3 ms·

Hollywood is so stuck it’s painful. They’re literally just remaking the same 15 or so movies over and over, mostly with the same actors. Our culture is STUCK.

50 3y ago
begs the question: where is our robert bresson in our hyper-banal modernity?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
dagmx 3y ago
Counterpoint: it’s our culture that’s stuck. Hollywood DOES make tons of original films every year. Many of the large studios have specific subsidiaries just to produce or distribute a wide range of originals. The issue is that known franchises will always be a relatively safe bet. Audiences don’t reward novelty, with the exception of the few breakthrough hits. Audiences generally want to spend their money and time on known entities. That people think Hollywood is “stuck remaking films” is testament to how little attention people pay to stuff outside the mainstream. This is why Marvel is so successful and why their strategy was brilliant. Early Marvel films were often stinkers like Thor/Thor2 but people keep going back for more because each new film cements them safely in people’s minds. People don’t generally care if the film will be great. They’ll happily go see mediocre films because they’re risk averse. I’ve worked for years in film. The most banal remakes always did way better in box offices than the really unique and critically acclaimed films. Hollywood is a reflection of audiences, and capitalism demands appealing to the majority
- echelon 3y ago
  > Hollywood is a reflection of audiences, and capitalism demands appealing to the majority 100% agree with your thesis. Appeal to the average consumer for soaking up maximum, predictable, risk-free money. > > Counterpoint: it’s our culture that’s stuck. Yeah, our culture isn't stuck. It's just average value of consumer tastes (as vetted by the market) that are. Look at TikTok and Twitter, "Harry Potter Balenciaga" [1] and all the other weird memes. How quickly things get riffed on and incorporated into our collective consciousness and vocabulary. Hollywood marketing can't keep up with the zeitgeist because it moves so fast. It's fickle, fleeting, risky, and unpredictable. Niche interests are super long tail anyway. A24 is doing a good job at picking off large sub populations of indie/art house filmgoers (not exactly niche), but ultimately it's going to take a dramatic reduction in cost structures to cater to the entirety of the human interest graph. I think we'll get there in the next 10-20 years. Generative AI and creative sandboxes like Unreal, Roblox, and VRChat will give creators the ability to make anything. We're not there yet, but we can start to see over the hill. [1] Granted, this is a riff on the non-A24 film, "Triangle of Sadness" (though A24 tried to win the bid to buy it themselves)
esarbe 3y ago
Our culture is stuck because of the insanely long copyright terms and mass media that has produced them.
- bzzzt 3y ago
  Disagree. I'd expect long copyright to give more incentive to create something not based on existing work. Did the world really need "Pooh - Blood and honey"?
  - esarbe 3y ago
    Do you know why we got "Pooh - Blood and Honey"? Because you for sure cannot make a children's book with new stories with the characters without getting sued by Disney. A slasher horror is about the only thing you can do without getting sued into submission, due to ridiculous trademark and copyright laws.
    - bzzzt 3y ago
      Pooh is out of copyright so unless you're copying the Disney adaptations you can do whatever you like. If you want to make a slasher film, just make a slasher film with original characters, maybe it will even be good. My point is you don't need existing IP to adapt.
      - esarbe 3y ago
        Pooh might be out of copyright, but the corporate media has found a way around that by using trade marks. So anything related to Children's books (or any books, drawing books, comics, anything) cannot come with "Winnie Pooh", "Winnie the Pooh" or similar, cannot have a golden-brown bear, not a pinky Piglett or a stripy Tigger. Humans have always been adapting existing "IP" to their own uses. Just look at the many ways that Odysseus has been adapted - It's like a cinematic universe of old. Humans have always been remixing and reshuffling things. Copyright has taken that away from us. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remix_(book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remix_(book)
kelseyfrog 3y ago
It's the decline of DVD sales. Big budget Hollywood films are designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Why did the mid-budget sector (the one that can take risks with creativity) drop out leaving us with either indie films or big budget films? According to Matt Damon[1], it's the obsolescence of the DVD market that changed the calculus of mid-budget films. When a structural change affects the economics of content, it's difficult to localize the problem and envision a remedy. Unfortunately, these economic systemic problems tend to shut down our capabilities to affect change rather than enhance them. In some ways it's more convenient to envision the problem as being a problem of movie studio executives and their choices, than a media economy problem with a change in financial relations. 1. Matt Damon | Hot Ones https://youtu.be/yaXma6K9mzo?t=841 https://youtu.be/yaXma6K9mzo?t=841

50 3y ago

begs the question: where is our robert bresson in our hyper-banal modernity?

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

dagmx 3y ago

Counterpoint: it’s our culture that’s stuck. Hollywood DOES make tons of original films every year. Many of the large studios have specific subsidiaries just to produce or distribute a wide range of originals. The issue is that known franchises will always be a relatively safe bet. Audiences don’t reward novelty, with the exception of the few breakthrough hits. Audiences generally want to spend their money and time on known entities. That people think Hollywood is “stuck remaking films” is testament to how little attention people pay to stuff outside the mainstream. This is why Marvel is so successful and why their strategy was brilliant. Early Marvel films were often stinkers like Thor/Thor2 but people keep going back for more because each new film cements them safely in people’s minds. People don’t generally care if the film will be great. They’ll happily go see mediocre films because they’re risk averse. I’ve worked for years in film. The most banal remakes always did way better in box offices than the really unique and critically acclaimed films. Hollywood is a reflection of audiences, and capitalism demands appealing to the majority

echelon 3y ago
> Hollywood is a reflection of audiences, and capitalism demands appealing to the majority 100% agree with your thesis. Appeal to the average consumer for soaking up maximum, predictable, risk-free money. > > Counterpoint: it’s our culture that’s stuck. Yeah, our culture isn't stuck. It's just average value of consumer tastes (as vetted by the market) that are. Look at TikTok and Twitter, "Harry Potter Balenciaga" [1] and all the other weird memes. How quickly things get riffed on and incorporated into our collective consciousness and vocabulary. Hollywood marketing can't keep up with the zeitgeist because it moves so fast. It's fickle, fleeting, risky, and unpredictable. Niche interests are super long tail anyway. A24 is doing a good job at picking off large sub populations of indie/art house filmgoers (not exactly niche), but ultimately it's going to take a dramatic reduction in cost structures to cater to the entirety of the human interest graph. I think we'll get there in the next 10-20 years. Generative AI and creative sandboxes like Unreal, Roblox, and VRChat will give creators the ability to make anything. We're not there yet, but we can start to see over the hill. [1] Granted, this is a riff on the non-A24 film, "Triangle of Sadness" (though A24 tried to win the bid to buy it themselves)

esarbe 3y ago

Our culture is stuck because of the insanely long copyright terms and mass media that has produced them.

bzzzt 3y ago
Disagree. I'd expect long copyright to give more incentive to create something not based on existing work. Did the world really need "Pooh - Blood and honey"?
- esarbe 3y ago
  Do you know why we got "Pooh - Blood and Honey"? Because you for sure cannot make a children's book with new stories with the characters without getting sued by Disney. A slasher horror is about the only thing you can do without getting sued into submission, due to ridiculous trademark and copyright laws.
  - bzzzt 3y ago
    Pooh is out of copyright so unless you're copying the Disney adaptations you can do whatever you like. If you want to make a slasher film, just make a slasher film with original characters, maybe it will even be good. My point is you don't need existing IP to adapt.
    - esarbe 3y ago
      Pooh might be out of copyright, but the corporate media has found a way around that by using trade marks. So anything related to Children's books (or any books, drawing books, comics, anything) cannot come with "Winnie Pooh", "Winnie the Pooh" or similar, cannot have a golden-brown bear, not a pinky Piglett or a stripy Tigger. Humans have always been adapting existing "IP" to their own uses. Just look at the many ways that Odysseus has been adapted - It's like a cinematic universe of old. Humans have always been remixing and reshuffling things. Copyright has taken that away from us. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remix_(book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remix_(book)

kelseyfrog 3y ago

It's the decline of DVD sales. Big budget Hollywood films are designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Why did the mid-budget sector (the one that can take risks with creativity) drop out leaving us with either indie films or big budget films? According to Matt Damon[1], it's the obsolescence of the DVD market that changed the calculus of mid-budget films. When a structural change affects the economics of content, it's difficult to localize the problem and envision a remedy. Unfortunately, these economic systemic problems tend to shut down our capabilities to affect change rather than enhance them. In some ways it's more convenient to envision the problem as being a problem of movie studio executives and their choices, than a media economy problem with a change in financial relations. 1. Matt Damon | Hot Ones https://youtu.be/yaXma6K9mzo?t=841 https://youtu.be/yaXma6K9mzo?t=841