32 ms·
And yet, they got huge audiences and revenues, so it isn't that studio executives judged the market wrong for many years.
by RandomLensman 3y ago
And yet, they got huge audiences and revenues, so it isn't that studio executives judged the market wrong for many years.
- CuriouslyC 3y agoIt's not wrong if you don't care about art, or the legacy of the time. They're aiming for repeatable mediocrity, which is more profitable, but 50 years down the line nobody will remember the profitable trash, but they'll remember the art that was made before it.
- RandomLensman 3y agoNot sure I subscribe to your definition of art. Making a movie that has a hundred million people watching it when it is released is art in my view. Most "art" even from the 1970s is utterly forgotten by now, for example, while certain blockbusters endured.
- neaden 3y agoBut that is how it has always worked. Movies in the past just seem better because you only remember the good ones. I would argue it was even more egregious in the past because under the studio system they used to quickly crank out huge numbers of formulaic movies that no one really though about after they had a theatrical run.