Comment on Martin Scorsese urges filmmakers to fight comic book movie culture: ‘We’ve got to save cinema’

• AsimovsRobot@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Probably talking about new IPs? Studios are pretty risk averse nowadays.

  source
• andrewrgross@slrpnk.net ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I apologize, but the case was made to be in a long and very compelling article that I don’t have a link for.

  I think it was about consolidation, and how the lack of diversity in small independent theaters and small independent distributors robbed movies that weren’t copies of successful films the chance to become surprise hits.

  Now, most theaters are chains, and they’re largely owned by the same entities that own distributors. So everywhere shows the same films, and there’s no one to take a chance on something different or risky.

  source

  • ech@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Gotcha. Yeah, vertical integration, such as studios owning theaters, has been a longstanding back-and-forth struggle in film. Most dramatically seen back in the “Golden Age” where studios basically owned the whole process, from actors to theaters. Even if we’re swinging back towards studio domination (or are already there), the Internet really changes things to the point I don’t think it’s gonna be the downfall of anything. Distribution is simply too easy to be entirely dominated by established studios like it was before.

    source

    • andrewrgross@slrpnk.net ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Distribution is simply too easy to be entirely dominated by established studios like it was before.

      When you say this I feel like you’re explaining how competition in healthcare is providing incredible choice for patients at incredibly low prices. Because what you’re saying sounds very reasonable in theory, but just doesn’t seem to match up with the reality we’re living in.

      source

      • ech@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        If you wanna read it that way, I’m not sure what to tell you. I’m just saying all’s not lost because Marvel is making bank.

        source
• SnowdenHeroOfOurTime@unilem.org ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  It obviously means studios wouldn’t take a chance on something “wacky” which is a change that prevents as much actual creativity from getting to audiences

  source

  • ech@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Big money has and will always chase success. That some people don’t like the current trends doesn’t mean it’s the downfall of the industry, and it doesn’t mean things were better or different in the past. And why should we be bothered about trends anyway? Indy film has been killing it for ages now and anybody that cares is looking there for innovation, not at profit driven studios.

    source

    • SnowdenHeroOfOurTime@unilem.org ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      As many people have pointed out, if all the money gets spent on ironman 72, movies like pulp fiction can’t be funded. Yeah indie films are great, but there was also a time that movies in that same vein could reach hundreds of millions in the mainstream, and that impact on culture was a good one imo

      source

      • ech@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        As many people have pointed out, if all the money gets spent on ironman 72, movies like pulp fiction can’t be funded.

        Good things that’s not happening! Again, that you and others aren’t happy with current trends doesn’t mean the industry is dying, or even that it’s objectively worse than it was. Is it really that surprising that the trends today aren’t the same as they were 40 years ago? And in 40 more years, there’ll be entirely different trends. Change is inevitable and fearmongering about it is just pointless. Find the good in it and celebrate the continued success of cinema instead of wallowing in a miserable yearning for something that’s moved on.

        source

        • -> View More Comments