Live data from Hacker News

The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

newyorker.com

61–70 of 454 posts

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#61

I'm surprised they call out the Conclave as an example of a good movie. It's not a bad movie, but the final twist (I'm not going to spoil it) is way over the top and almost absurdly Hollywood.

It wasn't just the ending. Any time a priest casually breaks the seal of the confessional and nobody bats an eye, it creates this weird surreal effect where you can't even tell if the author is aware of what he's doing.

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that were the case, people would watch classic movies, read novels, etc. No, I’m pretty sure social media has seriously hurt the average person’s attention span. The idea of sitting down and watching a two hour movie is really quite daunting when you’re used to videos that are at most 30 min and often less than one.

> attention span. This gets repeated ad nauseum, but IMHO people are short on patience, not attention. Parents probably understand this the most: try to find an 80s movie to show to your kids, you'll have a pass at it first to properly remember what it's about, and it will painfully slow. Not peaceful or measured, just slow. Scenes that don't need much explanation will be exposed for about for 10 min, dialogues that…

Old movies are kind of slow but I'm much less frustrated because they are short: an hour, at most two. That's more than enough to tell a story. Modern movies are two hours at minimum with some crossing over three with absolutely nothing to tell (e.g Babylon 2022, completely pissed me off).

I don't think the reason is "public needed time to process info", more likely both the length and the intensity (of changing sights, not of meaning) were ultimately determined by production costs. Filming two hours is more expensive than one hour. Filling an hour with 60 one-minute cuts is more expensive then 30 two-minute cuts because of all the setup and decorations.

Production is now cheaper thanks to CGI, box offices are larger thanks to higher prices and the global market. You no longer have to be frugal when filming, the protection against sloppy overextended movies is now taste and not money. And taste is scarce.

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#63

I'm surprised they call out the Conclave as an example of a good movie. It's not a bad movie, but the final twist (I'm not going to spoil it) is way over the top and almost absurdly Hollywood.

Without spoiling the twist, I question whether it’s “over the top.” The specific kind of anxiety alluded to by Conclave about popes is almost a thousand years old and has resurged several times.

The guy is actually way too unspecific about the details there to make much sense of the canonical relevance, which renders the resulting anxiety rather comical.

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without spoiling the twist, I question whether it’s “over the top.” The specific kind of anxiety alluded to by Conclave about popes is almost a thousand years old and has resurged several times.

The guy is actually way too unspecific about the details there to make much sense of the canonical relevance, which renders the resulting anxiety rather comical.

This spoiler-dogeing (pun intended) makes this comment too unspecific to respond to unfortunately, as it's not clear what you found unspecific. It's understood enough by the person he's telling it to, and it makes sense to be beating-around-bush about a topic that could get the person who's telling it in trouble.

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#65
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The T-Rex bit is not a joke, the line is said seriously. Also, watch Jurassic Park. Good movie.

I actually have less than zero excuse. I was a 13 year old nerd when it came out - PRIME market. But I think even then I was allergic to hype. Same reason I've never seen a vast number of well loved movies. Like Titanic. ... just a contrarian LOL. We didn't have the money to go to movies. So I think the exposure to entire cohort of my fellow nerds having seen it three times over opening weekend, wearing the t-shirt e…

Like others have said, go and watch it. It holds up exceptionally well. It's just a plain good movie. The tension, acting, the special effects, quotable moments, the dinosaurs, everything.

Do it tonight and report back tomorrow please.

I'm not gonna promise that it'll change your life - don't want to over hype it. But I am genuinely curious what an adult's initial reaction to it would be after watching it for the first time.

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#66
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Movies are still great, just not the main circuit. If you live in a large city most often you have access to indie movies or secondary rotation of festival movies instead of 3 marvels, one remake and one romantic like in the big box places.

I think they simply did what AAA video games did. They found what sold best at one moment in time and then obsessively tried to work to copy that. But the problem is that people don't want to play 40 different Call of Duties, or watch 30 different Batmen. It's just that Batman or Call of Duty were the 'meet in the middle' of a variety of different tastes. But when those other tastes aren't accounted for, it becomes n…

Not sure that pointing out the success of sci fi franchises is proof audiences want diversity.

The VAST majority of movies that have been made in the past (when the real indicator, % of population going to movies, peaked) deal with ordinary, realistic human stories. Murders are incredibly popular, of course, but so are fraught romances, coming-of-age, and grounded hero-quest movies (which even Bachelorette Party borrows from).

But your point is otherwise completely valid. They found out everyone likes cake, and converted their buffet restaurant to all-cake all-day!

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they simply did what AAA video games did. They found what sold best at one moment in time and then obsessively tried to work to copy that. But the problem is that people don't want to play 40 different Call of Duties, or watch 30 different Batmen. It's just that Batman or Call of Duty were the 'meet in the middle' of a variety of different tastes. But when those other tastes aren't accounted for, it becomes n…

Not sure that pointing out the success of sci fi franchises is proof audiences want diversity. The VAST majority of movies that have been made in the past (when the real indicator, % of population going to movies, peaked) deal with ordinary, realistic human stories. Murders are incredibly popular, of course, but so are fraught romances, coming-of-age, and grounded hero-quest movies (which even Bachelorette Party borr…

They didn't that was my point. But if people just go to the food court at the mall and complain there's 90% fast food...

Go to a smaller movie theater, go to movie festivals that happen every year in most big cities, you'll see the majority of movies have nothing to do with the few major Hollywood block busters. And comparing Dune, a major block busters to other ones makes no sense when the point was that you need to go outside the main circuit.

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#68

Fun fact: movie sales, in terms of tickets sold, peaked in 2002. [1] All the 'box office records' since then are the result of charging way more to a continually plummeting audience size. And this is highly relevant for things like this. People often argue that if movies were so bad then people would stop watching them, unaware that people actually have stopped watching them! Even for individual movies. For all the m…

> All the 'box office records' since then are the result of charging way more to a continually plummeting audience size. I don't think that going to the movies has gotten more expensive in real terms. It's just that the records are usually not adjusted for inflation, so a film with the same audience and the same inflation-adjusted admission price will appear to make 80% more at the box office compared to 2002.

In fact... it looks like they've slightly dropped.

https://www.reddit.com/r/boxoffice/comments/14kznfv/movie_ti...

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#69

Fun fact: movie sales, in terms of tickets sold, peaked in 2002. [1] All the 'box office records' since then are the result of charging way more to a continually plummeting audience size. And this is highly relevant for things like this. People often argue that if movies were so bad then people would stop watching them, unaware that people actually have stopped watching them! Even for individual movies. For all the m…

oh wow, Covid really spell the death of movie theaters, and it's never going to recover.

ONLY because of streaming services. The industry exploded after the 1918 flu.

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The threequel zombie movie lacked too much subtlety for you?

Quadquel? There is another (and supposedly final) in January 2026.

It's actually a sort of standing joke that trilogies are sometimes 4-fold. Trivial Pursuit used that answer as one of their copyright test questions (if your game replicates our bad answer, you stole our product).
Post reply on HN