Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Movies Television

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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Are Movies Dying?

Comments Filter:
  • by nospam007 ( 722110 ) * on Saturday March 26, 2022 @06:34PM (#62392599)

    The Avenger Black Panther Spiderman versus the Iron Predator Alien Man?

    Sorry, not movies.

    And now get off my lawn.

    • We've always had movies like that: people (or creatures) smashing each other into buildings. Or smashing buildings into each other. But somehow, this is all we have now, in terms of big budget spectaculars. DC and Marvel somehow are the biggest game in town, and the odd big production that isn't about superheroes is a reboot or rehash or remake. Maybe it's because Hollywood wants to play it safe, maybe it's influence of the Chinese market, but the public turning its back on cinema might be good news for
    • 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.

  • by SniffTheGlove ( 1261240 ) on Saturday March 26, 2022 @06:35PM (#62392601)

    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.

    • "Television" (cable, streaming, etc.) long story-arc and better character development have improved, though, particularly (coincidentally?) with the advent of the digital video recorder. Based on a comment from someone I know who worked in Hollywood, The Sopranos [hbo.com] was one of/the first offerings that demanded longer-term investment in a show.

      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

      • I especially love the miniseries format. Long enough to do justice to a novel, short enough to not meander about aimlessly because the end hasn't been thought up yet. And a perfect fit for streaming. Good Omens is the best one in recent memory.
    • 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.

      • 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

      • 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

        • 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.

  • I guess they don't make films like they used to then. Feeling nostalgic for the "good old days"? Not much to stop you re-watching all your old favourites on a great big 4K TV screen.

    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
    • They still make good films, just not in Hollywood.

    • 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.

      • The death of arcade did deal a strong blow to fighting games. While the genre did not die, it definitely shrinked.

        • 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.

          • 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.

    • 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.

    • 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.

    • 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

      • 20 hours of footage is not a "mini"series. It's just a series.

        • 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

  • by oldgraybeard ( 2939809 ) on Saturday March 26, 2022 @06:53PM (#62392631)
    "Hollywood's annual Academy Awards ceremony," but don't give a s%$t about the entertainment communities words, thoughts(on anything), deeds, activities, events which covers all their smug, self aggrandizing Award Ceremonies of the moment.
  • Netcraft confirms it!

  • ... 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

  • 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

    • by ffejie ( 779512 )
      Agree, but this comparison is worse than that. What's the last movie that led the box office that also won an Oscar in a directing, acting, or writing category? (Answer below) Box office has never been correlated with the Oscars, not even the slightest. It's always been an industry's way to honor what the others in the industry think are the best, not necessarily the ones with the biggest mass appeal.

      The issue for me is that TV, especially "prestige TV" is stealing so much of the oxygen - writers, actors,
      • 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.

  • 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

    • 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

      • 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

  • 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.

    • Was it worth seeing in the theaters? Absolutely.

      My local theater smells like piss and it’s in a nice area. So no for a lot of people.

  • 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

    • by skam240 ( 789197 )

      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.

  • 1. Most annoying. The movie stars are not that great at acting and think that their opinions matter. 2. Stories are lacking, so why care. 3. Following up 2, too much CGI and âoeaction/effectsâ for no particular reason.
  • 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.

  • 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

  • by ufgrat ( 6245202 ) on Saturday March 26, 2022 @08:07PM (#62392771)

    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).

  • 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.)

  • 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

    • You forgot one of the most important and welcome features that a home setup has that a cinema doesn't - the pause button.

      • 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.

  • by jemmyw ( 624065 )

    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

    • 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.

      • by jemmyw ( 624065 )

        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

  • by klipclop ( 6724090 ) on Saturday March 26, 2022 @08:25PM (#62392803)
    The last movie I saw in theaters was the new batman movie, and only because I got a free ticket and dinner. It was boring and I'd have never paid out of pocket. A lot of the other movies never pass the 10min challenge when they show up on my plex server (I subscribe to an IMDb movies list with radarr) most is just pure and utter crap and not worth my time. So when movies aren't even worth free, you know there's some issues.
  • 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.

  • 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

    • 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

    • 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)

    by erp_consultant ( 2614861 ) on Saturday March 26, 2022 @09:06PM (#62392879)

    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 :-)

    • 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.

  • 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

  • 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.

    • 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.

      • 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.

  • They're already dead and have been long before the pandemic. Shit movies only lead to monetary income from people that are desperate for entertainment, not from the masses that actually think a movie is good. There's been about 6 good movies in the past 2 years. 30 or so in the past 10. Averaging 3 decent movies a year is a horrible track record compared to the 90s and early 2000s. I've actually been going back to the 90s and finding awesome movies I didn't know about that I can stream for free.
  • 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.

  • 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.

  • by dohzer ( 867770 )

    Marvel and DC killed movies. There, I said it.

  • It's easier for people nowadays to film and publish straight to the internet. The quality of faster published stuff might not be as high as the post production capacity of Hollywood blockbuster, but for most things, that doesn't matter.
    • 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.

  • 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

  • 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.

  • 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

  • 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

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

    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
  • 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?

The unfacts, did we have them, are too imprecisely few to warrant our certitude.

Working...