Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8933972" data-attributes="member: 7023840">I think it's an interesting question.On the one hand, I can understand where Scorsese is coming from- because of the changing nature of the commercial box office, it increasingly feels that the only space that is left is for large, IP-driven tentpole movies and horror movies (which have great ROI).I just looked at the top 10 box office movies for the past year, and all 10 were sequels or IP-driven. In fact, 9/10 were outsrigh sequels (and the tenth was, um, The Batman, so make of that what you will).You'd have to go all the way to #12 domestically, with Baz Luhrmann's Elvis, to find a movie that wasn't either a sequel or an IP brand. That's ... kind of scary, especially if you're a filmmaker that wants your movies in cinemas and not on streaming....on the other hand, I would counter this with two separate points-1. Overall, especially if you include TV series, miniseries, and movies released on streaming platforms, the quality and breadth of films being released is as high as any other period in history, if not higher (IMO).2. The overall quality in terms of acting, cinematography, effects .... the &quot;craft&quot; of blockbuster movies is higher now than it has been in the past. We all suffer from selection bias- we remember the big amazing movies from the past. But there was a lot of schlock, as well. We are all tired of the persistent act structure problems with certain styles of movies, and the inevitably &quot;sky beam&quot; issues, but overall there is a high amount of quality that you wouldn't find in a movie like Crocodile Dundee II (#5 move in 1988!).It's just a changing of the business model (artsy or quirky films or even romcoms are less likely to get large theatrical releases) than it is a change in quality.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 8933972, member: 7023840"] I think it's an interesting question. On the one hand, I can understand where Scorsese is coming from- because of the changing nature of the commercial box office, it increasingly feels that the only space that is left is for large, IP-driven tentpole movies and horror movies (which have great ROI). I just looked at the top 10 box office movies for the past year, and all 10 were sequels or IP-driven. In fact, 9/10 were outsrigh sequels (and the tenth was, um, [I]The Batman[/I], so make of that what you will). You'd have to go all the way to #12 domestically, with Baz Luhrmann's [I]Elvis, [/I]to find a movie that wasn't either a sequel or an IP brand. That's ... kind of scary, especially if you're a filmmaker that wants your movies in cinemas and not on streaming. ...on the other hand, I would counter this with two separate points- 1. Overall, especially if you include TV series, miniseries, and movies released on streaming platforms, the quality and breadth of films being released is as high as any other period in history, if not higher (IMO). 2. The overall quality in terms of acting, cinematography, effects .... the "craft" of blockbuster movies is higher now than it has been in the past. We all suffer from selection bias- we remember the big amazing movies from the past. But there was a lot of schlock, as well. We are all tired of the persistent act structure problems with certain styles of movies, and the inevitably "sky beam" issues, but overall there is a high amount of quality that you wouldn't find in a movie like Crocodile Dundee II (#5 move in 1988!). It's just a changing of the business model (artsy or quirky films or even romcoms are less likely to get large theatrical releases) than it is a change in quality. [/QUOTE]

Verification