5 ms·
Most non-American movies are slop, melodramatic vaudeville, or tear-jerking gut-punches. Most American movies are slop too, but America can afford to swing at m
by unsupp0rted 1y ago
Most non-American movies are slop, melodramatic vaudeville, or tear-jerking gut-punches. Most American movies are slop too, but America can afford to swing at more pitches and consequently get more hits.
Have you ever tried to watch Korean movies from the last 20 years? It's all melodramatic romance-crime-poverty slop, with the rare Kim Ki-duk or Bong Joon Ho in there to balance it out. And that's a country with a wonderful reputation for quality film-making.
I mean you get zombies on a train and that's a fun popcorn flick, but it's forgettable. It's no Tremors, Twister, or Independence Day.
In Indonesia for every The Raid there's 999 poorly acted, poorly shot melodramas with a thin well-trodden story.
And don't get me started on "let's yell at each other for 120 minutes" Russian cinema.
American movies are by far the most watchable, especially when you don't feel like going on a heart-wrenching journey of despair, which is all international cinema excels at.
- dijit 1y agoHollywood undoubtedly has more money, but you genuinely have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to the quality of what gets made. So many things that hollywood produces are remakes of foreign movies, except with an order of magnitude more money poured in and palate-switched for american audiences. (which, due to the sheer volume of content that comes out of hollywood- becomes the default international palate). The entertainment industry in Sweden (girl with the dragon tattoo, a man called Otto) and the UK (the countries I have lived in) is undoubtedly very strong, even comparatively poor (not intended as a slur here) India is quite famous for its bombastic action movies. Russia too, has some of the most thought provoking movies that I've ever seen. Leviathan and Durak- they even have your "fun" action style movies (Brat and Brat 2 for fantastic examples). To say that Hollywood produces more and thus sometimes better, and that other counties make slop betrays two things: 1) Hollywood steals vigorously from other countries. 2) Other countries produce works that do not translate well for american audiences.
- unsupp0rted 1y agoEvery country has 5 or 10 good movies you can name, and they're always the same ones. Brat and Brat 2, Leviathan and Durak... the list doesn't go on much beyond that. And certainly not in the last 20 years. For US movies, the list goes on. And you can debate which ones should make the top-100. But here's a pivotal soviet comedy about a guy who goes to the future... okay, here's Bob Zemeckis's Back to the Future. Compare the quality of any aspect: story, acting, props, costumes, cinematography, special fx, attention to detail, MUSIC... 1:1 US cinema destroys on every level. Bollywood action movies? They're parodies of themselves- Adam Sandler's You Don't Mess with the Zohan, except they take themselves seriously.
- mopsi 1y ago> But here's a pivotal soviet comedy about a guy who goes to the future... okay, here's Bob Zemeckis's Back to the Future. Compare the quality of any aspect: story, acting, props, costumes, cinematography, special fx, attention to detail, MUSIC... 1:1 US cinema destroys on every level. There's a Russian saying "no point in comparing finger with a dick". "Ivan Vasilievich Changes His Profession" was made in 1973 on a budget that was modest even by Soviet standards. It looks like a cheap TV movie for a reason: they reused existing sets and decorations from other movies. The few Hollywood sci-fi comedies of the early 1970s are of similar quality: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BOnUobhm6U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BOnUobhm6U Non-modest Soviet productions of the era, such as the 1970 "Waterloo", are spectacular by any standard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyytd8HhuME https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kyytd8HhuME
- unsupp0rted 1y agoThe difference is that nobody holds up "The Thing with Two Heads" or "The Cat from Outer Space' as must-watch American cinema
- mopsi 1y agoI wouldn't call "Ivan Vasilievich Changes His Profession" that either. It's more of a "Blazing Saddles" type movie with a cult following due to its catchphrases, but overall, it isn't very good. Even among movies by the same director, some slightly earlier titles like "Kidnapping, Caucasian Style" and "The Diamond Arm" from the late 1960s are much better, and hold up well against Hollywood contemporaries like "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World" and "The Great Race". I'd even say that cinematically, "The Diamond Arm" is a league above the average Hollywood movie of the era. It was shot really beautifully and has wonderful use of color.
- geoka9 1y ago> "The Diamond Arm" is a league above the average Hollywood movie of the era. OK, even if true, that's only one movie :) I mean, ask any person from that era and they'll tell you it's their favorite. Kind of unfair to compare the only shining example to the "Hollywood average".
- propter_hoc 1y agoThis is a remarkable statement when Fellini and Kieślowski exist.
- unsupp0rted 1y agoYes, two directors exist, one who's been dead for 29 years, the other who's been dead for 32 years. I stand corrected then.
- darkwater 1y agoI hoped you were trolling but now I doubt it.
- unsupp0rted 1y agoNot trolling. Having lived in many countries and had the TV on, this happens to be my unpopular opinion. American movies are popular globally not because they're American but because they're so damn watchable/enjoyable/varied. Granted that becomes less true every year, since Hollywood appears to be broken. Other countries haven't figured out how to pick up the slack though. 1994 Hollywood will likely never come again.
- ch_sm 1y agoLook, this is a losing argument. It’s ok if you prefer stuff like Zemeckis (who I might add, made a lot of melodramatic films himself) over international films, but that doesn’t them objectively better or more watchable for everybody. I’m just going to leave this random link here: https://www.imdb.com/list/ls003889355/ https://www.imdb.com/list/ls003889355/
- unsupp0rted 1y agoLook at all those top non-American films on that list: 1. Once Upon a Time in America 2. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest 3. The Great Dictator 4. Lord of the Rings 5. Chinatown If there's one thing you can't associate Charlie Chaplin or Jack Nicholson with, it's Hollywood. Number 9 on your list is famous non-Hollywood filmmaker Alfred Hitchcock.
- maeln 1y agoAh yes, the 'slop, melodramatic vaudeville, or tear-jerking gut-punches' of Nuri Bilge Ceylan, Wong Ching-Po, Stephen Chow, John Woo, Emin Alper, Win Wenders, Pedro Almodóvar, Sylvain Chomet, Jean-Pierre Jeunet, Jacques Demy, Lee Chang-dong, Shunji Iwai, Wai Keung Lau, Wong Kar-wai, Hirokazu Koreeda, Park Chan-wook, Tran Anh Hung, Nadine Labaki, Santiago Mitre, ... Yes, the US is a wealthy country, with a big population, a healthy movie industries and a lot of consumer. It does mean that the US produce a lot of movies, from auteur movie to holywood blockbuster. Disproportionally more than any other country in the world. But dismissing every non-US movie industry just show your ignorance about cinema in general.
- unsupp0rted 1y agoPredictably, commenters read the word "most" as "every". Most non-American movies are melodramatic slop, vaudeville slapstick or heart-wrenching soul-destroyers. Oh really? Well I found one in China that isn't. And here's one from 1970s France that isn't.
- maeln 1y agoThere were several from China to be exact (Hong Kong to be precise, which had its own cinema golden-era between the late 80'and early 00'), and more than one from France also, some of which are more contemporary :) . Most movie everywhere are not masterpiece, incredible contribution to the art, tasteful and original. They are easy, made to profit, amateurish, etc. That is true for every art form. Again, yes the US being the wealthiest country in the world means that they can afford to produce more, and therefore, in your own word "can afford to swing at more pitches and consequently get more hits.". That much is true. The rest of your message is just dismissive of non-US movie in general, and again just show your ignorance and unwillingness to engage with different movie. > And don't get me started on "let's yell at each other for 120 minutes" Russian cinema. Just because you don't like it does not make it slop. > American movies are by far the most watchable, especially when you don't feel like going on a heart-wrenching journey of despair, which is all international cinema excels at. If you were to look at US movies that win awards, they tend to be "heart-wrenching journey of despair". That is just a bias of the perception of "awardable" cinema. Good light-heated comedy rarely wins award (altough stories of hope also often do). That is not specific to "international" cinema. You want some fun slapstick comedy from hong-kong, watch Stephen Chow movies. Some light hearted romance from France ? Jacques Demy might tickle your fancy. A more action horiented movie, Wong Ching-po wight interest you. Just because you don't know them doesn't mean they don't exist.
- Hard_Space 1y agoI didn't realize how many bad movies Italy produces, or at least produced, until I started living there in the late 1990s. Italians often go to the movies every week, and I did too, and then I realized that for every 'Life is Sweet', there were 50 dire entries that were just well-targeted enough to make their money back from a native audience. You'll never have heard of these movies, and rightly so. Having lived in other countries since, this appears to be a common syndrome. You can't judge a country by its tourists, and you certainly can't judge it by the small number of movies that get past its border control.
- unsupp0rted 1y agoWell said. Most people don't realize this. And likewise there's a Paris Syndrome that tourists sometimes have when first visiting America and expecting to step into a Hollywood movie. That subsides quickly. That said, American movies pass border control to other countries all the time because of their broad appeal.
- xz18r 1y agoI'll say that I am less offended than some of my fellow commenters in this thread. I can hardly name 5 Belgian movies that I would suggest anyone to watch; Belgium has 1/30th of the US' population, but certainly a much, much smaller percentage of good movies. Also, none of them are of the same 'appeal' as the American movies you cited, which are mostly action movies. The general populace wants to see big stunts and explosions, which require budget, local movies don't gross because they rely on local audiences, repeat ad infinitum. Most European movies that try to _look American_ in that sense fail horribly imo. However, the ones I can name all have something in common: they wouldn't appeal to an international audience because there is something inherently 'local' to them. Not only language barriers (imagine reading subtitles) but also a certain 'European film aesthetic/tone' just like American blockbusters have theirs. American movies don't have the same 'local barrier' for Europeans because they are the norm and we're getting them force-fed by the 100bio Hollywood industrial complex: it's a movie, or it's a local movie.
- brettermeier 1y agoI hope you're not just advocating for those really bad Marvel movies with which the USA is flooding the film market with stinking manure?