>I did not think that the films were worse then before, is just that I'd seen so many films that no new films felt original.
I think it's both. One wearies of a film's efforts to tell a story (compared to a book and an active imagination), given certain limitations in the medium, but the filmmaking process is getting much worse as time passes -- there's the temptation to blow stuff up for two hours (the Michael Bay approach) instead of tell a story. Also flimmakers know high-quality films can't find an audience -- old-style films that respect the intelligence of the viewers end up in art houses and late-night TV.
To a first approximation, modern filmmaking is a bunch of business-school graduates getting together and trying to create a "new" film that's as much as possible like the last film that attracted a large audience. They do all they can to include elements that worked before, they're extremely risk-averse, and their cynicism about their audience is boundless (and largely justified).
Meanwhile, films like "Juno" and other first-rate films get a modest audience, but at high risk -- most courageous films like "Juno" fail, so the risks are high in producing a remarkable film that people also watch.
People need to realize that filmmaking is primarily a business, not an art form. When a modern film is justly described as art, that's an accident, not part of the original plan.
Comments
>I did not think that the films were worse then before, is just that I'd seen so many films that no new films felt original.
I think it's both. One wearies of a film's efforts to tell a story (compared to a book and an active imagination), given certain limitations in the medium, but the filmmaking process is getting much worse as time passes -- there's the temptation to blow stuff up for two hours (the Michael Bay approach) instead of tell a story. Also flimmakers know high-quality films can't find an audience -- old-style films that respect the intelligence of the viewers end up in art houses and late-night TV.
To a first approximation, modern filmmaking is a bunch of business-school graduates getting together and trying to create a "new" film that's as much as possible like the last film that attracted a large audience. They do all they can to include elements that worked before, they're extremely risk-averse, and their cynicism about their audience is boundless (and largely justified).
Meanwhile, films like "Juno" and other first-rate films get a modest audience, but at high risk -- most courageous films like "Juno" fail, so the risks are high in producing a remarkable film that people also watch.
People need to realize that filmmaking is primarily a business, not an art form. When a modern film is justly described as art, that's an accident, not part of the original plan.