←back to thread

The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

(www.newyorker.com)
231 points frogulis | 8 comments | 15 Jul 25 03:52 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
somenameforme ◴[15 Jul 25 04:23 UTC] No.44567805[source]▶
Fun fact: movie sales, in terms of tickets sold, peaked in 2002. [1] All the 'box office records' since then are the result of charging way more to a continually plummeting audience size.

And this is highly relevant for things like this. People often argue that if movies were so bad then people would stop watching them, unaware that people actually have stopped watching them!

Even for individual movies. For all the men-in-spandex movies, the best selling movie (by tickets sold) in modern times is Titanic, 27 years ago.

[1] - https://www.the-numbers.com/market/

replies(25): >>44567864 #>>44567968 #>>44568136 #>>44568154 #>>44570905 #>>44570997 #>>44571105 #>>44571251 #>>44571355 #>>44571403 #>>44571486 #>>44571608 #>>44571759 #>>44571905 #>>44572267 #>>44572485 #>>44572904 #>>44573167 #>>44573177 #>>44573253 #>>44573502 #>>44573585 #>>44574449 #>>44576708 #>>44580563 #
zamadatix ◴[15 Jul 25 14:38 UTC] No.44571608[source]▶
In 2002, watching a movie at home for most people meant flinging a low quality VHS or DVD onto a ~27" tube TV (with a resolution so worthless it might as well be labeled "new years") using a 4:3 aspect ratio pan & scan of the actual movie. Getting anything recent meant going out to the Blockbuster anyways. In 2022, watching a movie meant streaming something on your 50+" 16:9 4k smart TV by pressing a button from your couch.

Box office ticket sales say people go to the theatre less often, not that people watch movies less often. Unless you specifically want "the movie theater experience" or you absolutely have to see a certain movie at launch you're not going to the theatre to watch a movie. The number of movie views per person may well be down (or up), but box office ticket sale counts don't really answer that question.

replies(11): >>44572352 #>>44572470 #>>44572546 #>>44572564 #>>44572738 #>>44572859 #>>44573434 #>>44573975 #>>44574881 #>>44575039 #>>44575905 #
nozzlegear ◴[15 Jul 25 15:54 UTC] No.44572470[source]▶
I was going to make this point myself. I think my wife and I have seen maybe three or four movies in a theater since COVID. Our theater didn't even close during COVID (they started marathoning older movies like Harry Potter), but once the big companies started releasing new movies directly on streaming services, we realized how much better seeing a new movie in the comfort of our own home can be.

So now we just wait for a movie we want to see to become available on Apple TV, and then we rent it.

replies(3): >>44573426 #>>44575086 #>>44576099 #
1. RandomThoughts3 ◴[15 Jul 25 17:08 UTC] No.44573426[source]▶
> once the big companies started releasing new movies directly on streaming services, we realized how much better seeing a new movie in the comfort of our own home can be

As someone who is blessed to live in a city where multiple cinemas screen old movies and therefore go to the cinema very often, I must say I can’t disagree more. The experience of watching a movie in a cinema is to me incomparable to watching on a tv.

It’s not only the bigger screen and better sound system. The act of sitting yourself in the cinema with other people to actively engage with a movie transforms the experience.

Sadly, I have to say I agree with the article however in that 95% of the movies produced in the USA during the past two decades could as well not exist. Thankfully, the rest of the world still exist.

replies(5): >>44574003 #>>44574603 #>>44574610 #>>44575076 #>>44575136 #
2. briliantbrandon ◴[15 Jul 25 17:57 UTC] No.44574003[source]▶
> The act of sitting yourself in the cinema with other people to actively engage with a movie transforms the experience.

I very much agree with this sentiment, unfortunately post-COVID that transformation has often been a negative one in my personal experience. This is entirely anecdotal, but I feel like there is an increase in the frequency with which I have had a public movie experience ruined by people on cell phones, talking to each other, or even yelling in response to the events on screen.

I feel like when a movie comes out now that I want to see, I am in a constant tension between dealing with a potentially rowdy or obnoxious public, or a less ideal viewing experience at home.

replies(1): >>44575151 #
3. ghaff ◴[15 Jul 25 18:55 UTC] No.44574603[source]▶
Tastes vary. I was on the executive committee of my college film group yers ago and going to weekend films was a lot of fun.

These days? Maybe an Imax film is a once a year experience.

I keep in touch with a lot of people I was on the film committee with and I'd say the opinion is pretty much split between people who still go to the theater a lot and those who basically never do like myself.

replies(1): >>44575102 #
4. nozzlegear ◴[15 Jul 25 18:56 UTC] No.44574610[source]▶
> It’s not only the bigger screen and better sound system. The act of sitting yourself in the cinema with other people to actively engage with a movie transforms the experience.

I think I understand that, it's just not for me. I've never felt that other people do anything but subtract from my experience in watching a movie. And I'm not saying that to be cynical or because I dislike social experiences – I'm an outgoing person and enjoy being around other people; I just don't want to watch a movie with them.

Plus I'm lost without subtitles, even if the dialog is crystal clear!

5. busterarm ◴[15 Jul 25 19:45 UTC] No.44575076[source]▶
I will agree with you up to a point. Some cinema-going experiences are without parallel.

I saw a screener of The Matrix two months ahead of release at a theater in Harlem. It was the best movie-going experience of my life and nothing has come close to capturing that.

The problem is that was only possible one time. There are so few movies made anymore that really capture that kind of mass-audience wow factor that make going to the cinema worth it.

The great films that I've seen since aren't diminished by me seeing them at home. Sometimes it's a question of format where there are only a few screens in the country where you can really see a film unmolested but you have to be lucky enough to live there and those films still only come around once a decade.

6. dylan604 ◴[15 Jul 25 19:47 UTC] No.44575102[source]▶
I much prefer going to the museum with an IMAX to see that content vs the next superhero tights wearing flick in IMAX
7. dylan604 ◴[15 Jul 25 19:50 UTC] No.44575136[source]▶
> The act of sitting yourself in the cinema with other people to actively engage with a movie transforms the experience.

To share an anecdote to counter this, a group of ~10 people gathered at a friends house to watch a movie none of us had seen. At the end of the movie, we all got up in a similar state and we then spent quite a bit of time talking about that shared experience. It was probably one of the coolest group movie watching experiences to date.

8. dylan604 ◴[15 Jul 25 19:52 UTC] No.44575151[source]▶
> the frequency with which I have had a public movie experience ruined by people on cell phones, talking to each other, or even yelling in response to the events on screen.

I will not go to a theater that does not have a well established policy of not tolerating this. For me, that's Alamo Drafthouse.