Since when did movies get so rotten?

[Kulebron]

I don't know if this experience is realistic, or it's that I started hearing these news back in 1990s, but I remember the moment when movies changed. It started with Titanic.

The movie broke both cost and box office records. And this was the most interesting part of the movie at all. We all knew what was about to happen, we all knew how they were making it, most of the content was social realism (pictures of real life of the society and its different members). So you could reflect on all this, but you didn't really care. Like I was thinking: "Ok, so here this is happening. And now this happens, all right."

Overall this was Ok movie. Actually, they did only one bad thing: the crappy annoying tune that was playing everywhere that year. But the hype around "Titanic" was annoyingly too strong (I guess PR agencies did their job very well).

Since then it happened more and more: much hype around huge budgets and CG, and actually good writers, actors and directors making mediocre but profusely promoted movies. Void plots that leave no ideas and you don't care about: Spiderman, Harry Potter, Avatar, Hobbit, the new Star Wars trilogy, Transformers, new Terminators, Maleficient, Hunger games, etc.

I now feel like I don't care about movies. Even of the most popular ones. They're just void. You watch and think: "ok, so this is an epic battle, *yawn*". I tried watching new cinema around 2008-2009 several times, and the amount of crappy but hyped movies just stunned me, so I stopped going to the cinema. I give it another chance once a year, and every time come out with facepalm.

My theory is that around that time, end of 1990s cinema networks finally got global, so that they could run and leverage a movie across the whole world faster than illegal copies were spreading. So big money came in. Then they could spend a lot of money on CG, on promotion, and marketing department made sure the plot had nothing too smart, and in the end it made a good return. (Actually, look at the "most expensive movies" in Wikipedia, there's a clear mark: historically most expensive movies start around 2004, but I guess if the table were bigger, it would be mostly the 1997-2004 range.)

Do others have similar impressions?

*edit*To put it better way, it's about sympathy to the characters which becomes rarity:

I infer from our many complaints of films' insufficient intellectual stimulation that we expect it from them. So often are we evidently disappointed that I hold we should question this expectation: perhaps films are not meant to stimulate the mind.

-Duxwing

Good point. Actually, recently I realised that we not necessarily expect intellectual stimulation. We at least expect having sympathy towards the character. This often times does not happen. Before you want to sympathise their dares and adventures, you need to build a bit of feeling for them, see they are worthy. The more movie makers try to impress you, the less they build character, and you end sitting through the film and just don't care.

So, I should say, probably the intellectual bit was a cliche that I followed. Sympathy is a real rarity now.

Bad example: Maleficient. The intro is the standard Disney opening, you don't feel this character is worthy, and right away they show THE epic battle, where you know what to expect: magic will happen (read: someone thrown by explosion or beaten against the ground). You immediately understand it will change nothing, because nothing real has even started.

Bad example: Hunger Games. Before you understand what the hell it was, they drop you the "mass protest" scene. Oh, not quite mass, but a protest in oppressed country. Again. Yawn. Stop pushing me to like them.

Good example: Blade Runner. You completely feel for the guy and worry about him.

Good example: Le Professionel. Before Beaumont starts his offence, you see how he is (mis)treated and how stoic he stayed. Then you're ready to forgive all the illogical decisions.

Good example: Interstellar. You totally feel for the guy quite soon. Was a good surprise despite rough plot towards the end.

Edited December 1, 2014 by Kulebron

[Kerbart]

"Good" and "bad" is largely up to personal taste. The current trend towards more, bigger & better special effects (I'm talking about the effects, not their impact on the movie) is perfectly understandable. Given that, if the budget is large enough, the SFX are spectacular (transformers/godzilla/turtles), in a way it's a promise to the audience: "when you come see this movie for the visual effects you will not be disappointed."

It's a lot like a fast food joint. You know what you're getting and while the contents are not phenomenal, they're not disappointing either if you adjust your expectations.

Those looking for gourmet food are left out, though.

[Nuke]

titanic was a movie engineered to attract the masses. it employed the barnum effect quite well. if you wanted a love story or an action flick, or a disaster film, you could watch it and it would be ok. it didnt try to do anything cerebral (because the people who are into that kind of thing usually just read books). its actually a lot like movies from the 40s and the 50s, its so simple an idiot can follow the plot. movies got a little better in the 60s (great scifi) and 70s (some great crime dramas). the 80s was kind of like things are now, using the state of the art in special effects, but with plots leaving something to be desired. the 90s was a mixed bag. it some great movies, some of which could please the brainy crowd, but it quickly devolved into special effects oriented movies, and that continues until now. they know that they can keep playing the same old game and turn a profit.

then one might also say that you are watching the wrong movies. the most successful movies are not always going to be the best movies. its the films that draw the cult followings that you really want to pay attention to.

[Red Iron Crown]

There's a few factors at play that make it seem like so many new movies are bad:

- Maturing taste. I don't know how old you are, but for most people the blockbusters get less entertaining as you get older. The same old cliches, underdeveloped cookie-cutter characters, romantic subplot and utter predictability are harder to cover up with pretty special effects to a more sophisticated viewer.

- Selective memory. We tend to only remember the truly great and truly awful movies from the past, and only the great ones from the more distant past. We tend to forget the drivel that made up the bulk of movies in those years, and Sturgeon's Law definitely applies. (This is sort of the same phenomenon as the false "houses were built better 100 years ago" perception; the only ones still standing are the ones built well enough to last 100 years. Similarly, the only movies we remember well from the 50s are those that have stood the test of time.)

- More pervasive marketing. New blockbusters get promoted more often and in more media than at any time in the past, this makes our awareness of them a good bit higher than before.

All that said, there are still great movies being made every year, it's just that most of them aren't the heavily-marketed blockbuster eye candy films.

[Nuke]

there are several silent movies that i have enjoyed too. you figure the movies that your great grandparents used to watch were tame puritanical pieces. but when you figure back then censorship was practically non existant, you have nudity, violence, all the things we associate with modern works. then you also have cerebral concepts. metropolis kinda toyed with marxist ideology for example. you also had birth of a nation (arguably one of the most racist movies ever made), had some pretty impressive war scenes in it (its also considered one of the first war epics). there was a 30s (not silent) picture "things to come" which was a great scifi movie with far reaching ideas about the course of humanitie's future. forbidden planet in the 50s pretty much cast the mold for every space opera ever made (and even had a few cerebral elements in it). so its fun to go back and watch some old films.

40s war era propaganda films are a great watch (just be sure to watch movies from all the countries involved) and it gives you a good sense of how the events of world war 2 were perceived by the general public at the time. the 60s and 70s were great for cerebral scifi. planet of the apes, zardoz, a clockwork orange, 2001, soylent green, logans run, the boys from brazil, etc. you of course have the hippie movement, feminism, civil rights, and anti nuclear movements all happening at that time and those movies reflect the times in which they were made. so for those who care about history they are a great watch.

for some more modern films, you have pretty much anything from tarantino. he has the ability to turn tried and true movie cliches into something completely different and original, do watch all of them. 90s also had movies like fight club which is one of my favorites. the best movie i think ive seen in the last couple years was probibly cloud atlas. it managed to completely slip under the radar and i wouldnt have even found it if i wasnt scanning imdb for recent scifi films i havent seen yet.

obligatory note that some of the movies mentioned in this post have adult concepts and ratings, so use digression.

[Dispatcher]

Always has been, is now, always will be a mix to choose from; ranging from garbage (open to interpretation) to so-so to good to epic in scope (again, all open to interpretation). We live in a time when its all available to us (theaters, Hulu and such, disc, cable/ satellite, etc.).

I certainly have my prefs, but so it is with everyone here.

Good luck in finding and enjoying what you like!

[Wanderfound]

Movies went to crap as soon as special effects and celebrity began to heavily outweigh scriptwriting and acting talent. Exactly when this happened is obviously subjective, but I'd put the turning point at about the release of Star Wars.

There's still plenty of quality films being made, they just aren't coming from the profit-focussed Hollywood studios. Go hit your local arthouse cinema and learn to enjoy subtitles. Or take advantage of the internet and watch the classics: Casablanca, The Hustler, The Seven Samurai, Das Boot, Breakfast at Tiffany's, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, etc.

For more recent stuff, check out The Station Agent and Pieces of April. Jim Jarmusch's Dead Man is worth the time, too.

Edited November 29, 2014 by Wanderfound

[Brethern]

I don't know if this experience is realistic, or it's that I started hearing these news back in 1990s, but I remember the moment when movies changed. It started with Titanic.

The movie broke both cost and box office records. And this was the most interesting part of the movie at all. We all knew what was about to happen, we all knew how they were making it, most of the content was social realism (pictures of real life of the society and its different members). So you could reflect on all this, but you didn't really care. Like I was thinking: "Ok, so here this is happening. And now this happens, all right."

Overall this was Ok movie. Actually, they did only one bad thing: the crappy annoying tune that was playing everywhere that year. But the hype around "Titanic" was annoyingly too strong (I guess PR agencies did their job very well).

I have to disagree on this point, when I first watched titanic in theaters I really was only interested in the sinking of the ship, and a certain part featuring Rose. Other than that I never really cared for it. So I would have agreeded that it was overhyped and all that stuff.

Years later two things happened that changed my mind, first thing is that I read somewhere that when they were filming the wreck Cameron finally realized just how real it was, he then worked to ensure that everything was perfect, and honestly he did do it.

The second thing that happened is that I got a job on a fishing trawler fishing in the North Atlantic, out there I saw icebergs and during the winter I realized just how cold it actually is.

Rewatching titanic now has allot more meaning to me.

I imagine anyone here who watched apollo 13 or from the earth to the moon series can relate as to that feeling.

However I think the problem is that there's really nothing to relate to in movies now, I imagine if aliens suddenly invade earth that might change.

[Drunken Hobo]

It's perhaps most apparent with comedy movies. How many truly classic comedy movies have there been since 2000? Ones that will be remembered for decades to come, like "Airplane!" or the Monty Python movies? Hot Fuzz is the only one I can think of. Perhaps Shaun of the Dead too.

[EdFred]

It's perhaps most apparent with comedy movies. How many truly classic comedy movies have there been since 2000? Ones that will be remembered for decades to come, like "Airplane!" or the Monty Python movies? Hot Fuzz is the only one I can think of. Perhaps Shaun of the Dead too.

Comedy is even more subjective. I find Airplane to be almost completely unwatchable.

[Superfluous J]

I used to love Airplane, and (still) quote it all the time. I watched it recently for the first time in decades and I hate to say it, but it's pretty bad. Not any better than the plotless comedies of today like 40 year old virgin or Hangover.

[Brethern]

Comedy is even more subjective. I find Airplane to be almost completely unwatchable.

I'm curious can you watch family guy? Because they both use the exact same humor.

[Duxwing]

I infer from our many complaints of films' insufficient intellectual stimulation that we expect it from them. So often are we evidently disappointed that I hold we should question this expectation: perhaps films are not meant to stimulate the mind.

-Duxwing

[razark]

"The X of today is not as good as the X when I was younger!"

--Everyone at some point in their life.

[PakledHostage]

I used to love Airplane, and (still) quote it all the time. I watched it recently for the first time in decades and I hate to say it, but it's pretty bad.

But "Airplane!" is a cult movie. Like Spinal Tap and even a lot of (gasp!) Monty Python, it isn't actually that funny. What makes these movies funny is how they work into everyday situations. They are ridiculous, but they are classics that have taken on a life of their own.

[MartGonzo]

I infer from our many complaints of films' insufficient intellectual stimulation that we expect it from them. So often are we evidently disappointed that I hold we should question this expectation: perhaps films are not meant to stimulate the mind.

-Duxwing

Good quote

movies are interesting in that they usually carry hidden meanings, whether it be ideas that the writer or director wishes to convey or the ideas of social manipulators in the "think tanks" like the Tavistock institute.

The wizard of Oz for example was written as an critique of economic policy (Bill Still - The secret of Oz)

The hidden meanings are rarely understood by the viewer but go towards shaping their overall world view

Movies are very very rarely just entertainment, programming describes them better.

Edward Bernays - Propaganda - History is a weapon

A large part of why most Hollywood movies are terrible now is because they are pushing the same ideas, over and over again.

Edited November 29, 2014 by MartGonzo

[Wanderfound]

"The X of today is not as good as the X when I was younger!"

--Everyone at some point in their life.

"Times are bad. Children no longer obey their parents, and everyone is writing a book."

- Marcus Tullius Cicero, 106BCE-43BCE.

(supposedly; may be apocryphal)

[Wanderfound]

I infer from our many complaints of films' insufficient intellectual stimulation that we expect it from them. So often are we evidently disappointed that I hold we should question this expectation: perhaps films are not meant to stimulate the mind.

Go catch some Charlie Kaufman flicks; Adaptation, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Being John Malkovich. Messing with your mind is their main schtick. Ditto for Waking Life, Cube, Memento, Gattaca, I ⤠Huckabee's, etc etc.

There's plenty of intelligent film around; just don't expect it from the big budget blockbusters.

[Superfluous J]

But "Airplane!" is a cult movie. Like Spinal Tap and even a lot of (gasp!) Monty Python, it isn't actually that funny. What makes these movies funny is how they work into everyday situations. They are ridiculous, but they are classics that have taken on a life of their own.

Okay, this is hilarious. I swear - hand to Jool - that I had in that post you quoted a mention of Spinal Tap and how it is still good even after a long time of not watching it. I deleted that text because I wanted the post to be a bit more concise.

[Kulebron]

I infer from our many complaints of films' insufficient intellectual stimulation that we expect it from them. So often are we evidently disappointed that I hold we should question this expectation: perhaps films are not meant to stimulate the mind.

-Duxwing

Good point. Actually, recently I realised that we not necessarily expect intellectual stimulation. We at least expect having sympathy towards the character. This often times does not happen. Before you want to sympathise their dares and adventures, you need to build a bit of sympathy, see they are worthy. The more movie makers try to impress you, the less they build character, and you end sitting through the film and just don't care.

So, I should say, probably the intellectual bit was a cliche that I followed. Sympathy is a real rarity now.

Bad example: Maleficient. The intro is the standard Disney opening, you don't feel this character is worthy, and right away they show THE epic battle, where you know what to expect: magic will happen (read: someone thrown by explosion or beaten against the ground).

Bad example: Hunger Games. Before you understand what the hell it was, they drop you the "mass protest" scene. Oh, not quite mass, but a protest in oppressed country. Again. Yawn. Stop pushing me to like them.

Good example: Blade Runner. You completely feel for the guy and worry about him.

Good example: Le Professionel. Before Beaumont starts his offence, you see how he is (mis)treated and how stoic he stayed. Then you're ready to forgive all the illogical decisions.

Good example: Interstellar. No need to explain. Was a good surprise.

Edited November 29, 2014 by Kulebron

[Nuke]

blade runner is one of those movies with a lot of cerebral undertones, but its just a movie i have never really been able to get into. its sort of like the godfather of scifi. a movie which everyone agrees is great, but you struggle to figure out why. and its not the plodding pace because i can sit through a movie like 2001 and i not feel like i wasted my time.

[DJEN]

Let the future evaluate us. We are subjected to seasonal bias, and thus unable to see the clear truth.

-Daniel Jeon-

[Vanamonde]

An awful lot of movies are made like this: "It's like/a sequel to Blahblah. We've got a star and a signed the contracts and we have a budget. Now, what should the story be?" It absolutely amazes me how studios will spend millions on special effects and stars, send the thing to theaters, and never bother to fix huge holes in the plot. Wouldn't you think the story would be the first thing they settle on? Also, while the movie is still being made, they will show it to test audiences and alter the movie based on reactions. So the story can change halfway through making the movie, and all kinds of garbage can end up shoehorned in there.

Edited November 30, 2014 by Vanamonde

[Superfluous J]

An awful lot of movies are made like this: "It's like/a sequel to Blahblah. We've got a star and a signed the contracts and we have a budget. Now, what should the story be?" It absolutely amazes me how studios will spend millions on special effects and stars, send the thing to theaters, and never bother to fix huge holes in the plot.

But "this movie really took care of all those little things that annoy science nerds" doesn't sell as well as "EXPLOSIONS AND GEORGE CLOONEY"

Note: I like movies that take care of all those little things that annoy me, a science nerd.

I also like explosions and think George Clooney is a pretty good actor.

[sal_vager]

A lot of what made old movies great was the suspense they engendered in the viewer, they couldn't rely on special effects and action scenes so they had to be clever.

Take the original Alien, very tense, very scary, can you think of a modern movie that makes your skin crawl in quite that way? I can't.