▲ 1745 ▼ Hollywood Shuts Down After 160,000 Actors Walk Off the Set (youtu.be) submitted 3 years ago by Lenins2ndCat@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world 428 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] funkless@lemmy.world 11 points 3 years ago (3 children) Banshees of Inisherin? The Whale? Everything Everywhere All At Once? Succession? The Bear? There's loads of great acting out there. Maybe the issue is you're buying tickets to Chris Pratt instead of other things? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] dudebro@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pineapplefriedrice@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago (1 child) The big name movies now are so cringeworthy and require zero thought on the part of the viewer. I'd be almost embarrassed to go watch them. The worst part is that I used to watch them because there was just nothing else to see, until one day I was so bored that I walked out of the theatre. To my surprise, I was even approached and given a refund by the manager without asking... maybe they watched it too and understood the pain. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] vimdiesel@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago* (1 child) You are equating "big name" with quality. That has almost never been true since movie blockbusters became a thing. Go ask any movie history buff/expert. You are very wrong if you think blockbusters were some kind of artsy tear jerkering, mind bending, raved over by critics products. They've almost always been formulaic. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] TheActualDevil@sffa.community 3 points 3 years ago But the first blockbuster movie is an arthouse masterpiece that really makes you look deep within yourself and wonder how big a shark could actually be. Jaws. It was Jaws. permalink fedilink source parent [–] pineapplefriedrice@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) But are those the things that get marketing? I'm with you on loving that content, but none of the main theatres in my area (a city of 7 million) even show them. A couple will put them into the standard screen theatres at oddball times to fulfill their contracts, but the good content is in the local dollar theatres where, of course, the movie gets less traffic. I think what they're saying is that the movies that you're "supposed" to watch are things like those god awful Harry Potter prequels (literally any fanfic amateur could have written them better), the ten thousandth Marvel movie (seriously, just stop), or those Adam-Sandler style low effort white trash movies that run solely on the recognition of the probably male and supposedly "so talented" lead actor. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] tormeh@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 3 years ago When most people pick movies to watch in a theatre it's typically based on which movie no one will object to. So it needs a bit of action, a bit of romance, a bit of comedy... It also needs to have brand/actor recognition. So you get Marvel. There's nothing wrong with this, but it's a different market from the one you're in. permalink fedilink source parent [–] pineapplefriedrice@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago But are those the things that get marketing? I'm with you on loving that content, but none of the main theatres in my area (a city of 7 million) even show them. A couple will put them into the standard screen theatres at oddball times to fulfill their contracts, but the good content is in the local dollar theatres where, of course, the movie gets less traffic. I think what they're saying is that the movies that you're "supposed" to watch are things like those god awful Harry Potter prequels (literally any fanfic amateur could have written them better), the ten thousandth Marvel movie (seriously, just stop), or those Adam-Sandler style low effort white trash movies that run solely on the recognition of the probably male and supposedly "so talented" lead actor. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] dudebro@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] pineapplefriedrice@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago (1 child) The big name movies now are so cringeworthy and require zero thought on the part of the viewer. I'd be almost embarrassed to go watch them. The worst part is that I used to watch them because there was just nothing else to see, until one day I was so bored that I walked out of the theatre. To my surprise, I was even approached and given a refund by the manager without asking... maybe they watched it too and understood the pain. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] vimdiesel@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago* (1 child) You are equating "big name" with quality. That has almost never been true since movie blockbusters became a thing. Go ask any movie history buff/expert. You are very wrong if you think blockbusters were some kind of artsy tear jerkering, mind bending, raved over by critics products. They've almost always been formulaic. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] TheActualDevil@sffa.community 3 points 3 years ago But the first blockbuster movie is an arthouse masterpiece that really makes you look deep within yourself and wonder how big a shark could actually be. Jaws. It was Jaws. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pineapplefriedrice@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago (1 child) The big name movies now are so cringeworthy and require zero thought on the part of the viewer. I'd be almost embarrassed to go watch them. The worst part is that I used to watch them because there was just nothing else to see, until one day I was so bored that I walked out of the theatre. To my surprise, I was even approached and given a refund by the manager without asking... maybe they watched it too and understood the pain. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] vimdiesel@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago* (1 child) You are equating "big name" with quality. That has almost never been true since movie blockbusters became a thing. Go ask any movie history buff/expert. You are very wrong if you think blockbusters were some kind of artsy tear jerkering, mind bending, raved over by critics products. They've almost always been formulaic. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] TheActualDevil@sffa.community 3 points 3 years ago But the first blockbuster movie is an arthouse masterpiece that really makes you look deep within yourself and wonder how big a shark could actually be. Jaws. It was Jaws. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] vimdiesel@lemmy.world 4 points 3 years ago* (1 child) You are equating "big name" with quality. That has almost never been true since movie blockbusters became a thing. Go ask any movie history buff/expert. You are very wrong if you think blockbusters were some kind of artsy tear jerkering, mind bending, raved over by critics products. They've almost always been formulaic. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] TheActualDevil@sffa.community 3 points 3 years ago But the first blockbuster movie is an arthouse masterpiece that really makes you look deep within yourself and wonder how big a shark could actually be. Jaws. It was Jaws. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] TheActualDevil@sffa.community 3 points 3 years ago But the first blockbuster movie is an arthouse masterpiece that really makes you look deep within yourself and wonder how big a shark could actually be. Jaws. It was Jaws. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pineapplefriedrice@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) But are those the things that get marketing? I'm with you on loving that content, but none of the main theatres in my area (a city of 7 million) even show them. A couple will put them into the standard screen theatres at oddball times to fulfill their contracts, but the good content is in the local dollar theatres where, of course, the movie gets less traffic. I think what they're saying is that the movies that you're "supposed" to watch are things like those god awful Harry Potter prequels (literally any fanfic amateur could have written them better), the ten thousandth Marvel movie (seriously, just stop), or those Adam-Sandler style low effort white trash movies that run solely on the recognition of the probably male and supposedly "so talented" lead actor. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] tormeh@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 3 years ago When most people pick movies to watch in a theatre it's typically based on which movie no one will object to. So it needs a bit of action, a bit of romance, a bit of comedy... It also needs to have brand/actor recognition. So you get Marvel. There's nothing wrong with this, but it's a different market from the one you're in. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] tormeh@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 3 years ago When most people pick movies to watch in a theatre it's typically based on which movie no one will object to. So it needs a bit of action, a bit of romance, a bit of comedy... It also needs to have brand/actor recognition. So you get Marvel. There's nothing wrong with this, but it's a different market from the one you're in. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] pineapplefriedrice@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago But are those the things that get marketing? I'm with you on loving that content, but none of the main theatres in my area (a city of 7 million) even show them. A couple will put them into the standard screen theatres at oddball times to fulfill their contracts, but the good content is in the local dollar theatres where, of course, the movie gets less traffic. I think what they're saying is that the movies that you're "supposed" to watch are things like those god awful Harry Potter prequels (literally any fanfic amateur could have written them better), the ten thousandth Marvel movie (seriously, just stop), or those Adam-Sandler style low effort white trash movies that run solely on the recognition of the probably male and supposedly "so talented" lead actor. permalink fedilink source parent