Women aren’t bothered by showing their vaginas onscreen as part of full frontal. I mean, there’s nothing to see really.
What do you feel is the biggest problem with modern entertainment
X
Favorite Movies
I would say that some men are very sensitive about the size or lack thereof of their member & therefore are reluctant to do full frontal onscreen. Whereas there’s tons of naked breasts small or big.
I suspect that's also part of it. Every now and then, there are actors the director doesn't want to put on screen because they are "confusingly large," and "might distract the (male?) audience. (as in, makes them insecure)"
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
There's not? I thought for sure there was something there
__________________
I’m here only on Mondays, Wednesdays & Fridays. That’s why I’m here now.
I’m here only on Mondays, Wednesdays & Fridays. That’s why I’m here now.
Films are seen as 'content', something to fill the shelves on a subscription service. Filmmaking is a business, it's always been motivated by money though. Also when people throw around the term 'woke' to basically mean anything that doesn't have an all-white cast.
Part of the reason why there's more race-blind casting is that there are far more white roles than there are for other ethnicities. If we're speaking strictly historically, you basically wouldn't have black characters in costume dramas in anything other than a servant role. So regardless of talent, they don't get the same amount of opportunities.
Personally I only care about whether they're a good actor or not. Let's not pretend that costume dramas are intended to be documentaries- people like the romance and fantasy of what it was like in the nineteenth century.
And as mentioned before, Hollywood has been casting race-blind before- it's just that there's more high-profile white actors.
Also, we can talk about how Schindler's List wouldn't have been made today but that isn't true. Green Book has been accused of being patronising and having a white saviour narrative yet that won the Oscar. If filmmakers think it will make money, they will make it
Part of the reason why there's more race-blind casting is that there are far more white roles than there are for other ethnicities. If we're speaking strictly historically, you basically wouldn't have black characters in costume dramas in anything other than a servant role. So regardless of talent, they don't get the same amount of opportunities.
Personally I only care about whether they're a good actor or not. Let's not pretend that costume dramas are intended to be documentaries- people like the romance and fantasy of what it was like in the nineteenth century.
And as mentioned before, Hollywood has been casting race-blind before- it's just that there's more high-profile white actors.
Also, we can talk about how Schindler's List wouldn't have been made today but that isn't true. Green Book has been accused of being patronising and having a white saviour narrative yet that won the Oscar. If filmmakers think it will make money, they will make it
X
User Lists
There's too much "fabricated" content, which is not entirely a *bad thing*, if there was a bit more balance on the other side of the scale, but that's the thing. Films have gone back to the studio system machinery where "content" is just churned out modeled after a formula/template, music is being engineered and manipulated in studios... even kids shows, which I put to my sons often, seem to be devoid of that human spark of a devoted creator.
__________________
Check out my podcast: The Movie Loot!
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Our expectations are too high. Most people are half dumb, half disinterested and half educated. Because that adds up to three halves, some of THAT gets cut out of our brains so they don't spill out on the floor. Prior to the movie/TV world, when books were king of content, most of them were awful too. Most of the stories that ever will be written have been done before and there's only a few dozen unique plot lines in literature. Ergo, movies and other entertainment are as good as we are, and probably as good as we will ever be.
X
User Lists
I think a general blurring between aspirations (our "entertainment" is abutting our "art") has a lot to do with it. The category of "movies" is too broad to be talked about in aggregate in most contexts. We're often comparing things made with deep emotional aspirations to things literally made to keep 7-year-olds from fussing.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Our expectations are too high. Most people are half dumb, half disinterested and half educated. Because that adds up to three halves, some of THAT gets cut out of our brains so they don't spill out on the floor. Prior to the movie/TV world, when books were king of content, most of them were awful too. Most of the stories that ever will be written have been done before and there's only a few dozen unique plot lines in literature. Ergo, movies and other entertainment are as good as we are, and probably as good as we will ever be.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law
"ninety-percent of everything is crud".
There's no perfect definition or clear line, but I think we usually know it when we see it. There's a lot of network procedurals that are pleasant enough while we watch them but basically disappear from memory right afterwards.
I'm pretty sure most people watch a mix, but that most is disposable because most people are watching things to kill time. Which is fine. It's just far more common in the general population than it'll be on a niche interest site like this, which self-selects for people more interested in films as art.
I think mere entertainment and genuine art both do this, it's just that the latter stays with us afterwards and/or provokes further thought (or a more profound experience during, though I'm guessing not everyone would find that part consistent with forgetting ourselves).
I'm pretty sure most people watch a mix, but that most is disposable because most people are watching things to kill time. Which is fine. It's just far more common in the general population than it'll be on a niche interest site like this, which self-selects for people more interested in films as art.
I think mere entertainment and genuine art both do this, it's just that the latter stays with us afterwards and/or provokes further thought (or a more profound experience during, though I'm guessing not everyone would find that part consistent with forgetting ourselves).
Part of the reason why there's more race-blind casting is that there are far more white roles than there are for other ethnicities. If we're speaking strictly historically, you basically wouldn't have black characters in costume dramas in anything other than a servant role. So regardless of talent, they don't get the same amount of opportunities.
Personally I only care about whether they're a good actor or not. Let's not pretend that costume dramas are intended to be documentaries- people like the romance and fantasy of what it was like in the nineteenth century.
There should be more all-Black entertainment etc., sure, but I find (again, just my view) that a Black Anne Boleyn etc. is too much to ask in terms of suspension of disbelief. If you want to go there, I feel like you might as well go the alternative history route, construct a whole new alternative historical reality (Fatherland-style) where people in Henry VIII’s/whosever court are Black, why the hell not, as long as it’s actually commented on in some diegetic way that doesn’t break the fourth wall/feels natural and is addressed within the world building, why not.
I feel like there’s nothing inherently racist in noticing that Anne Boleyn doesn’t look like Henry in this film and why is that, how do we explain that/why isn’t that explained? (Case in point to an extent: I recently watched Three Thousand Years of Longing, which I really didn’t like, but it felt natural that Queen Sheba was Black, given the Middle Eastern biblical context/Moors etc (there is, for once, some historical/scriptural/apocryphal evidence for that one). But Anne Boleyn? My disbelief cannot be suspended that far; it’ll drop down).
I don’t feel like this can be quite pulled off in a straight-up historical adaptation/film.
Also, we can talk about how Schindler's List wouldn't have been made today but that isn't true. Green Book has been accused of being patronising and having a white saviour narrative yet that won the Oscar. If filmmakers think it will make money, they will make it
Shifting the focus away from Jews on anything Holocaust-related is obscene (the issue with all this inclusion business is, you are decentring the primarily affected demographic in favour of the “diverse” 0.5 per cent). Unfortunately, of course, sidelining the Jewish people in Holocaust stories is not new and far predates the “diversity boom”.
It’s also hard to reliably predict what will make money, try as people might. And risk-taking is very obviously not something that’s been on the rise in the film industry/the arts overall, hence we have all the remakes/reboots/re-everything. I would argue Schindler’s List made money because of Spielberg’s golden touch, not because there was something inherently commercial about the concept (though that’s a whole other matter, and I’m very much on the Terry Gilliam side of the debate here in terms of the “happy ending” which obviously boosted the film’s commercial potential).
Last edited by AgrippinaX; 09-14-22 at 03:09 AM.
X
Favorite Movies
not just movies but entertainment in general
This also I think has the result of making the group of artists and people that work to create these things quiet small. Maybe thats why there seems to be a lack of originality and why things in film and tv sometimes feel the same. Somebody in this thread said something about theres only so many stories to be told but I completely disagree I think there are so many amazing stories (including music) even just in my imagination that could be told and made into great films and tv shows let alone in the minds of all the people on this planet.
I think if it was somehow possible where we were in a situation where a bigger portion of artists could expect to get paid more (and less fame and money for the biggest stars). Youd have fewer movies starring the same 50 actors that get recycled for every mainstream movie . I dont know if other people hate this but one of the biggest things I hate about movies and tv shows is how often youll see the same frickin actor/actress everywhere. In general I think movie and tv would be much better (at least for me anyway) if movies and tv shows would cast from a wider pool- like casting unknowns, etc.
The failure to recognise when to stop a franchise.
TV series, movie franchises - anything that makes money, just wants to do it again. To make more money. That is just capitalism I guess. But the crossover has resulted in some of the most stale, boring output. Even one the greatest TV series of all time went on a season too long (The Sopranos). Sometimes it works - Better Call Saul wasn't really needed but it has turned out great.
TV series, movie franchises - anything that makes money, just wants to do it again. To make more money. That is just capitalism I guess. But the crossover has resulted in some of the most stale, boring output. Even one the greatest TV series of all time went on a season too long (The Sopranos). Sometimes it works - Better Call Saul wasn't really needed but it has turned out great.
I was thinking of this very thing only in relation to pop music. I have always enjoyed pop music from Doris Day to Katy Perry. But I couldn’t tell you who the pop stars of today are. I never hear pop music. Almost nothing new is on the radio. In my car, the only place I listen to music, I never hear anything new. It is just Classical, Jazz, R & B, Classic Rock and Oldies. Let’s face it most of that is the Oldies. I feel like I have been listening to the same thing for the last ten years. Is pop music dead? Is new music dead? Is it just that I am too old to find it cause it has migrated to the Internet? Is it behind some pay wall. It used to be a lot easier keeping up with the new back in the olden days. I may be old but I enjoy new things.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
I was thinking of this very thing only in relation to pop music. I have always enjoyed pop music from Doris Day to Katy Perry. But I couldn’t tell you who the pop stars of today are. I never hear pop music. Almost nothing new is on the radio. In my car, the only place I listen to music, I never hear anything new. It is just Classical, Jazz, R & B, Classic Rock and Oldies. Let’s face it most of that is the Oldies.
X
Favorite Movies
But even communist countries for example still put out communist propaganda entertainment, so I don't think that capitalism is the issue, if other non-capitalist cultures are doing it as well with their entertainment?
Ha, come on, now! That sounds like heaven, what radio is it you listen to!? I take cabs to work daily and it takes me circa 1 hour, I’m usually in headphones with my Tom Waits/Chris Isaak/Rammstein/whatever, but if I do happen to take them off, it’s all Harry Styles or Olivia Rodrigo or Ed Sheeran or Dua Lipa, for my sins. Seems one can’t escape!
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Love Tom Waits and Chris Isaak. I am in the US so it will probably do you no good knowing what I listen to. But I remember occasionally you would hear something new and good. Now it's just lame stuff. I have taken to listening to an oldies station. Sometimes you hear something from the fifties or the early sixties. Its not always what I like but it is definitely different. I just can't believe, I have to reach that far back for anything that seems new cause I haven't heard it in fifty years.
Last edited by AgrippinaX; 09-13-22 at 06:43 PM.
X