Yeah, you know, I didn't think this needed to be said but maybe it does: mindless escapism is arguably the most popular type of movie now and has been since at least 76-77 and, like the more escapist movies today, the original Star Wars also produced a lot of imitators, heck, even James Bond found himself being launched into space in 1979. Having a CBM become a box-office hit certainly isn't new, WB did it first and the original big-budget incarnations of Superman and Batman were extremely popular and followed by a lot of sequels of rapidly decreasing quality. Then WB struck gold again with the Nolan trilogy. So absolutely, what is going on today is kind of a continuation of stuff that's being happening for decades to some extent or another. You may argue that, in your absolutely subjective opinion, this kind of escapist movie is less artistic than that other one, but they're all trying to do basically the same thing: giving people the entertainment most of us crave. I asked someone before and didn't get an answer - what was the last time any of you watched Sullivan's Travels? Sometimes the thing a person needs most in their life is to watch Ants in Your Pants of 1939 - not some stuffy, pretentious and condescending piece of you-know-what. To pretend otherwise strikes me as a certain kind of elitist snobbery, and I say that with all due respect to elitist snobs everywhere because a lot of my friends are precisely that. So if you don't like an MCU, Fast & Furious, or SW-type of movie, then absolutely don't watch them, but let's not pretend that the situation with movies is unlike the situation with any other product for the masses - it's all about supply and demand. Also, FWIW, I just watched the new West Side Story and I think it's a masterpiece - most likely it will be ignored by the masses and perhaps won't make a dime, which will mean we will get less ambitious projects like it. So I don't like it, either, but I've made my peace with it.
I'm still amazed that people are still wearing their rose-tinted glasses about a mythical "golden age" of cinema when only good movies were made. Sturgeon's Law is timeless.
Saying Marvel "ruined" cinema implies a time when the majority of movies weren't ****. Besides, it's been well documented that it was Waterworld that ruined movies.
You would like that you trash peddling corporate sycophant. Everything after magic lanterns is a perversion of the form.
Movies should've remained within the purity of a theoretical concept. The act of creating an actual film tainted the genre forever.
Theatre was never the same after it moved indoors and authors began writing plays that accommodated the constraints imposed by architecture. This leads us to only one conclusion. That’s right: Shakespeare ruined cinema.
Just recently, the better-known Senator from Arizona was the deciding vote to kill the American Film Quality Restoration Act of 2021. So, I'm saying that, ... ah, skip it.
Do you guys think that Deadliest Catch killed informational TV or was Discovery and similar networks move away from informative programming to bad reality tv and conspiracy theories about aliens inevitable?
In the early 1600s the King’s Men largely transitioned to performing in the Blackfriar’s, which is an indoor venue that could remain open during the winter. Yeah you would believe that.
This proves what I’ve suspected for years - @Ramza is really a shill account paid to promote major Hollywood studio lantern shows. We all know the art form peaked with cooking fires and shadow puppets against the cave wall.