Slashdot Mirror


Why Have Movies Been So Bad Lately?

mikesd81 asks: "Why have movies and shows been so bad lately? I find myself looking on my Video on Demand service from my cable company or flipping channels and just nothing seems to have any depth any more. But on the other hand, I happened to watch Stargate Atlantis and there was an incredible scene that just caught the emotion and emergency. So is it the directing? The writing? The acting? It seems more and more movies just aren't worth anything. Let alone paying $20 to go to a movie." Let's not forget the recent number of Hollywood remakes and the amount of "reality TV" being pumped out by the networks.

23 of 664 comments (clear)

  1. Hollywood is out of ideas by amrust · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sorry. Someone had to say it.

    Seriously, though. I think the constant deluge of remake-after-remake of classic TV series and older movies has killed my interest in going to the movie theater. Why go out, when I can pull 1/2 of the "new" movies off my own DVD rack, or watch the original on late-night TV.

    But I guess someone is watching these rehashes, because Hollywood keeps making them.

    --
    VOTE!
    1. Re:Hollywood is out of ideas by tomstdenis · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The last few movies I've seen have been an excuse to get out of the house. That's about it.

      They could show a futurama marathon on the big screen and I'd still go see it. Just for the excuse to get out.

      Movies and music in general suck because like any other corrupt practice, they has been heavily marketed. I'm sorry, but at what point is Paris Hilton a properly trained singer?

      Why is collin farrel [sp?] playing american hero cops? He's FUCKING IRISH!!!!

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    2. Re:Hollywood is out of ideas by smittyoneeach · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, their idea that "people are teh st00p3d" is what's out.

      Movies with: actual plots, decent acting, and good taste will always be in fashion.

      actual plots means that it's OK to require the viewer to pay attention. Tired, formulaic vehicles are exactly that.

      decent acting probably means load-shedding the big names and going for some undiscovered talent.

      good taste means that, while we require a hint of the human capacity for evil to understand why the villian is the villian, we aren't really interested in wallowing in the evil. Lynch/Tarentino will always have their fan base, and I'm not advocating censorship here, just letting you know that "less is more". Expanding on that, less emphasis on potty mouth and hormones would also enhance their dramatic value. Finally, stories rooted in sexual confusion are of no interest whatsoever.

      Summarizing: movies with some didactic value, not just "chewing gum for the mind", are what is needed.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    3. Re:Hollywood is out of ideas by Metrol · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I had a chat with some friends about this very subject not too horribly long ago, which I came up with a theory of my own. I don't think the problem here is that Hollywood is out of ideas. The problem may very well be too many!

      Consider how the original Star Wars got to be the highest grossing movie of it's time. It spent over a year in theaters. Heck, the ads for it weren't much more than the movie's logo and some of the music. This movie had the time to let it be judged by the movie goers, who convinced others they needed to see this thing.

      Today, there are so many new movies coming out that they're barely in the major theaters for more than a couple of weeks. Even a reasonably successful film may only see a month out there.

      This is a huge shift in how movies are marketed, which is coming back to your point about all these remakes, sequels, and TV series. Today, if a movie doesn't produce big time within a couple of weeks, the studios lose money. There's no time for word of mouth, or generating interest in a good movie. If you were a movie executive whose primary concern is making sure everyone gets paid (especially yourself) what would you do?

      Heck, we're already seeing what they'd do. Generate movies based on subjects that are already established household names which your marketing department has identified a certain demographic for. Let's toss together a "Bewitched" movie with some notable names and put it out there! Lots of folks over 30 at least saw reruns, and it should have a predictable attendance.

      Even as of a few weeks ago I was reading an article concerning a debate over how much time after a movie leaves the theater should the DVD come out. If this shortens up even further (as it likely will) you can expect the remakes and the like to get even worse. 1 year for marketing, 2 weeks in distribution, 3 weeks later the DVD. Sounds like a recipe for even worse film making.

      --
      The line must be drawn here. This far. No further.
    4. Re:Hollywood is out of ideas by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      good taste

      Good luck with that one. Taste is purely in the mind of the beholder. What you think is good taste is unlikely to be what any significant majority of the population thinks it is. Your implications about David Lynch and Quentin Tarantino and your outright dismissal of any stories based on sexual confusion is glaring proof of the subjectivity of taste.

      For example, while vast numbers of Americans clearly think "Passion" was in good taste, there are more than a few who saw it as exploitive, crude and excessively violent. Similarly with "The DaVinci Code" - I even got email from some people I know who thought it worthy of boycotting because its blasphemy was in such poor taste.

      I'll even go out on a limb and say that no movie can rise above the level of passable but forgettably simple entertainment unless it challenges some of the widely held perceptions of what is acceptable in society. Any movie that makes such a challenge is certain, almost by definition, to conflict with what a large number of people in that same society would consider "tasteful."

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    5. Re:Hollywood is out of ideas by Skreems · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You and the story poster just aren't watching the right movies. I live in Seattle, and just got done watching 52 films in 3 weeks at the local film festival. All but about 5 were absolutely fantastic... well worth seeing, and certainly much better than the dreck pumped out as the "must see blockbuster" of the summer.

      And hell, even in mainstream cinema there's some great stuff coming out. Look at anything directed by Chris Nolan (The Prestige is coming out shortly), and anything written by Charlie Kaufman or Aaron Sorkin. In the last couple years we've had fantastic work from Sofia Copola, Tim Burton, Martin Scorsese, Woody Allen, Quentin Tarentino, and Tommy Lee Jones (The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada was just in theaters this spring).

      Go see "A Scanner Darkly". Catch Aronofsky's "The Fountain" when it hits theaters. See Ed Norton in "The Illusionist". Keep an eye out for Lynch's "Inland Empire". There have always been crap films coming out, but if you know what to look for, there's some really exciting things coming out right now. Ignore the remakes-of-remakes, and look around a bit. You'll find plenty of new ideas out there.

      --
      Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
      The Urban Hippie
  2. You. by mnemonic_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "I happened to watch Stargate Atlantis and there was an incredible scene that just caught the emotion and emergency."

    After reading that, I must seriously question your ability to judge any film or video work.

  3. Simple answer by sakusha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The reason why movies suck is very simple.

    In the "golden age" of movies (whenever you consider that to be) movies were made by writers, directors, and actors who considered it an art form. Today, the studios are run by people who consider it a profit-oriented business.

    Sure, the studios always wanted to make money. But technology has improved and now it is extremely expensive to produce a movie to modern technological standards, so budgets have skyrocketed. No studio will take risks when they're spending $100 million MINIMUM to make a movie. Unfortunately, art is all about taking risks.

    1. Re:Simple answer by soupforare · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not to be facetious but what's "modern technological standards"?
      We went decades upon decades without digital editing, let alone recording.

      $100M minimum?
      You can make a film, *film* now, for a fraction of that. You could shoot on video and make it a fraction of that fraction.

      It seems to me that the amazingly high cost of movie making comes from ridiculous CGI, over-inflated talent payrolls, and marketing blitzes that start a year before the movie's even done shooting.

      Clerks was ~$40k
      pi was ~$60k
      cube was ~$250k

      I'm not trying to pull some bullshit romanticism faggotry. I'm just saying that pandering to the masses with shineys and pretty faces that we all know and love isn't going to promote cinema as an art.

      There's nothing wrong with either but there should be room for both.

      --
      --- Do you believe in the day?
    2. Re:Simple answer by sakusha · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Movies have completely changed technologically over the past 25 years. Look at mainstream movies from the early 1970s and compare them with what they make today. I don't mean look at them on a DVD or TV, look at them in a theater. Everything has changed. Lenses and cameras are sharper, film stock is lower grain, sound production has gone from simple stereo to surround sound, even the lighting is better. Go look at a film from the 1970s, some film about filmmaking, like Truffaut's "Day for Night." Compare what they use to the kind of equipment is used on today's films. A typical modern film spends more renting ONE camera than they used to spend on their whole equipment budget.

      I watched all this stuff change when I worked in Hollywood in the 1980s. Everyone talked about how the "bean counters" were taking over Hollywood, and how expensive productions were. I think the breaking point was the big Writer's Strike in 1988, the writers saw how much money producers, directors, and actors were getting, and they wanted a piece of the pie. Of course they didn't get squat.

      Yeah, there's always the exception of some ultra-low budget movie that breaks big, but those never come from Hollywood, they're always from outsiders. The Studio system produces BIG movies because they believe that's the way to make big money. That's what pandering to the masses is all about.

  4. The writing is the problem, for the most part by DavidinAla · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm just getting into filmmaking right now. (I've only made one short film, which has been in 11 film festivals so far.) The problem that I see with most films (both Hollywood and indie) is the writing. In general, the technical work in movies is the best it's ever been. Acting is competent, at worst. The problems are in story construction and other aspects of writing. If you have a bad script, it doesn't matter how good your actors or photography or special effects are. Writing has been getting steadily worse for about 40 years. It has to do, IMO, with movie execs who are ignorant and illiterate. They don't know good writing -- as the great producers of the past did.

    David

  5. Sturgeon's Law by GrumpySimon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sturgeon's Law: 90% of everything is crap.

    I don't think movies are getting worse - they're just as crap as they always have been.

    1. Re:Sturgeon's Law by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Insightful
      they're just as crap as they always have been.

      The older we get the more crap we have seen and the less tolerant we are of new crap. Hence the question: why is there so much crap around these days?

      Things which I thought were pretty good when I was 20 now look like crap to be 20 years later. Maybe the absolute level of crap today is the same as is was in the past.

  6. When were (most) movies good? by apflwr3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When do you think movies were good? The 90's? The 80's? Look at the top ten list from just about any week from any year. There'll be one classic, maybe two, and one movie that's so bad it's good, and the rest is mediocre and forgettable. Most mainstream movies have always been aimed at the lowest common demoninator and if you think movies from the past were better you're just applying selective memory. Yes, there were times (e.g. in the 70's) when the bar was raised a little higher, but even then most movies were still dreck.

    That said, there are great independant movies being made every day and even an occasional a big-budget flick that gets everything right. Some of it's foreign, some of them are documentaries, most will require a little more effort to locate (like browsing new areas of Netflix. It's not like the great movies from the past have disappeared, either-- if you can't find anything new to watch, why not try a classic you've never seen?

    By the way, there's one more factor to take into account-- maybe you're just getting old. Look at some movies you used to think were great 10 or 20 years ago (I have no idea how old you are...) and see if they're as good as you remember.

  7. money doesn't require it by eliot1785 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Movie productions are actually investor-led enterprises, despite the fact that they are also an art form. While there are a lot of movies whose directors and actors really care about communicating an important vision or message, there are also a lot of movies that are designed solely to appeal to as many people as possible. They fill the movie with cliches and implications designed to please as many people as possible, but in appealing to everybody enough to get them to see the movie, they appeal to very few people enough to get them to actually like it.

    Superman Returns is a case in point. Did you notice how that was simultaneously marketed to evangelicals with "Superman as Jesus figure" and gays with that article "Is Superman Gay?" and liberals with Lex Luthor's "bring it on" statement in the trailers? In reality the movie was none of these things, they just wanted to intrigue as many people as possible to bring them to the theaters.

    Bottom line: For people trying to make the "summer blockbuster," it doesn't matter if the movie is good, as long as it sells. You make more money increasing expectations than delivering on those expectations.

    This is why niche and indie movies are often better, because the primary goal of the writers, directors and actors is to present their vision. Now, I actually like a fair number of mainstream movies, but certainly not most of them.

  8. Simple Answer... by BTWR · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Q: Why are movies so bad lately?

    A: Because it's a tired, cliched question/statement.


    This year, like every year, has had some great movies and some bad ones. In the past year, we've had Superman Returns, Pirates of the Carribean 2, United 93, Munich, Millions, Crash, Capote, Match Point, Hustle & Flow, Batman Begins, Sin City, Walk the Line, Murderball, The Constant Gardener, A History of Violence, March of the Penguins, Wallace & Grommit...

    And that's just to name a few. Is this any better than other year? No, not really. It's just that every year, there's always a lot more trashy art than good art. Any nostalgia for "back then" being better than now is just smoke and mirrors. For every Schindler's List, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Godfather Part II, you got Police Academy 6, Halloween 3, and Monster a Go-Go in those years (or shortly around it, that was just off the top of my head).

    I'm sick of all these "movies/books/music/crime rates/teenagers were all better back then" arguments. Baloney. We only remember the best, and today, when every friday we get 3 new mediocre movies and every few weeks a decent one, we forget that there were also new movies every week in the 90s and 80s, and countless 8-track trash music from the 70s, and romance novels have been around since the 40s.

  9. It's a trick of perception. by NereusRen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Have you ever heard someone say the following: "Look at this really old [thing]! It's still in great condition, whereas my new [thing] broke already! They sure don't make things like they used to..."

    When you look at all the old things you have that have lasted 30 years and work great, compared to the things that break easily, you're comparing the worksmanship of the set {things that were built 30+ years ago and are still working} to {things that were built a few years ago}... of course all the older things you see around you are better-made, even if the worksmanship standards haven't actually changed over the years, because of the natural filter that they're still working, or else they wouldn't be around for you to compare.

    Similarly, the set {movies I remember from more than a few years ago} will clearly be better than {movies from this year}, simply by virtue of the fact that you remember the better ones and forget the worse. Comparing today's Hollywood crap to yesterday's cream of the crop is unintentional, but it's exactly what's going on everytime someone rehashes this "story" every few months.

  10. Movies are NOT getting worse by ivan1011001 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First off, there have ALWAYS been bad movies.

    Secondly, I ran a simple python script on the IMDB's top 250 movies database and then sorted the titles by year, and then by decade.

    below is a table showing the number of movies from a decade that made the IMDB's top 250 movies list.

    1920s 5
    1930s 15
    1940s 23
    1950s 39
    1960s 31
    1970s 25
    1980s 29
    1990s 41
    2000s 41

    As you can see, there are plenty of good movies out there. The submitter just needs to get a life.

    --

    I was thinking of converting to paganism, but where the hell can you find sacrificial virgins these days?
  11. Did you just turn 35? by ewg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did you just turn 35? It seems like movies are pitched at the demographic from teenagers to mid-thirties. By 35, you've seen every trick in the Hollywood book, so nothing seems fresh. Everything strikes you as a copy of something you've already seen.

    I submit it's not that the movies have been so bad lately, but rather that your sensibilities have changed.

    --
    org.slashdot.post.SignatureNotFoundException: ewg
  12. It doesn't make sense by MagicAlex84 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Having just watched Serenity and all the episodes of Firefly I've come to the conclusion that nobody cares about entertainment that's meaningful, because if the opposite were true then Firefly would still be on TV and nobody would give a shit about American Idol.

  13. What bad movies? by Zhe+Mappel · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Bad movies?! My friend, what are you complaining about? Armed with the IMDb and a little thing called taste, I haven't seen a bad movie in ages.

    In just the last few months, I've been dazzled by cool stuff by Michael Haneke (*the* coolest end-of-the-world movie ever made, "Hour of the Wolf," the creepy "Hidden," and the revoltingly subversive "Funny Games") and Takashi Miike (the icy "Black Society" trilogy), the awesome 1976 black comedy "Network," and a pair of superb recent documentaries, "New York Doll" (70s glam rock) and "Why We Fight" (Eisenhower's warning against the military industrial complex). I can't also forget "The Servant," a sinister 60s-era British flick (made by Joseph Losey, the immensely talented film industry outcast from Wisconsin) about a manservant slowly taking over his master's life which has the additional gift of having been adapted by our recent Nobel Laureate in literature, Harold Pinter. Oh, yeah, and two really different, fantastic dramas about the boxing life: "Fat City" (1972) and "The Set-Up" (1949). Hell, I'd watch more, but the week's only so long and I have to make room for possibly the best serial drama ever made, Deadwood--a masterpiece in our time!

    See, it's too late in the day to complain about Hollywood. Disappointment and boredom will await you if you depend on the idiot factory. Happily, the rest of the planet hasn't lost its touch. The library of international film is so full of good and even astonishing work that you need a lifetime to watch it all.

    Like any subject, you won't get very far without some guidance. The little paragraph in the On Demand section? That isn't going to cut it. Get hold of a good film companion like Halliwell's, and read some of the great movie critics like Andrew Sarris or Pauline Kael. Or if you want to start this instant, then peruse the reliable Roger Ebert's short odes to great films. Start at random, you can hardly go wrong with anything here:

    http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/secti on?category=REVIEWS08

  14. American movies by rs79 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You know, other countries make movies too... having just finished watching _The Longest Engagement_ I can't say I really care that hollywood makes shite these days.

    --
    Need Mercedes parts ?
  15. Re:Slashdot rejected my ask slashdot submission by Thomas+Miconi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Question: Why Have Movies Been So Bad Lately?

    Answer: Because you've grown up.

    Duh!