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

How Hollywood stopped making movies in Hollywood

statsignificant.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 264 posts

Re: How Hollywood stopped making movies in Hollywood

#201

Post by Spivak »

g42gregory wrote: post #122

With a very few exceptions, I don’t watch anything made past 2016. Not sure what happened in Hollywood then, but it’s just seems that they are constantly making some sort of public service messages that they need to pay me to watch. Not the other way around. That goes even if I agree with some of the messages.

Films having a moral lesson for the audience is a weird thing to criticize when it's been done since time immortal—it's exceptional when a story doesn't have one. The fact that your cutoff is 2016 I think says more about what specific messages you're sensitive to rather than media containing more of them. I think cultural context is a big factor as well because you don't necessarily notice or react as strongly emotionally to what would have been considered controversial or on the nose at the time.

So like I think your experience is valid, and you're definitely noticing a real thing but I think it's better explained by you having more media literacy for contemporary topics and so you see the mirror being held up by these works way more obviously. Like I think about post 9/11 beginning of the Iraq war films and they're not even a little bit subtle.

Re: How Hollywood stopped making movies in Hollywood

#202

Post by protocolture »

sublinear wrote: post #45
dotBen wrote: post #27

An interesting read but also feels like the rearranging of the deckchairs on the Titanic given the forthcoming disruption from generative AI in this industry. I spent some time last month with a relative in the industry (camera operator and producer) and he already uses some very sophisticated AI to map out scenes and shots in gen ai full video before they shoot IRL. It's mostly a cost saving exercise as well as occa…

I still don't understand why there's such a race to the bottom. If they don't want to make a movie properly, why make it at all? The corner cutting across the board has become so bad that these movies are unwatchable. This isn't even a new problem. A lot of traditional CGI can still be bad enough to ruin the illusion when it's the state of the art and a lot of attention to detail went into it. We've been circling the…

90% of movies aren't shown at cinemas. 90% of movies are for home consumption. 90% of movies are Paw Patrol or some low rent action filler for Primes catalogue.

Re: How Hollywood stopped making movies in Hollywood

#203

Post by protocolture »

DiscourseFan wrote: post #199
protocolture wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I swear I watched a 1930s hollywood film where a guy died inside the box they built to soundproof the camera.

It was Babylon (2022), which takes place in 1930s Hollywood

Thats it yep.

Re: How Hollywood stopped making movies in Hollywood

#204

Post by UltraSane »

Ekaros wrote: post #112
UltraSane wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People want to see expensive effort in movies they have to buy tickets to see and AI is the opposite of effort.

Expensive movies are liked because they look impressive much more so than cheap movies. Say Titanic in past. Or Lord of The Rings. If AI can do the same they don't actually care if it was expensive or not.

AI isn't going to be able to replace AAA CGI for a very long time. We are in the Tron era

Re: How Hollywood stopped making movies in Hollywood

#205

Post by throw0101a »

clickety_clack wrote: post #198
morkalork wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A staggering amount of film and TV is shot in Canada.

Living in Vancouver ruins a lot of tv shows. Chicago? Nope, Vancouver. New York? Nope, Vancouver. SF? Nope, Vancouver! On the flip side, they use a lot of local place names and things, so it’s like a little in-joke when you notice them.

> Living in Vancouver ruins a lot of tv shows. Chicago? Nope, Vancouver. New York? Nope, Vancouver. SF? Nope, Vancouver!

Also Toronto / southern Ontario.

If you see a city scene and there's streetcar tracks, it was probably shot in Toronto. See opening shot of this scene in Reacher s02e04:

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MQQrvYjdbQ

Re: How Hollywood stopped making movies in Hollywood

#208

Post by thaumasiotes »

gamblor956 wrote: post #197
nikanj wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Movies like Forrest Gump, Return of the Jedi, Men in Black or Harry Potter 5 all managed to lose money, according to "GAAP". If that's not creative accounting, I don't know what is.

Those movies didn't lose money under GAAP. However, the specific legal entities that the talent made their profit deals with did not earn profits due to the way that revenues and expenses were allocated between the companies involved in making and distributing those films. For each of those films, at least one company was and is earning $$$, but the talent doesn't get to make a revenue sharing deal with those compani…

> For each of those films, at least one company was and is earning $$$, but the talent doesn't get to make a revenue sharing deal with those companies.

That doesn't sound right. Traditionally, and in particular in the case of Forrest Gump, the distinction is between people who contract for a percentage of net profit (always zero) and people who contract for a percentage of gross revenue. The revenue is measured at the same point either way; it's just about whether you got suckered or not.

Re: How Hollywood stopped making movies in Hollywood

#209

Post by aprilthird2021 »

laidoffamazon wrote: post #9
aprilthird2021 wrote: post #3

I wonder if this will change as Hollywood is eyeing three $1B+ box office earners back to back to back this summer

But weren't they all made outside of Hollywood? Emeryville, around Europe and the UK, and then the UK for Toy Story 5, Odyssey, and Spiderman respectively?

Sure but I meant now they are making more than before they might not be as cost sensitive going forward

Re: How Hollywood stopped making movies in Hollywood

#210

Post by aprilthird2021 »

epolanski wrote: post #5
aprilthird2021 wrote: post #3

I wonder if this will change as Hollywood is eyeing three $1B+ box office earners back to back to back this summer

Unlikely. Money is money, and if you can film in UK where you get tax incentives and lower costs there's no reason to film in Hollywood.

Could say the same about filming on IMAX, refusing to use CGI, various cost cutting measures taken by cheaper looking Netflix movies.

Idk, the need to worry about cost fluctuates with how much you make. That's also true

Post reply on HN