this post was submitted on 13 Apr 2025
90 points (94.1% liked)
movies
3479 readers
342 users here now
Matrix room: https://matrix.to/#/#fediversefilms:matrix.org
Warning: If the community is empty, make sure you have "English" selected in your languages in your account settings.
A community focused on discussions on movies. Besides usual movie news, the following threads are welcome
- Discussion threads to discuss about a specific movie or show
- Weekly threads: what have you been watching lately?
- Trailers
- Posters
- Retrospectives
- Should I watch?
Related communities:
- !television@lemm.ee
- !animation@lemm.ee
- !homevideo@feddit.uk
- !horrormovies@lemm.ee
- !martialartsmovies@lemm.ee
Show communities:
Discussion communities:
RULES
Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.
Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain [spoilers] in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title’s subject matter.
Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown.
2024 discussion threads
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Heh, looking at the article and the cesspool of WSJ comments:
The elephant in the room (that the website dances around) is algorithmic attention. If people are glued to feeds on phones/at home, that's less time to chat about (and go to) movies that don't have the critical mass to pop into your feed. That sucks, as there's nothing movie studios can do about our toxic information environment.
Going by the comments... Seems modern movie goers have a thin skin. Even the slightest hint of something woke is apparently unwatchable? But themes and conflicts that make you uncomfortable are what makes fiction interesting. This may cut both ways too (with, for instance, military-themed movies turning off more leftist moviegoers? I feel that way to some extent).
Wanting to watch at home is a major contributing factor, but I think its overstated compared to the above two. Like, our local Movie Tavern isn't super luxurious, I have crazy technical family with OLED/surround setups, but going out is still a fun social excursion. Most peoples' home setups... aren't great.
Maybe this is more personal to me, but I am way more into TV series than movies these days. There's just so much more time to worldbuild and assemble characters, and more room to run and play once established. But I would totally pay for a restaurant booth to, say, watch some TV episode I can pick with buds.
I suppose that depends on how war is depicted in the film. War is hell, but sometimes it's necessary. I don't love the idea of war, but Slaughterhouse Five lives on as one of my favorite books about war. Understanding war and its impacts are important, even if we don't like a world in which we have to resort to war.
Sure, a lot of American film makes war movies all "RAH RAH RAH USA USA USA," but that doesn't mean all films about war have to be that way, especially films about war made in other nations, who perhaps don't have their military so deeply ingrained in the film industry.
Hell, Three Kings is still an underrated war film which has an undercurrent of themes regarding capitalism and consumerism and how it relates to war.
Yeah, these MAGA babies can't handle anything at all that challenges their worldview. Even things that are supposed to challenge their worldview, like The Boys, instead re-enforces the same views because they simply have no media literacy.
Here are the 3 "original" movies in my local theatre, to get more of what I mean:
The last one (Warfare) kinda stands out, but see the pattern? "Ex black ops protag" is super popular, and I posit that, on average, it's a turn-off for leftists.
Oh, I don't dispute any of that. There's tons of media in that vein, and it is indeed all a turn off. I just meant there's occasionally a diamond in the rough, but they are indeed a rarity.
Hell, most of these just seem like movies that all want to be 2008's Taken with Liam Neeson really badly. Even Taken was honestly very silly and absurd. Like, he just walks away from these situations where he fucks up half the city and the cops somehow can't find him? It just cuts away and suddenly he's fine and on to the next bit.
However, it was an incredibly popular film, spawned multiple sequels, and there's definitely a whole genre of films in this vein. Nobody said Hollywood was very original, even when it comes to an original film. They still want formulas that they think will sell. Action tends to be the most popular, and to make action believable you have to have some backstory that makes these guys top tier fighters.
At least the John Wick films didn't rely on him being ex-military, I guess.
Yeah. I mean, there was stuff before Taken (Bond, Die Hard, many more I'm sure), but in terms of movie plots, Taken has to be one of the most influential movies of the millennium, lol. It's even leaking into TV (Reacher, and many others).
Maybe but not because I’m liberal, because we’re shit. The fact that “The Covenant” exists is FUCKING INFURIATING to me. I signed up to put my ass on the line, knowing any flight out of CONUS had a return ticket. We not only told the terps we’d take them to the American dream but made them put their lives on the line…then flew away and made a fucking movie about how it’s too bad they’re all stuck in the suck.
All quiet on the western front was a pretty good war film
Most moviegoers want to shut their brains off and escape and be entertained for 90-120 minutes. Not be challenged or be uncomfortable.
I own thousands of movies on 4K and Blu-ray. I've had a surround sound setup since the mid-2000s. I have complete collections of many directors' entire filmographies. Even in my case, the ratio of entertained to challenged that I want most nights is about 90% to 10%.
Eh… I think most viewers like compelling characters when they find them, even in comfort entertainment. And putting them in interesting situations is part of what makes them compelling.
I guess this is why influencers (using that term very broadly) are so popular. That format cuts out all the plot and fluff and goes straight to characters.
I mean, sure, but compelling characters and interesting situations is not what you said. You talked about making the viewer uncomfortable. It's not hard to identify characters and situations that are compelling and interesting and yet don't particularly challenge the viewer or make them feel uncomfortable.
You nailed it and the minecraft movie proved them right. I'm predicting now that movies will be engineered to be memeable for TikTok videoing stupid dances in the theaters not to watch the movie you paid for but to make a 6 second video for the feeds.
Bingo.
Ugh, that's exactly what's going to happen, isn't?
Also, I hate how people ponder why stuff like this is happening and miss the elephant in the room. Guess engagement optimization isn't a trending topic...
Minecraft is only technically an original movie. Video game "franchise" popular with kids is usual "formula slop" leveraging past pop culture.
I'm the opposite with TV. Most seasons are too long and just get filled with pointless interpersonal drama that feels far too contrived. I think mini series length is usually better.
I also personally feel that as series go on past the first, maybe second season, the story has been told and now they are just having to fill it with slop because the studios want anything making money to continue indefinitely even if there isn't a good story needing to be told anymore.