3 ms·

> Taken as a game rather than the movie it often seems more interested in being It's interesting how movies today seem to be the "top" art form: there are book

> Taken as a game rather than the movie it often seems more interested in being It's interesting how movies today seem to be the "top" art form: there are books, comics, videogames that want to be movies, but never in the other direction. (There are books and games based on movies, but they are clearly secondary.) I wonder if there could be some other art form that would be "above" movies in this sense.

worthless-trash 2y ago
By top i assume you mean most profitable, I guess that movies are simply more accessible and cater to the lowest common denomination.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
ucla_rob 2y ago
video games revenues are usually 5x those of video games. call movies 40bb per annum mobile games alone are ~100bb. Finish Him.
- kaoD 2y ago
  Isn't most of that revenue from F2P user hostile mobile games? That'd be like counting TikTok as part of the movie revenue.
- iamacyborg 2y ago
  I doubt many people consider Candy Crush to be a good example of an art form. It’s just an app designed to manipulate human psychology to extract maximal profit.
- dahart 2y ago
  This is pretty misleading and 5x is totally wrong. You’re quoting the approximate box office number for film, but leaving out home entertainment (streaming & DVDs) and merchandising entirely, while at the same time including those categories on the games side. Film industry revenues as a whole when including streaming exceed $100B per year, and approximately matched the games industry, at least as of 5 years ago. See Wikipedia’s entries on film & game industries [1][2] — in 2018, film was $136B, while games was $135B. It’s only very very recently that total games revenue exceeded total film revenue. Making this much harder to reconcile is that total film revenues are generally not public information and they are notoriously misrepresented and downplayed, maybe to help reduce taxes, royalties, and bonuses, or maybe just for competitive reasons, but either way film numbers are unreliable and underestimated. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_industry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_industry [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_industry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_industry
moomin 2y ago
It’s funny, because movies still have the prestige television and games do not, despite both of them outstripping cinema in many ways. Movies have become increasingly global common denominator, with razor edge finances, and have ceded so much ground to TV it’s ridiculous. An example of this: watch Kramer vs Kramer. It’s a great movie, with a big name cast telling an emotional story. Try to think of a more recent movie like it.
account42 2y ago
Makes sense considering that movies are usually self-contained art pieces while games these days more of then than not try to upsell you DLC or microtransactions and TV series tend to be so drawn out that hey are cancelled before getting to the point. Books are the odd one out in that they don't have this problem and as a result are still considered prestigious (probably moreso than movies) but instead suffer from lack of audiovisual communication.

worthless-trash 2y ago

By top i assume you mean most profitable, I guess that movies are simply more accessible and cater to the lowest common denomination.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

ucla_rob 2y ago

video games revenues are usually 5x those of video games. call movies 40bb per annum mobile games alone are ~100bb. Finish Him.

kaoD 2y ago
Isn't most of that revenue from F2P user hostile mobile games? That'd be like counting TikTok as part of the movie revenue.
iamacyborg 2y ago
I doubt many people consider Candy Crush to be a good example of an art form. It’s just an app designed to manipulate human psychology to extract maximal profit.
dahart 2y ago
This is pretty misleading and 5x is totally wrong. You’re quoting the approximate box office number for film, but leaving out home entertainment (streaming & DVDs) and merchandising entirely, while at the same time including those categories on the games side. Film industry revenues as a whole when including streaming exceed $100B per year, and approximately matched the games industry, at least as of 5 years ago. See Wikipedia’s entries on film & game industries [1][2] — in 2018, film was $136B, while games was $135B. It’s only very very recently that total games revenue exceeded total film revenue. Making this much harder to reconcile is that total film revenues are generally not public information and they are notoriously misrepresented and downplayed, maybe to help reduce taxes, royalties, and bonuses, or maybe just for competitive reasons, but either way film numbers are unreliable and underestimated. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_industry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_industry [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_industry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_industry

moomin 2y ago

It’s funny, because movies still have the prestige television and games do not, despite both of them outstripping cinema in many ways. Movies have become increasingly global common denominator, with razor edge finances, and have ceded so much ground to TV it’s ridiculous. An example of this: watch Kramer vs Kramer. It’s a great movie, with a big name cast telling an emotional story. Try to think of a more recent movie like it.

account42 2y ago

Makes sense considering that movies are usually self-contained art pieces while games these days more of then than not try to upsell you DLC or microtransactions and TV series tend to be so drawn out that hey are cancelled before getting to the point. Books are the odd one out in that they don't have this problem and as a result are still considered prestigious (probably moreso than movies) but instead suffer from lack of audiovisual communication.