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

The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 454 posts

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#151

Post by antognini »

neuroelectron wrote: post #93

New Yorker is plagued by shallow snobbery. A kind of assumed elitism based on geographic location and a specific demographic. What makes their opinions so correct ? Rich people agree with them. Of course, we have a term for this, luxury beliefs.

That's not exactly what is meant by luxury beliefs. Luxury beliefs aren't simply beliefs that rich people hold. It more refers to social opinions which would (allegedly) impose high costs on the poor, but from which the wealthy would be insulated from the consequences. Something like "defund the police" is usually pointed to as an example of a luxury belief. The poor, who live in high crime areas, would see crime go up and bear the brunt of the consequences. Whereas the rich, who live in pricey, low crime neighborhoods, wouldn't see much of a change and would be able to afford private security anyhow if they did.

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#153

Post by JKCalhoun »

brokencode wrote: post #9
bluefirebrand wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is just as likely the other way around People are on their phones because the slop they are being served is so shallow and meaningless that they can't be bothered to pay attention to it

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.

I don't think people know about classic movies, or know that they have access to classic movies (hint: libraries).

This people though has been catching up on a century of classic films. There are plenty of lists around on the internet if you wanted to get started. The AFI Top 100 is a gentle introduction to the (American-only) classics. There are deeper cuts when you are ready to saddle up for "1001 Movies" instead. (Warning, you could be starting down a journey that will involve the next eight years of your life.)

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#155

Post by BurningFrog »

somenameforme wrote: post #17

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…

Movies had a century as one of the main stages for global culture.

That era is ending, and other things are replacing them, mostly based on computers and internet.

If you love movies this is sad, but movies once replaced other beloved things.

The world spins on and nothing is forever. Enjoy the ride!

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#156

Post by JKCalhoun »

api wrote: post #98

Special case of bad writing, which is what really plagues today's movies. I often blame comic book films but I'm not sure that's the explanation. I don't know what the explanation is. Literalism is bad writing. A movie that feels like it's punching you in the face with its moral themes is bad writing. "Ruined by woke" where it feels like minority characters are shoehorned in is actually just bad writing. Plots that d…

I suspect the writers are doing exactly what they're being paid to do.

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#157

Post by shayway »

Ah, a New Yorker article on media. I think I got bingo!

  - Identify some problem pervading modern pop media? Check
  - Cherry pick examples? Check
  - Misrepresent or misunderstand an example that actually supports the opposite claim? Check
  - Paint a vague picture of how much better it was before [trend], without making any real statement? Check
  - Don't use any actual data or evidence? Check
  - Draw a line from dumb blockbuster trends to Trump/Nazis/[insert hot-button political issue]? Check
You either come into the article ready to believe movies are getting worse or you don't. You come away feeling vindicated, or angry. There is nothing of substance here.

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#158

Post by pickledoyster »

deafpolygon wrote: post #133
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2002 was also when broadband internet and movie piracy became more prolific - DivX was just out, DVD burners became a thing, etc. Streaming video was in its infancy, with TiVo and VOD slowly becoming a thing (although that only reached mainstream in 2007 when Netflix launched). DVDs and DVD players became mainstream, as well as flat TVs, HD video, etc. Anyway. The tech in the movie theaters did improve by a lot since…

There is no evidence as to piracy even being a cause for the decline, I say this not as a supporter (I do not pirate) but to correct a misconception. 2002 is when tvs got larger, fidelity with cable tv improved, dvds were readily available, etc. it was also an era where more people started gaming (the industry took off around this time), so people were shifting away from movie theaters as a social activity. The rise…

> People don’t want to think anymore.

Or the bean counters in charge target the largest common denominator, shaving off the long tail of above-average sophistication with every mediocre release.

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#159

Post by wahnfrieden »

s28l wrote: post #149

I find this article rather underwhelming because it spends so much time calling out bad examples and so little time highlighting examples of subtlety (in any era). Without positive examples, I don’t think they make the case that this is a new phenomenon or even a phenomenon at all: all the author has done is identify a lens to criticize through. It may be the case that this is a recent phenomenon (though some other c…

It ends with one

Re: The new literalism plaguing today’s movies

#160

Post by silisili »

makeitdouble wrote: post #36
brokencode wrote: post #9

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…

I noticed this recently when I decided to watch Hitchcock's 'The Birds.'

It was almost absurd to me not only how bland and drawn out most scenes were, but how absolutely poorly acted it was. If it were not famous(ie didn't exist), and updated to today's vernacular and shot scene for scene, it would absolutely get reamed by critics.

Funny how much changes in just a generation or two.

Post reply on HN