Film Film Elitism

[Pinkie-Dawn]

I don't know how old this debate is, because there appears to be a divide between movie goers since the 21st century. You have one side of movie fans who believe films with philosophical meanings and question humanity's morals are far superior. These include movies with cynical environments like 1984 and Clockwork Orange, psychological horror movies, and a plethora of movies directed by Christopher Nolan (e.g. the Dark Knight trilogy). Then you have another side of movie fans who find them "overrated" and believe that movies that involve escapism and "turning your brain off to enjoy it" are far better. These include summer blockbusters and pretty much any movie from the action genre, horror genre, and comedy genre. Because of these two dividing sides, it's hard to pinpoint whether or not Hollywood is going downhill or if there is a demand for more original, as in not based on any pre-existing source material, movies. Whose side are you on, PC? Do you prefer "serious" films or "fun" films? If neither, do you think all of this elitism is what's causing the decrease in movie quality?

 

[Bay]

Having read 1984 twice, I never really liked the movie version of it to be honest while Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy I enjoy much more. Concerning films meant more for enjoyment, I haven't been into horror and comedy movies as before while I still enjoy some action films (the MCU movies for instance).

I don't think I'm in either side, I just enjoy what I like. I actually haven't paid too much attention to the debate of which type of movies are better, so I wouldn't know.

 

[acatfrommars]

Personally, I don't think that it's possible to divide up all of the movies ever made into two categories. A movie can be hilarious and seem idiotic at first, then take a serious turn later on. However, if we were to divide them into 2 categories I would have to say that my favorite type of movies are the ones where you can "turn your brain off" and enjoy them. The movies that are just plain stupid, and hilarious like Ashton Kutcher's Dude Where's My Car and the Harold and Kumar movies are some of my favorite of all time.

Though, I really do like both sides of the coins. Some of my favorite movies I've ever seen were masterpieces such as The Prestige, Inception, The Dark Knight, Momento and Schindler's List. Those are some of the best movies that I've ever seen and I would totally watch them again as well. However, some of my favorites such as Anchroman, Hot Rod, and 21 & Over are films that I love as well. Both sides of the coin produce great movies; though the latter aren't always as good quality-wise as others they are still fun to watch. Christopher Nolan is known to be a better director than Michael Bay imo, but some people still prefer to watch a Michael Bay film over his.

I've never seen 1984, but Clockwork Orange isn't even that good of a movie imo. I know people that are so stuck up about the movies they watch that they won't watch any of the "stupid" movies. Like I don't get it, if you try to be so into the film industry, then you should watch all sorts of movies. It's hypocritical imo, but whatever. I believe that Hollywood's success rates are determined by the amounts of sales the movies make. If the movies make a large profit then Hollywood is doing well! think that Hollywood movies will tend to go where the money takes them, and right now a huge money maker is Superheroes and movies based off of books (but that's been going on for a long time now).

 

[maccrash]

as much as I may try to deny it, I'm probably hugely elitist when it comes to film taste, so much so that I believe Christopher Nolan's films to be closer to the "stupid" end of the spectrum than the "philosophical" or what have you, but that's not a sleight against his films or anything -- they're kinda good sometimes. (this was the most lacklustre compliment I've ever given.) that being said, I can get behind either kind of film if you really want to like at it in this Bipartisan manner, but I do find myself gravitating towards the more serious side even though it's hugely relaxing for me to watch nearly any film that isn't a tense thriller or some such. PLUS, a lot of the more cinephile **** I end up watching isn't nearly as Drop-Dead Serious. as most people may think. you'd be hard-pressed to find a film that's entirely straight-faced for its whole duration.

 

[Pinkie-Dawn]

I believe that Hollywood's success rates are determined by the amounts of sales the movies make. If the movies make a large profit then Hollywood is doing well! think that Hollywood movies will tend to go where the money takes them, and right now a huge money maker is Superheroes and movies based off of books (but that's been going on for a long time now).

It's a lot complicated than that, because Hollywood has this mentality that box office results will determine if the audience want more philosophical movies or more "fun" movies. For example, if a 2D animated film were to flop at the box office despite critical acclaim, then Hollywood would assume that the audience don't want to see a 2D animated film, so their next one will be CG-animated.

 

[maccrash]

It's a lot complicated than that, because Hollywood has this mentality that box office results will determine if the audience want more philosophical movies or more "fun" movies. For example, if a 2D animated film were to flop at the box office despite critical acclaim, then Hollywood would assume that the audience don't want to see a 2D animated film, so their next one will be CG-animated.

first of all, that's almost exactly what he said. (; and second of all I don't think it's as cut-and-dry as that. Hollywood in and of itself is not some over-bearing omnipresent Thing that rules over every film studio -- you have film studios that work in their own respective niches, like 2D animated films, for example. chances are they won't deviate too far from what they already do. rarely would a film studio just switch their styles completely in order to get more money. guess it's possible, but unlikely.

 

[Pinkie-Dawn]

first of all, that's almost exactly what he said. (; and second of all I don't think it's as cut-and-dry as that. Hollywood in and of itself is not some over-bearing omnipresent Thing that rules over every film studio -- you have film studios that work in their own respective niches, like 2D animated films, for example. chances are they won't deviate too far from what they already do. rarely would a film studio just switch their styles completely in order to get more money. guess it's possible, but unlikely.

I could've sworn that it didn't sound exactly as how I saw it. Also, yes, they do switch styles completely, just look at Disney when they switched to CGI after their recent 2D films, which had been their niche, flopped at the box office, but it wasn't entirely their own fault considering that they were going up against bigger flicks.

 

[maccrash]

I could've sworn that it didn't sound exactly as how I saw it. Also, yes, they do switch styles completely, just look at Disney when they switched to CGI after their recent 2D films, which had been their niche, flopped at the box office, but it wasn't entirely their own fault considering that they were going up against bigger flicks.

yeah, I'll concede that, actually, just because I'm not really knowledgeable on Disney in particular for whatever reason. but yeah. I still think it's kinda rare, plus it wasn't necessarily a Huge Shift for them.

 

[The T.K]

I personally like films which make me think, or are 'intelligent' in some way, such as K-Pax or A Beautiful Mind, but I also enjoy 'mindless' movies as well(Rush Hour and Who Am I are my guilty pleasures XD).

 

[Pinkie-Dawn]

I think this article I found here provides more detail regarding film elitism. The "self-parody" movies the article mentions could easily fit into the "mindless" movies category.