Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

An Open Letter to Warner Bros CEO About Layoffs and Donuts-

pajiba.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 86 posts

Re: An Open Letter to Warner Bros CEO About Layoffs and Donuts-

#51

Post by Throwaway23412 »

objclxt wrote: post #32
privateersman wrote: post #13

I think this is a symptom that the movie industry is on its way out, in much the same way as has happened to music. They were flush with cash during the early 2000s thanks to TV and DVD. It was like a golden age with lots of studios producing unusual material. The problem is the internet has damaged their tiered selling technique, yet their projects are still as expensive and risky.

> I think this is a symptom that the movie industry is on its way out, in much the same way as has happened to music. If that were true, other movies studios would be in trouble: but look at Disney, who are doing gangbusters with Marvel and Lucasfilm. Warners are in this situation because they got complacent: they had one major cash cow (Harry Potter), and they failed to find other franchises that could offer equal r…

That's the weird thing. Is Disney Studios printing money because they're so incredibly excellent at making movies or because their competitors are doing so poorly at competing?

Re: An Open Letter to Warner Bros CEO About Layoffs and Donuts-

#52

Post by CaptSpify »

santaclaus wrote: post #45
justinlardinois wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think this is a symptom that the movie industry is on its way out, in much the same way as has happened to music. What makes you think something happened to the music industry? It's still alive and well.

> What makes you think something happened to the music industry? It's still alive and well. Honestly I am more excited by music now than I've ever been. People often cite the 90s and early 2000s as these halcyon days, but I feel like interesting music is way more accessible now than it has ever been. I can queue up tunes from virtually any independent label at the press of a button, I can order vinyl and have it on m…

I think that's the point though. The music industry is thriving, because a lot of the dinosaurs passed away, and the newer businesses took it into a new direction. It was a bad business to be in for a while.

Now is the start of the bad time to be in major movies. Independent and niche movies are getting more time than ever, because bigger studios can't figure out how to cope with companies like Netflix.

Re: An Open Letter to Warner Bros CEO About Layoffs and Donuts-

#53

Post by Throwaway23412 »

justinlardinois wrote: post #39
dpitkin wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might suggest that Wave and Vista are obvious projects Google and Microsoft wrote and below a standard of quality, and akin to a bad movie from WB. Google+ and Windows 8 could be considered bad sequels.

Vista was just bad marketing. After that whole fiasco Microsoft did market tests where they presented consumers with a "new version" of Windows that was actually just Vista, and they got a positive response. And even if you don't believe that story completely, the fact that Windows 7 wasn't all that different from Vista and yet got just as popular as XP was says a lot.

>the fact that Windows 7 wasn't all that different from Vista

Say what now? I don't know if you remember but Vista had really high hardware requirements. When Vista came out, it was fundamentally unusable for me. Hardware requirements is literally the first section of criticism in Vista's Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Vista#Hardware_require...):

>For example, Mike Nash (Corporate Vice President, Windows Product Management) commented, "I now have a $2,100 e-mail machine" because his laptop's lack of an appropriate graphics chip so hobbled Vista.

Windows 7 made substantial performance improvements in comparison to the widespread hardware incompatibilities that Vista had.

Re: An Open Letter to Warner Bros CEO About Layoffs and Donuts-

#54

Post by sirclueless »

tw04 wrote: post #24
thewopr wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what's interesting is that TV is having such a different trajectory (TV as in video packaged as episodes, the lines have blurred). Netflix and the like. I often wonder if TV is winning because it has built-in sequels. If a series doesn't stick, whatever, money lost. If a new series does well, you can milk it for many many more seasons. TV vs Movies, the risk in cost is the same but the upside is much higher for T…

That's because instead of trying to fill 3 movies, TV can just flow naturally until it's done. Yes, for some shows they end up with filler either because they want to drag it out, or they don't have quite enough to fill an entire last season... but for the most part it feels like TV shows don't have that pressure to fit into a very tight box.

    for the most part it feels like TV shows don't have
    that pressure to fit into a very tight box.
Don't they? I feel like TV is a lot more constrained than movies. The forced "last time on XYZ" cadence means that it's very difficult to have natural story-lines when things need to be wrapped up in a suitable emotional resolution and/or cliffhanger every 22 or 45 minutes. Especially when the writers are working with 25% of the screen time being commercials (thankfully much less of a problem with Digital-first TV from Netflix, HBO etc.).

I think it's a lot easier to write and produce a quality movie about just about anything. Yes the mass-produced sequel machines look pretty cookie cutter, but you also get some extremely well-told stories like In Bruges or Wes Anderson's stuff. There's anything-goes stuff like Swiss Army Man. I feel like this kind of thing couldn't realistically be produced for TV. The acting, writing, and production value falls off a cliff very quickly as soon as you leave the mainstream. Even a single season of a TV show means 6-10x as much content as a movie, and consistently conforming to the structure of a serial TV show means the content feels inevitably more repetitious.

Re: An Open Letter to Warner Bros CEO About Layoffs and Donuts-

#55

Post by jfoutz »

To throw things in a greek setting, Marvel is traditionally comedy and DC is tragedy. Iron Man is a drunken, womanizing asshole. Robert Downey Jr was is brilliant because he's still likeable. Sure, he's rich, but his life is a mess. You can look down on him. He's a fun guy, you want him to make it, but he's still kind of a scumbag. Christopher Nolan's Batman is the opposite. Sure, he's rich, but he's facing some big demons. There's a note of sadness, because in spite of his advantages, he faces some terrible challenges. You feel for the guy, because he suffers so much. Marvel is relatable, at least i'm handling my life better than that guy. DC is aspirational, i wish i was strong enough to handle what they handle. This is a sweeping generalization, but i think it's generally true.

I've seen most of the movies the author called out, and i enjoyed them. I can't say i enjoyed them enough to see in a theater, but they're fun. I think of them as Saturday afternoon matinee movies. I like movies. I don't mind flaws, but those popcorn movies are something i'll wait to watch on a Tuesday night with a couple of beers.

I think warner's big problem is they're spending 100+ million dollars to produce something that's in the 20-60 million range. I'll watch them, independent of production value, because i like movies. But i'm going to get the $2.99 SD itunes version, i'm not going to spend the 12 bucks to see that in the theater. (i did see suicide squad opening night, but the ticket was free)

I hope they figure it out. WB made some great stuff, and some fun stuff. They're just not quite calibrated right. If you're going to blow 100M+ on a movie, you really need the details right. Calling back to Suicide squad, it was fun. I really enjoyed it, and i'd be happy to pay 3-5 dollars on a weeknight to watch it. If i had to pay $12 for the ticket, and another $10 for the popcorn and soda (how can you not get popcorn and soda?!? it completes the experience!) I'd be annoyed.

Re: An Open Letter to Warner Bros CEO About Layoffs and Donuts-

#56

Post by je42 »

Throwaway23412 wrote: post #51
objclxt wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think this is a symptom that the movie industry is on its way out, in much the same way as has happened to music. If that were true, other movies studios would be in trouble: but look at Disney, who are doing gangbusters with Marvel and Lucasfilm. Warners are in this situation because they got complacent: they had one major cash cow (Harry Potter), and they failed to find other franchises that could offer equal r…

That's the weird thing. Is Disney Studios printing money because they're so incredibly excellent at making movies or because their competitors are doing so poorly at competing?

Disney looks like that have a process to deliver great movies. They are not hoping have one. There are engineering one. Repeatable.

Re: An Open Letter to Warner Bros CEO About Layoffs and Donuts-

#57

Post by cycomachead »

Throwaway23412 wrote: post #51
objclxt wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think this is a symptom that the movie industry is on its way out, in much the same way as has happened to music. If that were true, other movies studios would be in trouble: but look at Disney, who are doing gangbusters with Marvel and Lucasfilm. Warners are in this situation because they got complacent: they had one major cash cow (Harry Potter), and they failed to find other franchises that could offer equal r…

That's the weird thing. Is Disney Studios printing money because they're so incredibly excellent at making movies or because their competitors are doing so poorly at competing?

I'd say somewhere in the middle. Disney has gone through some _really_ rough periods both in the '90s and '00s but now they seem to be on a pretty good upswing. Interestingly, it seems like a significant part of that upswing is through acquisitions (aforementioned Marvel and DC, also Pixar), though they still have an amazing breadth of talent and style.

Re: An Open Letter to Warner Bros CEO About Layoffs and Donuts-

#58

Post by sandworm101 »

jfoutz wrote: post #55

To throw things in a greek setting, Marvel is traditionally comedy and DC is tragedy. Iron Man is a drunken, womanizing asshole. Robert Downey Jr was is brilliant because he's still likeable. Sure, he's rich, but his life is a mess. You can look down on him. He's a fun guy, you want him to make it, but he's still kind of a scumbag. Christopher Nolan's Batman is the opposite. Sure, he's rich, but he's facing some big…

Iron man is a jerk. He is the embodiment of all that is wrong with our economy. But that is why the Marvel movies work. That's what I like about them. The characters are human enough for me to actually care. Superman? He is too flat for me to have any opinion.

For all the bluster, the MCU is full of metaphor and leveled humor. My favorite is the 1-minute WWII skit in Avengers (The old jewish man about to be killed by the german, saved by the soldier who then needs the scientist to force a surrender ... that's the american story of WWII.) It isn't historically accurate, but it's fun. You don't see stuff like that in the DC movies. They have no metaphor, no depth. That requires writers and crews who both care about the work and aren't afraid for their jobs.

Re: An Open Letter to Warner Bros CEO About Layoffs and Donuts-

#59

Post by jfoutz »

sandworm101 wrote: post #58
jfoutz wrote: post #55

To throw things in a greek setting, Marvel is traditionally comedy and DC is tragedy. Iron Man is a drunken, womanizing asshole. Robert Downey Jr was is brilliant because he's still likeable. Sure, he's rich, but his life is a mess. You can look down on him. He's a fun guy, you want him to make it, but he's still kind of a scumbag. Christopher Nolan's Batman is the opposite. Sure, he's rich, but he's facing some big…

Iron man is a jerk. He is the embodiment of all that is wrong with our economy. But that is why the Marvel movies work. That's what I like about them. The characters are human enough for me to actually care. Superman? He is too flat for me to have any opinion. For all the bluster, the MCU is full of metaphor and leveled humor. My favorite is the 1-minute WWII skit in Avengers (The old jewish man about to be killed by…

> Superman? He is too flat for me to have any opinion.

IMHO, Superman is ethical. He'll stop a nuclear launch and get a cat out of a tree, because he's the ultimate boy scout. Every problem is important to solve, and he has the power to, at least try, to solve them all. Violate ethics for the greater good? Never.

I don't think the Superman point has really come across since Christopher Reeve. I really liked the Nolan Batman movies. He was able to really capture the spirit of that character. It's a shame WB couldn't put that together for Superman.

Post reply on HN