Why are new movies coming out these days so bad?

[Goldstar88]

Tried to sit through the new “Sopranos film” last night and shut it off halfway through.  There have been very few movies over the last decade or so that I saw and thought, “wow, that was great. I would watch that again.” Guess Joker and Three Billboards would fall into that category for me, but that’s about it.

There were so many great films in the 90’s and earlier in the 2000’s, but over the last 10+ years it seems like Hollywood just pumps out garbage. What happened?

[knuckleballer]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/college/2015/06/08/jerry-seinfeld-says-comedians-avoid-college-gigs-students-are-so-pc/37403583/

This article is six years old and about stand up comedy, but I think it’s more telling than that.  It’s hard to tell a good story while being impeccably politically correct.  It’s boring.

[Adelaide Celt]

For the most part, everything out of Hollywood has to abide by the woke agenda. Hence, garbage. Some movies still manage to be terrible in their own right of course.

[Roy H.]

For the most part, everything out of Hollywood has to abide by the woke agenda. Hence, garbage. Some movies still manage to be terrible in their own right of course.

I think a lot of that is right.  Critics consider “Get Out” to be a top-five movie of the 2010s.  That was a good movie, but not an all-timer.  But, it’s pushed like it’s an all-timer.

I’d say:

1.  Agendas — nobody seems to just want to tell a great story

2.  Spectacle — the movies that draw the most eyeballs are the most exciting ones, not the best ones

3.  Prestige TV.  There is a lot of great television. I think some screen writers and directors are asking themselves why should they be limited to two hours, when they can tell a deeper story in 16?

[Who]

I'd say the #1 cause has been these franchise movies. The Marvel Universe, the DC universe, the fast and the furious franchises. The continuing Bond franchise.

The big studios have concluded they can make more money by putting more of their eggs (their money) in these big franchise baskets (franchise movies) instead of the old model where they made a larger number of movies in the hopes that some made it big.

Turns out these franchise movies forecast way better than previous Hollywood block bluster attempts. Far more reliable return on investment. Less risk. They already have a built-in brand and consumer market ready to buy. Less risk again.

So (1) the old hollywood blockblusters (like 90s action flicks) were more hit-or-miss financially than today's franchise movies + (2) the old model relied on a diversified portfolio meaning the studios made many movies in order to decrease risk. Like in the stock market. Diversification = lower risk. So they had their blockblusters but also a large number of other movies that were even more hit-or-miss than the blockbusters. Some of these movies became blockbusters themselves and made the studios tons of money.

Now though they centralize their investment into these franchise movies which have less risk than previous blockbuster moves (with no in-built audience) and further double down on the franchises by decreasing the number of overall movies being made because the franchises are so financially successful that it just makes more sense to concentrate on them.

Result is a lack of original scripts / movies.

The main movies getting made now are re-hashes of these franchises and the occasional new movie that squeaks through.

Then you throw all that PC / Woke nonsense on top of it and it ruins an already diluted product. There was talk post-Trump that Hollywood and TV writers will be making their shows more Woke in the future as the message clearly was too subtle in the past -- which is ridiculous but it is already clear to see in the new TV shows over the last 12 months. I haven't watched enough movies yet to know if it is happening there as well but it is definitely happening on TV. Hollywood actually believes they were not being woke enough! Insane.

[jambr380]

For the most part, everything out of Hollywood has to abide by the woke agenda. Hence, garbage. Some movies still manage to be terrible in their own right of course.

I think a lot of that is right.  Critics consider “Get Out” to be a top-five movie of the 2010s.  That was a good movie, but not an all-timer.  But, it’s pushed like it’s an all-timer.

I’d say:

1.  Agendas — nobody seems to just want to tell a great story

2.  Spectacle — the movies that draw the most eyeballs are the most exciting ones, not the best ones

3.  Prestige TV.  There is a lot of great television. I think some screen writers and directors are asking themselves why should they be limited to two hours, when they can tell a deeper story in 16?

I can't believe the only mention of #3 so far is in your post. Streaming has become a much bigger deal in recent years, and with people now having incredible television sets, they are much less likely to go to the movies. Many of these shows coming out are 'limited series', which basically means 6-8 one-hour episodes. These obviously would have been movies in the past, but not anymore. The writers/creators are able to delve into much more complex and interesting stories.

What we are left with are crappy-ish action flicks with lots of special effects. Good for making money, but far less entertaining and memorable. Personally, I love quality horror/suspense movies and it's been since like mid-2000s that these types of movies have been memorable and worthwhile. Or maybe I'm just getting old 

[ChillyWilly]

For the most part, everything out of Hollywood has to abide by the woke agenda. Hence, garbage. Some movies still manage to be terrible in their own right of course.

I think a lot of that is right.  Critics consider “Get Out” to be a top-five movie of the 2010s.  That was a good movie, but not an all-timer.  But, it’s pushed like it’s an all-timer.

I’d say:

1.  Agendas — nobody seems to just want to tell a great story

2.  Spectacle — the movies that draw the most eyeballs are the most exciting ones, not the best ones

3.  Prestige TV.  There is a lot of great television. I think some screen writers and directors are asking themselves why should they be limited to two hours, when they can tell a deeper story in 16?

I can't believe the only mention of #3 so far is in your post. Streaming has become a much bigger deal in recent years, and with people now having incredible television sets, they are much less likely to go to the movies. Many of these shows coming out are 'limited series', which basically means 6-8 one-hour episodes. These obviously would have been movies in the past, but not anymore. The writers/creators are able to delve into much more complex and interesting stories.

What we are left with are crappy-ish action flicks with lots of special effects. Good for making money, but far less entertaining and memorable. Personally, I love quality horror/suspense movies and it's been since like mid-2000s that these types of movies have been memorable and worthwhile. Or maybe I'm just getting old 

This is false. So much so that companies are ditching their straight to stream model and going back to 30-45 day theatrical releases. Humans are social and want some activities to be social experiences and not just entertainment consumption. Yes I am long AMC.

[gouki88]

I think you must be missing the good movies. Of which there are plenty. Take 2019 (COVID has had obvious major impacts upon the film industry) for example: Parasite, The Irishman, Marriage Story, Uncut Gems, Pain & Glory, Knives Out, The Lighthouse, The High Life, Midsommar, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood and Waves, just to name a few of the ones I really enjoyed. That's a strong lineup of good films for one year, and I wouldn't think that any of them suffered from 'woke agendas' in art, or were particularly flashy.

[Goldstar88]

For the most part, everything out of Hollywood has to abide by the woke agenda. Hence, garbage. Some movies still manage to be terrible in their own right of course.

I think a lot of that is right.  Critics consider “Get Out” to be a top-five movie of the 2010s.  That was a good movie, but not an all-timer.  But, it’s pushed like it’s an all-timer.

I’d say:

1.  Agendas — nobody seems to just want to tell a great story

2.  Spectacle — the movies that draw the most eyeballs are the most exciting ones, not the best ones

3.  Prestige TV.  There is a lot of great television. I think some screen writers and directors are asking themselves why should they be limited to two hours, when they can tell a deeper story in 16?

I can't believe the only mention of #3 so far is in your post. Streaming has become a much bigger deal in recent years, and with people now having incredible television sets, they are much less likely to go to the movies. Many of these shows coming out are 'limited series', which basically means 6-8 one-hour episodes. These obviously would have been movies in the past, but not anymore. The writers/creators are able to delve into much more complex and interesting stories.

What we are left with are crappy-ish action flicks with lots of special effects. Good for making money, but far less entertaining and memorable. Personally, I love quality horror/suspense movies and it's been since like mid-2000s that these types of movies have been memorable and worthwhile. Or maybe I'm just getting old 

I don’t care how nice the TV at home is, going to the theatre and watching a sold out movie on a 50 foot screen is a better experience, Imo. It’s not like people weren’t packing the theaters pre-covid to see the new Star Wars and Avengers movies when they premiered. Feel like the demand is still there, but people aren’t going because the quality of the films just isn’t there anymore.

[Kernewek]

I'd say the #1 cause has been these franchise movies. The Marvel Universe, the DC universe, the fast and the furious franchises. The continuing Bond franchise.

The big studios have concluded they can make more money by putting more of their eggs (their money) in these big franchise baskets (franchise movies) instead of the old model where they made a larger number of movies in the hopes that some made it big.

Turns out these franchise movies forecast way better than previous Hollywood block bluster attempts. Far more reliable return on investment. Less risk. They already have a built-in brand and consumer market ready to buy. Less risk again.

So (1) the old hollywood blockblusters (like 90s action flicks) were more hit-or-miss financially than today's franchise movies + (2) the old model relied on a diversified portfolio meaning the studios made many movies in order to decrease risk. Like in the stock market. Diversification = lower risk. So they had their blockblusters but also a large number of other movies that were even more hit-or-miss than the blockbusters. Some of these movies became blockbusters themselves and made the studios tons of money.

Now though they centralize their investment into these franchise movies which have less risk than previous blockbuster moves (with no in-built audience) and further double down on the franchises by decreasing the number of overall movies being made because the franchises are so financially successful that it just makes more sense to concentrate on them.

Result is a lack of original scripts / movies.

The main movies getting made now are re-hashes of these franchises and the occasional new movie that squeaks through.

This is 100% on the money. Getting films made is really expensive, and it's harder and harder to subsidise the arthouse side of it, which is where the great films usually dwell.

The other part of why it's comparatively easy to remember the best films from 20 or 30 years ago is that people have had 20 or 30 years to evaluate them. That's not a point that should go unremarked, and why comparing like this has some issues.

[perks-a-beast]

For the most part, everything out of Hollywood has to abide by the woke agenda. Hence, garbage. Some movies still manage to be terrible in their own right of course.

I would say you hit the nail on the head here. Nothing compromises art more than political agendas. Films have become more about fighting political battles and less about creating great and meaningful art. It's a shame, and I hope this PC nonsense ends sooner than later because I miss going to the movies without feeling like I am being indoctrinated into the woke leftist cult.

[gift]

As a standalone movie The Many Saints of Newark might not have been a great movie but as an extension of The Sopranos universe I loved it.

“he doesn’t have the makings of a varsity athlete” line alone might have been worth it.

[Roy H.]

Parasite, The Irishman, Marriage Story, Uncut Gems, Pain & Glory, Knives Out, The Lighthouse, The High Life, Midsommar, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood and Waves

I haven’t seen all of those, but of the ones I have, I’d say they range from “watchable” to “good”.  There are none I consider great, and probably none that I’d rewatch.

Not every year is 1994, but I don’t think the last few years compare.

[jambr380]

For the most part, everything out of Hollywood has to abide by the woke agenda. Hence, garbage. Some movies still manage to be terrible in their own right of course.

I think a lot of that is right.  Critics consider “Get Out” to be a top-five movie of the 2010s.  That was a good movie, but not an all-timer.  But, it’s pushed like it’s an all-timer.

I’d say:

1.  Agendas — nobody seems to just want to tell a great story

2.  Spectacle — the movies that draw the most eyeballs are the most exciting ones, not the best ones

3.  Prestige TV.  There is a lot of great television. I think some screen writers and directors are asking themselves why should they be limited to two hours, when they can tell a deeper story in 16?

I can't believe the only mention of #3 so far is in your post. Streaming has become a much bigger deal in recent years, and with people now having incredible television sets, they are much less likely to go to the movies. Many of these shows coming out are 'limited series', which basically means 6-8 one-hour episodes. These obviously would have been movies in the past, but not anymore. The writers/creators are able to delve into much more complex and interesting stories.

What we are left with are crappy-ish action flicks with lots of special effects. Good for making money, but far less entertaining and memorable. Personally, I love quality horror/suspense movies and it's been since like mid-2000s that these types of movies have been memorable and worthwhile. Or maybe I'm just getting old 

This is false. So much so that companies are ditching their straight to stream model and going back to 30-45 day theatrical releases. Humans are social and want some activities to be social experiences and not just entertainment consumption. Yes I am long AMC.

Eh, I'd say there is a lot of gray area. I've been to the movies like twice in the last decade and they both were $5 Tuesdays at old school movie theaters for movies that had already been released. And I am somebody that used to go at least twice a month - I doubt I am the only one. Obviously humans are social beings, but I don't think the movie theater is the only way to accomplish this (especially since it's not really a social experience). Things change - 20 years ago nightclubs were booming and people were buying cds for $15 each. To pretend that streaming has had no effect on the film industry just seems a bit strange.

[action781]

Parasite, The Irishman, Marriage Story, Uncut Gems, Pain & Glory, Knives Out, The Lighthouse, The High Life, Midsommar, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood and Waves

I haven’t seen all of those, but of the ones I have, I’d say they range from “watchable” to “good”.  There are none I consider great, and probably none that I’d rewatch.

Not every year is 1994, but I don’t think the last few years compare.

JoJo Rabbit was one of my top 10 favorite all-time movies and I've watched it multiple times.  Incredibly clever movie and took a lot of risks I thought.  I thought Parasite was a very good movie, which I agree I will probably never watch again, but it was still very good.  1917 was also good.