Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Hollywood Today


NipkowDisc
 Share

Recommended Posts

soapbox time for me again....
here goes...
Hollywood has surrendered itself to a creeping obsolescence for they themselves have paved the way for the eventual extinction of theatrically released films. everything made today has only one demographic in mind, the youngest. everyone else, people in their 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s and beyond have been effectively locked out. Why? because hollywood insists on peddling social progressivism and they have handed the reins of filmmaking over to a bunch of kids (although not physically) who perceive the world and the human condition through the eyes of 15-year old adolescents. that imo explains a great deal of what we are seeing coming out of hollywood today.
modern historical epics are now nothing more than cgi fests built around 3D and imax and having no heart, no soul, no true drama or any believable human interaction.
they're are a few older competent heads still around, steven spielberg, john badham, coppola, scorsese, carpenter and william friedkin who has limited himself to TV fare in recent years.
maybe he gave up tryin' to cut through the crapola out there. I doan know.
I'm glad he is still around though.
But these younger people like tarantino have the potential...imo...to put hollywood in it's grave.
just my opinion. I'm sure many here will disagree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

soapbox time for me again....

here goes...

Hollywood has surrendered itself to a creeping obsolescence for they themselves have paved the way for the eventual extinction of theatrically released films. everything made today has only one demographic in mind, the youngest. everyone else, people in their 40s, 50s, 60s, 70s and beyond have been effectively locked out. Why? because hollywood insists on peddling social progressivism and they have handed the reins of filmmaking over to a bunch of kids (although not physically) who perceive the world and the human condition through the eyes of 15-year old adolescents. that imo explains a great deal of what we are seeing coming out of hollywood today.

modern historical epics are now nothing more than cgi fests built around 3D and imax and having no heart, no soul, no true drama or any believable human interaction.

they're are a few older competent heads still around, steven spielberg, john badham, coppola, scorsese, carpenter and william friedkin who has limited himself to TV fare in recent years.

maybe he gave up tryin' to cut through the crapola out there. I doan know.

I'm glad he is still around though.

But these younger people like tarantino have the potential...imo...to put hollywood in it's grave.

just my opinion. I'm sure many here will disagree.

 

I disagree.   Making movies is a business.   Like any product if the product doesn't sell,   those making the product will make changes to increase sales.    Simple supply and demand theory.    While I don't like the majority of the movies released, someone must (this includes DVD sales),  otherwise what is being made would change. 

 

Oh,  and Tarantino isn't some young person (he is 51).    What,  only Clint should direct films?   :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree.   Making movies is a business.   Like any product if the product doesn't sell,   those making the product will make changes to increase sales.    Simple supply and demand theory.    While I don't like the majority of the movies released, someone must (this includes DVD sales),  otherwise what is being made would change. 

 

Oh,  and Tarantino isn't some young person (he is 51).    What,  only Clint should direct films?   :P

but they're only making films for millennials. what the heck about the rest of us? my true point is that today's films are vastly inferior drama-wise, story-wise, acting-wise and direction-wise. older people who have been watching movies and TV for most of their lives can plainly see it. I believe guys like osborne and manckiewicz see it. nobody wants to talk about it though. this is not a phase. hollywood is starting to go down the drain imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is Hollywood in Decline?
Started by NipkowDisc, on November 13 2014, 11:55 AM

dark blue posted the last post on November 27 2014, at 3:38 AM

This was your first post on this subject which is very close in content to your new first post in this newer thread about Hollywood…


 

“Simple enough. They handed the reins of the industry over to twentysomethings and thirtysomethings who were weaned on video games and home computers, captain planet and power rangers... and it is showing.



Exodus of Gods and Kings is a perfect example.

 Fifty or even forty years ago a film with that kind of subject matter would have been either a biblical or an historical epic, but in today's environment it is merely just another vehicle for hyper-kinetic action sequences courtesy of cgi.



Hollywood today is just one long continuous 3rd season of the original star trek.... and it is getting worse.”

 


Now I have to wonder why creating a new thread to what it seems to me to be some sort of continuation of the older thread reallymakes no sense to me. But I have to say that many people who regularly post on the message boards do the same thing. They somehow forget that they created a thread sometime in the past and they start up a new thread essentially about the same subject.

Is this what happened? You forgot about your earlier thread where you took Hollywood to task about catering to younger audiences and blasting the younger studio executives and well, you get the idea…..  

My fear has been and continues to be the use of the message boards to just continue this age old practice of creating threads that were already created but for some reason stopped generating responses so the original creator of the the older thread comes back to the trough once again to reestablish “views” and comments where the other, older thread once thrived.

Is that your goal here?

Why not just pick up where you left off in your other thread? I mean just because the older thread stopped producing on November 27th should not indicate to you that it was a “done” deal. The thread could have remained active, it has over 160 responses, which is pretty good I think. Now we have to start this whole discussion on what Hollywood is like today using pretty much the same kind of descriptors that were used in that older thread.

What do you think?

My feeling is that you should ask the moderators to combine these two threads into one, or at least take the responses from this thread and place them in the other thread. You could do this simply by copying and pasting what has been written so far and then ask the moderators to merge the two threads or eliminate the new thread.

The duplication of threads on the message boards causes the boards to become bogged down as far as I am concerned. One thread being about the decline of Hollywood and then starting yet another thread about Hollywood of today is to me the same thing.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My decision to stop seeing movies in theaters has nothing to do with the movies that play there. It has to do with preferring to watch in the comfort of my own home. This didn't use to be possible in ancient times.

 

Home entertainment has made theater-going unnecessary - unless one absolutely HAS to see movies right away. Generally speaking, it's mostly "kids" who think it's imperative to keep up with what's happening in movies - for social purposes as much as entertainment.

 

So, I'm fine with letting the kids have the theaters. It's not like no other movies get made with the home market in mind. There's plenty. And, on average, they're better movies.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is Hollywood in Decline?

Started by NipkowDisc, on November 13 2014, 11:55 AM

 

dark blue posted the last post on November 27 2014, at 3:38 AM

 

This was your first post on this subject which is very close in content to your new first post in this newer thread about Hollywood…

 

 

Now I have to wonder why creating a new thread to what it seems to me to be some sort of continuation of the older thread reallymakes no sense to me. But I have to say that many people who regularly post on the message boards do the same thing. They somehow forget that they created a thread sometime in the past and they start up a new thread essentially about the same subject.

 

Is this what happened? You forgot about your earlier thread where you took Hollywood to task about catering to younger audiences and blasting the younger studio executives and well, you get the idea…..  

 

My fear has been and continues to be the use of the message boards to just continue this age old practice of creating threads that were already created but for some reason stopped generating responses so the original creator of the the older thread comes back to the trough once again to reestablish “views” and comments where the other, older thread once thrived.

 

Is that your goal here?

 

Why not just pick up where you left off in your other thread? I mean just because the older thread stopped producing on November 27th should not indicate to you that it was a “done” deal. The thread could have remained active, it has over 160 responses, which is pretty good I think. Now we have to start this whole discussion on what Hollywood is like today using pretty much the same kind of descriptors that were used in that older thread.

 

What do you think?

 

My feeling is that you should ask the moderators to combine these two threads into one, or at least take the responses from this thread and place them in the other thread. You could do this simply by copying and pasting what has been written so far and then ask the moderators to merge the two threads or eliminate the new thread.

 

The duplication of threads on the message boards causes the boards to become bogged down as far as I am concerned. One thread being about the decline of Hollywood and then starting yet another thread about Hollywood of today is to me the same thing.

 

 

OR, and perhaps more succinctly worded... the Ol' "How Many Different Ways Can One Attempt To Say Basically The Same Thing Syndrome".

 

However, our friend ND here isn't the only one "good" at doing this, ya know. In this I mean, isn't almost any thread started by anyone with the general intent about it being, say, "The effects critics might have upon the one's personal view of a movie" be one? Or say something with its overall premise being "Your favorite movie stars and/or films"? 

 

Perhaps the only difference in ND's case here is that it appears to have become a persistent "rant" and based upon a negatively held assumption on his part, and be it a legitimate "gripe" or not.

 

I would think anyone who has been a member of this forum OR probably ANY forum regardless its common base interests, would have noticed this "syndrome" is bound to happen and often does.

 

(...I suppose the best thing(s) about this "syndrome" might be that keeps websites' board activity geared to a higher quantity, and that it allows newer members who may not be cognizant of similarly themed threads previously discussed the opportunity to voice their opinion within them...oh and yeah, for ME to interject some of my jocularity into them and of course often it seems to the consternation of others!!!) LOL

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is Hollywood in Decline?

Started by NipkowDisc, on November 13 2014, 11:55 AM

 

dark blue posted the last post on November 27 2014, at 3:38 AM

 

This was your first post on this subject which is very close in content to your new first post in this newer thread about Hollywood…

 

 

Now I have to wonder why creating a new thread to what it seems to me to be some sort of continuation of the older thread reallymakes no sense to me. But I have to say that many people who regularly post on the message boards do the same thing. They somehow forget that they created a thread sometime in the past and they start up a new thread essentially about the same subject.

 

Is this what happened? You forgot about your earlier thread where you took Hollywood to task about catering to younger audiences and blasting the younger studio executives and well, you get the idea…..  

 

My fear has been and continues to be the use of the message boards to just continue this age old practice of creating threads that were already created but for some reason stopped generating responses so the original creator of the the older thread comes back to the trough once again to reestablish “views” and comments where the other, older thread once thrived.

 

Is that your goal here?

 

Why not just pick up where you left off in your other thread? I mean just because the older thread stopped producing on November 27th should not indicate to you that it was a “done” deal. The thread could have remained active, it has over 160 responses, which is pretty good I think. Now we have to start this whole discussion on what Hollywood is like today using pretty much the same kind of descriptors that were used in that older thread.

 

What do you think?

 

My feeling is that you should ask the moderators to combine these two threads into one, or at least take the responses from this thread and place them in the other thread. You could do this simply by copying and pasting what has been written so far and then ask the moderators to merge the two threads or eliminate the new thread.

 

The duplication of threads on the message boards causes the boards to become bogged down as far as I am concerned. One thread being about the decline of Hollywood and then starting yet another thread about Hollywood of today is to me the same thing.

 

"What man can remember his own dreams?" -Edward Morbius :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"What man can remember his own dreams?" -Edward Morbius

 

What are you doing now, channeling Dargo?

 

Is this actually the best you can do when answering my questions??

 

Someone who obviously has put a little thought into their posts and this is what you have come up with???

 

This gives me so much hope of what I can expect from you in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but they're only making films for millennials. what the heck about the rest of us? my true point is that today's films are vastly inferior drama-wise, story-wise, acting-wise and direction-wise. older people who have been watching movies and TV for most of their lives can plainly see it. I believe guys like osborne and manckiewicz see it. nobody wants to talk about it though. this is not a phase. hollywood is starting to go down the drain imo.

 

I told you before,  when one sell products they care only about the people willing to pay for said product.   If those making movies don't care about the type of movies you wish to see it is because there are NOT enough people who share the same POV as you worth caring about.   You appear unable to accept this simple marketing truth.

 

BUT note that my POV (taste), are also NOT worth caring about.   e.g. my love of bebop jazz (as well as my taste in movies).     I know my taste are NOT mainstream enough for corporations to try to market to.        

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hollywood's modus operandi  has always been "the bottom line."

The major Hollywood studios, today and in the past,  produce and theatrically release movies that they believe will sell the most tickets.

Audience tastes  may have changed (as well as the demographics of the ticket-buying audience) but "Hollywood" has always been profit-driven.

 

If you want to see theatrical movies released by major studios that do not have profit as their primary goal, you should seek out movies produced in Paris rather than Hollywood films.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you doing now, channeling Dargo?

 

Is this actually the best you can do when answering my questions??

 

Someone who obviously has put a little thought into their posts and this is what you have come up with???

 

This gives me so much hope of what I can expect from you in the future.

No, actually I must agree with you about my repetitiousness but to go back and find all that old stuff would surely tax my browser.

you're right of course, fxreyman. I've said it all before. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No business would put itself on the road to obsolescence on purpose and

Hollywood is no different. As has been pointed out ad nauseum, they are

in the business of attracting customers and do things that they hope will

accomplish this goal. Making movies that will appeal to fifty and sixty year

olds is not part of that agenda. And when new technologies come along,

Hollywood will use them and maybe sometimes over use them, but that's

the way things work. Funny thing about "old timers" like Spielberg, but

earlier in his career he put out the kind of movies that appealed to the

young demographic of the time and that some people were likely complaining

about at that time, the summer blockbusters of their time. Not to worry

though, the winter and spring seasons are coming around and with them

more movies pitched to an older demographic.

Making movies that will appeal to fifty and sixty year olds is not part of that agenda

 

On that - perhaps I should start a poll  :D - what is the number of 50 and 60 year olds who actually GO to a movie theater in a year? And what kinds of movies get them there?

 

How is that being monitored in a movie theater, for that matter? Not everyone goes for the senior discount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you doing now, channeling Dargo?

 

Is this actually the best you can do when answering my questions??

 

Someone who obviously has put a little thought into their posts and this is what you have come up with???

 

This gives me so much hope of what I can expect from you in the future.

 

HEY now Rey, ol' buddy! Gotta say I'm not exactly sure how I should TAKE that here!!! ;)

 

(...C'mon now...I'm not usually THAT "cryptic" around here, now AM I?...I mean, you DID just "like" my previous long and drawn-out AND somewhat well-reasoned post of mine, now didn't YA?!) LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing that Hollywood has a pretty good idea of the demographics of movie

goers, and though mostly catering to the young, I'm guessing it also has a pretty

good idea of what will likely appeal to older folks, and markets those films

accordingly.

Yes, but how? Do they send plants out to the movie theaters? Do the ticket sellers estimate the ages of every movie goer, when they can barely count change? How do they know the movie theater isn't filled with walkers and Geritol imbibers?

 

Am I missing the secret encoded age estimating chip in the movie ticket or the age determiner eye scan as a movie goer walks through the door? 

 

Or is it simply from all the erudite WOW did you see that scene where the guy got his head blown clean off and the woman took off all her clothes comments on the internet?

 

I'm sure it's something much simpler, but it's escaping me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another cause for concern.

 

Not the FIRST movie theater to offer this, but the only other one in this area shut it's doors several years ago....

 

There was an item on the local evening news about a movie theater chain's newest multiplex offering COCKTAILS to moviegoers to enjoy while watching a movie. 

 

Just what we need.

 

Bad enough we have to deal with inconsiderate, loudmouthed jerk-wads and their CELL PHONES in the theaters, NOW it'll be DRUNKEN jerk-wads!

 

Yeah, ON DEMAND is looking BETTER!

 

 

Sepiatone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but how? Do they send plants out to the movie theaters? Do the ticket sellers estimate the ages of every movie goer, when they can barely count change? How do they know the movie theater isn't filled with walkers and Geritol imbibers?

 

Am I missing the secret encoded age estimating chip in the movie ticket or the age determiner eye scan as a movie goer walks through the door? 

 

Or is it simply from all the erudite WOW did you see that scene where the guy got his head blown clean off and the woman took off all her clothes comments on the internet?

 

I'm sure it's something much simpler, but it's escaping me.

 

Theaters do perform random checks of the demographics that go into the thearters,  but most data is captured by DVD sales.  e.g. in most cases when one purchases a DVD the gender and age of the customer can be determined.

 

But the point your trying to make, if any,  is escaping me.     Are you saying that there are millions of dollars to be made by making  'old fashion'  (for lack of a better term),  movies,  but studios are just unaware of this OR just refused to make movies they know would make bank?     I'm not buying that POV.     If studios are really just greedy hacks out to make a buck (which is another POV put out by those that complain about movies today),  well,  the money of the over 50 generation is just as green as the younger one,  so wouldn't studios want that money as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Sorry, not buying that response. The old thread was JUST five pages back under General Discussions. I think you are lazy, like so many others here.

yeah, you're right. I be lazy but my machine is old and pages take some time to load on an old dinosaur like what I'm usin'.

my old machine ain't exactly lickety-split. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another cause for concern.

 

Not the FIRST movie theater to offer this, but the only other one in this area shut it's doors several years ago....

 

There was an item on the local evening news about a movie theater chain's newest multiplex offering COCKTAILS to moviegoers to enjoy while watching a movie. 

 

Just what we need.

 

Bad enough we have to deal with inconsiderate, loudmouthed jerk-wads and their CELL PHONES in the theaters, NOW it'll be DRUNKEN jerk-wads!

 

Yeah, ON DEMAND is looking BETTER!

 

 

Sepiatone

I saw that, Sepiatone. If I'm not mistaken, they're also thinking of offering food service.

 

Can't you just see THAT cleanup after the slobs, um, lovely polite moviegoers leave?

 

Hence my questions, haven't been in years, never again will go. Oh, and I'm apparently not missing anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another cause for concern.

 

Not the FIRST movie theater to offer this, but the only other one in this area shut it's doors several years ago....

 

There was an item on the local evening news about a movie theater chain's newest multiplex offering COCKTAILS to moviegoers to enjoy while watching a movie. 

 

Just what we need.

 

Bad enough we have to deal with inconsiderate, loudmouthed jerk-wads and their CELL PHONES in the theaters, NOW it'll be DRUNKEN jerk-wads!

 

Yeah, ON DEMAND is looking BETTER!

 

 

Sepiatone

Well, if you're drunk, you may be less likely to use your cell phone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theaters do perform random checks of the demographics that go into the thearters,  but most data is captured by DVD sales.  e.g. in most cases when one purchases a DVD the gender and age of the customer can be determined.

 

But the point your trying to make, if any,  is escaping me.     Are you saying that there are millions of dollars to be made by making  'old fashion'  (for lack of a better term),  movies,  but studios are just unaware of this OR just refused to make movies they know would make bank?     I'm not buying that POV.     If studios are really just greedy hacks out to make a buck (which is another POV put out by those that complain about movies today),  well,  the money of the over 50 generation is just as green as the younger one,  so wouldn't studios want that money as well?

And who buys DVDs anymore? You're dating yourself.

 

My point, my question rather, is HOW do movie studios ACCURATELY determine the demographic of the movie going public?

 

And it ain't from DVD sales. Your other points are correct, though. Studios are just greedy hacks out for the money and oblivious to everything except the bottom line. Younger people spend more movie on the violent sexist sensationalistic crap that is released in movie theaters, whilst old f-a-r-t-s wait for the Best Exotic Marigold Hotel to come out on On Demand or go to niche art theaters that showcase good cinema like they used to make in the old days. The Pelham Picture House in Westchester is an example of one of these class movie theaters, and you can bet no a********** are allowed.

 

As to greed and stupidity and bottom line - witness SONY, which will apparently now be releasing the POS movie about North Korea. They probably partnered with the little fat dictator to pull off this PR stunt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

© 2023 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...