This is just survivorship bias. Nobody remembers the bad movies from the 80s but there sure were a lot of them. Think of all the movies you pass by in the thrift store. They’re trash. We still get good movies today. Think of Everything Everywhere All At Once, or Oppenheimer, as examples that will define this era in film.
Nobody remembers the bad movies from the 80s but there sure were a lot of them.
Bologna! There’s a whole community practically dedicated to the terrible movies of the 80’s over at B Movie Bonanza. :P
That’s where I get all my movie recommendations. I’ve seen most of them but once in a while I find a new one and get way too excited.
I love garbage movies.
Focusing solely on the movie-going experience, I would love to live in a city like LA or NYC where they have a few theaters with added technological features, like 70mm IMAX and/or 4K projectors and/or rumble seats (those must have been amazing with something like Mad Max: Fury Road).
There’s at least one 60FPS theater in NYC, it must be wild to watch a film like that just by itself, or even WILDER, in 3D.
But I believe there are a few theaters in Asia - probably in places like Singapore and Shanghai, but don’t quote me on that - that screened Ang Lee’s “Gemini Man” in the incredible-sounding combination of 120FPS in 4K and 3D, they said it was like the screen dissolved and you were watching the action happening through a huge rectangular hole in the wall.
I understand resolution improvements but I don’t understand the push for higher framerate for film. In real life motion is blurred when things move, the higher the framerate the less of that you see.
For me it’s awful, the “soap opera” effect or whatever else they call it kills me, like I’m seeing a cgi picture even when I know everything was captured in camera.
24-30fps is the sweet spot for film and TV imho, I have yet to see a good argument for watching regular real time footage at a higher frame rate.
(To be clear - of course high speed footage for super slo mo and all of that has plenty of cool applications)
No, survivorship bias is real, but this is late stage capitalism. Disney owns it all, and the occasional worthwhile film sneaks under their writing by committee bullshit
There’s plenty of good movies that future generations would happily watch… But proportionally? The number of movies made a year has exploded, the number that make an impression for even a year has dwindled
This is true as well. I won’t disagree that there’s nuance here. But still, I think most people have cognitive distortions around the state of every media industry. With the huge rise of Disney and Netflix running the industry, we now see more independent films and new studios taking up the slack. Just like how we’ve had great indie games lately but the mainstream AAA stuff just isn’t impressing the same way. Think of the original couple of assassins creed games and compare them to the new ones. Sure there’s more content, but there’s not as much innovation going on.
I think that just supports my point, that rather than survivorship bias this is a small group of companies owning the entire industry, and movies are just actually getting worse
Gaming is going through the same thing with Microsoft now owning most of the industry, but 1-5 people can make an indie game without leaving the house. There’s also a number of non-shittified stores for distribution, meanwhile media and streaming services are firmly in the stages of enshitification
I don’t think indie movies will be able to take over the way indie games seem to be - not without the streaming industry changing first
Then you don’t seek out movies that you would enjoy, not exactly a flex but I understand if it’s just not your thing.
