Capitalist art and Hollywood Superheros (video games, 2011, superheroes, Heroes)

[Winterfall8324]

Great article I just read: https://newmatilda.com/2019/05/07/ca...d-superheroes/

The gist of it is that since big budget movies are all managed by big corporations looking to turn a profit, all modern literature/movies/etc. have been made to appeal to the largest audiences and not be intrinsically good.

I see the same thing with Game of Thrones, I have been reading the book series since 2011 and only started watching the show in 2017 but the devolution is obvious.

Where one had morally complicated characters who did not always do what readers wanted the show has now come to adding in scenes for characters who are more popular on social media (source, George R.R Martin).

Back to Disney, the superhero trend doesn't exist because someone wrote a story they loved to share, but because it was means tested to appeal to the broadest segment of society and be self-advertised through memes, gifs, and other 'epic' moments.

That's not to say it is all bad, but it is getting worse.

Even triple A video games that use to be awesome are all migrating over to a Game As A Service Model (think destiny, Anthem, the Division, etc.) because they offer a steady stream of revenue that single time buys don't.

That's not to say corporations are evil, but this evolution was obvious, since if you want high budget entertainment, you need returns and corporate control.

It's sad, that's all.

[harry chickpea]

The article is spin, probably from someone who just woke to the realities of he world.

Movies are created to make money. Full stop. The costs of creation are too great for ill-considered or personal agenda movies to get created, much less distributed. It has been that way since the industry started. It is not news.

Movies have always been propaganda tools, for better or worse. Governments recognize that, industry execs recognize it, and about everyone in the industry knows it.

The author seems to think that people are force fed the movies. He obviously has never read Carl Jung, and has no concept of archetypes and the requirement of art to fit the archetypes of the audience to gain popularity. When films are tweaked with test audiences, they are modified to give the public more of what it wants - to make more money.

There was a reason the original Star Wars was so popular. here was a reason Ishtar flopped. The is a reason that Bollywood movies only play to a select audience stateside.

The author "studied history and politics at the University of NSW, completing a research thesis, titled, Broken Resistance: Reviving a Counter-Establishment. He now works as a music teacher in Melbourne." His bias and ultimate success at mainstream reform are pretty well summed up in that bio snippet.

[Winterfall8324]

Originally Posted by harry chickpea

The article is spin, probably from someone who just woke to the realities of he world.

Movies are created to make money. Full stop. The costs of creation are too great for ill-considered or personal agenda movies to get created, much less distributed. It has been that way since the industry started. It is not news.

Movies have always been propaganda tools, for better or worse. Governments recognize that, industry execs recognize it, and about everyone in the industry knows it.

The author seems to think that people are force fed the movies. He obviously has never read Carl Jung, and has no concept of archetypes and the requirement of art to fit the archetypes of the audience to gain popularity. When films are tweaked with test audiences, they are modified to give the public more of what it wants - to make more money.

There was a reason the original Star Wars was so popular. here was a reason Ishtar flopped. The is a reason that Bollywood movies only play to a select audience stateside.

The author "studied history and politics at the University of NSW, completing a research thesis, titled, Broken Resistance: Reviving a Counter-Establishment. He now works as a music teacher in Melbourne." His bias and ultimate success at mainstream reform are pretty well summed up in that bio snippet.

I can't speak for the author, but personally I believe it is more than just money, it is about who controls the capital.

You can make good money with a good book or film, but that is not want shareholders want anymore, they want a revenue stream. That means setting up sequels, spin-offs, merchandise, etc.

Not all shows/films are great for that. Game of Thrones is an example, the books are incredibly long winded with deep themes and strain emotions.
The show on the other hand plays up sex, politics, and war/bloodshed, all relatively minor components to the book series.

The fact isn't that people need to like something for it to be produced, that is obvious. The fact is what type of product needs to be produced because it needs to be liked in the right way. Before streaming services, etc. this was harder.

Now everything has become more corporate oriented than ever before. Movies, books, etc. were all sold for profit, but now they are made for profit.

[Quietude]

Originally Posted by harry chickpea

The article is spin, probably from someone who just woke to the realities of he world.

The poster child for this type is long, angry books about how Disney behaves just like a corporation.

[Winterfall8324]

Originally Posted by Quietude

The poster child for this type is long, angry books about how Disney behaves just like a corporation.

No, it's deeper than that. Read my post above.

[2x3x29x41]

Originally Posted by Winterfall8324

Great article I just read: https://newmatilda.com/2019/05/07/ca...d-superheroes/

The gist of it is that since big budget movies are all managed by big corporations looking to turn a profit, all modern literature/movies/etc. have been made to appeal to the largest audiences and not be intrinsically good.

I see the same thing with Game of Thrones, I have been reading the book series since 2011 and only started watching the show in 2017 but the devolution is obvious.

Where one had morally complicated characters who did not always do what readers wanted the show has now come to adding in scenes for characters who are more popular on social media (source, George R.R Martin).

Back to Disney, the superhero trend doesn't exist because someone wrote a story they loved to share, but because it was means tested to appeal to the broadest segment of society and be self-advertised through memes, gifs, and other 'epic' moments.

That's not to say it is all bad, but it is getting worse.

Even triple A video games that use to be awesome are all migrating over to a Game As A Service Model (think destiny, Anthem, the Division, etc.) because they offer a steady stream of revenue that single time buys don't.

That's not to say corporations are evil, but this evolution was obvious, since if you want high budget entertainment, you need returns and corporate control.

It's sad, that's all.

Yes.

The last three Avengers films each cost $300,000,000+ to make.

Oddly, investors expect to make their money back and more. Weird, huh?

Just out of curiosity, how much of your money do you invest in modest art-house films that might flop and never return even a fraction of what you kicked in?

[alsopp123]

The article is very interesting I send it to my friends.

[Winterfall8324]

Originally Posted by 2x3x29x41

Yes.

The last three Avengers films each cost $300,000,000+ to make.

Oddly, investors expect to make their money back and more. Weird, huh?

Just out of curiosity, how much of your money do you invest in modest art-house films that might flop and never return even a fraction of what you kicked in?

None...

I was only saying that literature, movies, etc. were once sold for profit but made out of the creators own ideas.

Now as movies become more industrialized, so do the scripts. That is all I was saying.

If your asking for my personal preference, I'd rather have no triple A video games, high budget movies, or long-winded TV series and instead allow creativity and desire drive story telling.

[kovert]

Since the Red Scare from 1919 to the McCarthy era the media & academia have been steadily taken over by the propaganda wing of the globalists in order to create One World Plantation Utopia.

At least that's what the cheerleaders for fascist-corporatists; paleo & neo-nazis; theocrats & fanatics; Loyalists/Royalists & their slaver sidekicks from the man-children keep pushing.

[JonathanLB]

Originally Posted by Winterfall8324

None...

I was only saying that literature, movies, etc. were once sold for profit but made out of the creators own ideas.

Now as movies become more industrialized, so do the scripts. That is all I was saying.

If your asking for my personal preference, I'd rather have no triple A video games, high budget movies, or long-winded TV series and instead allow creativity and desire drive story telling.

Why?! I’d much rather watch Avengers than most of the garbage that gets awards attention every year, and I majored in philosophy and have studied film history from the 1890s through present. I’m also in the film industry and have written and directed a feature. I still don’t want to see most of what goes to art house theaters. Sure there are the occasional movies like Whiplash and Birdman that I love, but for every one of them there are 10 movies that absolutely suck and are complete wastes of time like Boyhood, Call Me By Your Name, Manchester by the Sea, and other things with zero appeal to me or most audiences. If I go watch a Marvel film, so far I am 100% guaranteed across 22 movies to really enjoy it. If I go watch an awards movie, I’d say I’m 90% likely to hate it and 20% likely to think it’s one of the worst movies of all time.

I’ll take my AAA video games and Hollywood blockbusters any day!