What do guys think of the current state of blockbuster movies?
What do guys think of the current state of blockbuster movies?
Yesterday penguinz0 made a video about the current state of modern blockbusters and its something I think would be interesting to discuss here. In my opinion it would be for the best if the MCU was put out to pasture and the Disney monopoly was broken up.
It seems like more and more blockbusters have the sane tone, the same style and the same direction. Its like they are written and directed by the same handful of people. The Flash, Indiana Jones 5, and Ant Man 5 all felt like they had the same writers and directors. I place a lot of the blame for this on Disney. Ever since Disney Plus launched everything marvel put out has been so paint by numbers.
What do you all think. Would love to hear your thoughts on this.
I'm not a huge movie buff so please excuse me if my opinion might be uneducated, but I feel like today's Blockbusters are so risk-averse. The movie has become such a product with clearly defined business goals and target audience.
It's just the enshittification you're noticing. I've felt this way about movies since the mid 2000's. It's happening everywhere. Movies. TV. Video games. Music.
The only way you can find true innovation and something new and creative is to seek out the independent creators. They're the only ones taking any chances. They have nothing to lose and everything to gain.
All the big producers are just going to find a combination of things that allows them to sell the most and then stick with it for as long as it keeps making them boatloads of money. They won't take a chance; they will wait for an independent to take a chance, and either buy their shit or copy it.
Just following in the footsteps of the restaurant industry. McDonalds has risen to the top as the worlds most successful restaurant by a very wide margin.
MCU is the McDonalds of film. Simple, formulaic, predictable, scalable, and, unless you eat it too often, even enjoyable. A safe, predictable bet.
Broadcast television took a similar turn years ago, to pundits and reality tv. Low quality, low effort, predictable and repetitive content.
Never forget the goal is to maximize profit by maximizing revenue, but also minimizing risk and cost. This minimizing risk and cost part is hugely important, and is why I always laugh when people are surprised giant corporations aren't producing genuine art. Why should they? Look at what pulls the money in. They're optimizing, basically. You know how you optimize video games? They're optimizing us.
This is demonstrably untrue, and contradicted by your own statement. Guardians 3, Spider-Man Across the Spiderverse both did very well in theaters despite being big franchise movies. Audiences aren't tired of the theater, they are tired of spending big dollars for badly written movies at the theater.
Disney and Marvel have been cranking out a massive flood of titles over the past 5 years, and that has diluted the talent pool and shortened the development pipeline forcing way more cookie cutter scripts going through far less review with much worse CGI hitting the big screen. It isn't cinema people that is keeping people away, it is bland, uncreative cinema with bad writing.
I think you missed OP's point that studios care about minimizing risk as much as they care about maximizing profit. Sure, if you take risks maybe you'll come out with a smash hit that makes you billions-- but you could just as easily come out with a bomb that costs you hundreds of millions of dollars.
Let's say your studio has a budget of $500 million for this year. You've decided to produce 10 movies, each costing an average of $50 million to make. You could take risks, leading to two gems that each pull in $500 million, and eight stinkers that "only" pull in $5 million. (Remember, they cost $50 million to make each, so you're losing $45 million per flop here.) You end the year with $680 million, for a profit of $180 million. Not bad, all things considered, but not spectacular margins.
Alternatively, you could play it safely by numbers, and make $100 million per movie. Now you're making a profit of $5 billion.
If you're a corporate exect who doesn't give a damn about art and only cares about the numbers, it's tragically a no-brainer.
Spiderverse was a rare exception, I'll grant that one.
I think the problem isn’t the quality of movies. After all, we have had some really good ones with some that did well (including 2 Marvel ones) like Guardians 3, the Spider-verse movie, Super Mario, Avatar, Dungeons & Dragons, etc..
The problem is that nobody wants to go to the movies anymore. It’s as simple as that. The theater has lost its audience now that streaming is mainstream. Why pay for a $8 coke and $10 popcorn when I have my whole home kitchen available?
Also, even streaming is seeing its audience’s time grabbed away by other things. In my house, making time away from video games, YouTube, and online socializing to watch a 2 hour movie isn’t always easy. Folks have to put away their hobbies and normal entertainment for a passive experience. It’s not always an easy sell.
So no, I don’t think something is wrong with the movies that are coming out. I don’t think an increase in quality will help. I think they should aim for streaming more and away from theaters.
Come on, are you claiming the movie industry has quality while mentioning Marvel movies, Super Mario, Avatar and D&D?
Not to piss on yours or anyone else's taste, but still.
After all, we have had some really good ones
Super Mario... Dungeons and Dragons
Listen, I enjoyed both of these movies, but these are also the exact movies that OP is complaining about. These were made by the book. Almost 0 originality or innovation in them. Can't speak for the otherovies on your list as I haven't seen them.