5.50 - only 2 screens though so what they're s
Re: (Score:2)
Why would I go to The Movies when a large percentage of people in America, even in interesting art house theaters, have such atrocious behavior?
Talking, phone checking/use/sounds, even smoking/vaping it just ruins it. Alamo Draft House is a good idea when it actually works.
And many movie theaters now have reserved seating (which I dislike on principle) meaning you can't move away from obnoxious/distracting people.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would I go to The Movies when a large percentage of people in America, even in interesting art house theaters, have such atrocious behavior?
Talking, phone checking/use/sounds, even smoking/vaping⦠it just ruins it. Alamo Draft House is a good idea when it actually works.
Score of 0 - someone is actually down-modding this? Must be assholes that can't put their phones away. This is absolutely the problem that has driven me away from theaters.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought Dune was better than the book.
Re: (Score:2)
I preferred the 2000 miniseries to the 2022 movie.
Re: (Score:2)
Look how awful dune came out.
Dune was a critical and box office success. It's fine to have opinions contrary to the mainstream but maybe try to be aware of the world around you.
Re: (Score:2)
My only disappointment from Dune 2022 was the wait for the next one.
Re: (Score:2)
If I had mod points I'd mod this so far negative . . .
Can someone with mods, or an admin, ban this account as it seems to a SPAM account.
I might be wrong, sure, but I doubt it.
Re: (Score:2)
Hollywood, please just make movies that tell a story. If you need some special effects OK, but focus on the story.
...and stop trying to turn everything into a sequel/trilogy/franchise. There are some great stories that have a beginning, a middle, and an end and that's it. I don't need to see what happened afterward, what happened before, this character's backstory, that character's backstory, etc.
Heck, recent example, I saw "Free Guy" and thought it was a pretty fun movie. It had a nice happy ending. Done. Now they're talking about a sequel. Frankly, I'm fine with, "...and they lived happily ever after. The End.
Re: (Score:2)
New stories are a risk. Making a movie is very expensive, and it's only getting more so - audiences want a big name superstar lead actor. And if it's a more fantastic movie they will want good effects too. If you don't have that, you'll have a hard time even getting cinemas to show it. Low-budget movies only get very limited distribution, generally.
But a franchise comes with a ready-built audience. A large and measurable fanbase that are almost guaranteed to watch the movie, even if it turns out to be crap.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you a Markov model trained on right wing twitter accounts?