the movie industry in 10 years?

Started by SmellyBoobFungus, February 24, 2004, 03:17:43 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages1 2 3
User actions

SmellyBoobFungus

February 24, 2004, 03:17:43 AM
a harsh reality
ticket sales are at a steady decline, attention spans are dissipating, society is changing, television has taken over, video-games are taking over, but my question is: will cinema really survive?

i'd like to hear some theories.
Guy with spoon: My spoon is too big. My spoon is too big. My spoon is too big.
Banana: I am a banana!

Rejected

molly

#1
February 24, 2004, 03:27:15 AM
they said that reading books will extinct, but it didn't, it got better

classical gas

#2
February 24, 2004, 03:59:19 AM
it has it's ups and downs; but really i don't see anything contributing to it's ultimate downfall...maybe that's an ignorant statement, but i think the cinema will always be fresh...it's the closest thing to our reality, in terms of art ,as we know of, so what could be better? and i'm optomistic that there will always be an intelligent crowd out there for decent films...

btw, good point molly...

edit: television has been around and film changes with the changing society....

SmellyBoobFungus

#3
February 24, 2004, 05:00:07 AM
Quote from: classical gas
edit: television has been around and film changes with the changing society....

good point, and television/vhs/dvd created a new way for movies to get into our homes, but the audiences are changing as well. video-games are playing a more imporant role in our culture and people feel the need to interact with a medium instead of just watching.
Guy with spoon: My spoon is too big. My spoon is too big. My spoon is too big.
Banana: I am a banana!

Rejected

Raikus

#4
February 24, 2004, 09:40:51 AM
As has been stated, there's more entertainment outlets than ever before (cable, DVD, internet).

Is cinema dying? Hell no. It's funny that everyone turns Chicken Little over a slight decline in ticket sales, but no one pays attention to a NEW BOX OFFICE RECORD BEING BROKEN NEARLY EVERY OTHER WEEK!

Movies grossing over $50 Million in the off season on their first weekend. If that's death throws I want some.
Yes, to dance beneath the diamond sky with one hand waving free, silhouetted by the sea, circled by the circus sands, with all memory and fate driven deep beneath the waves, let me forget about today until tomorrow.

SoNowThen

#5
February 24, 2004, 09:49:10 AM
The only reason box office records are being broken is because ticket prices are on a steady incline.

Down with theatres!!

Long live home dvd!!!!
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

godardian

#6
February 24, 2004, 09:51:13 AM
Quote from: SmellyBoobFunguspeople feel the need to interact with a medium instead of just watching.

That's much too general a statement. Who are these "people"? It's certainly true of some and a possibly growing number of people, but I'd say there's hope left, and it exists in the educational system and in righting our sociocultural priorities therewith.

In other words: "Turn off those fucking videogames and do your goddamn homework!!"
""Money doesn't come into it. It never has. I do what I do because it's all that I am." - Morrissey

"Lacan stressed more and more in his work the power and organizing principle of the symbolic, understood as the networks, social, cultural, and linguistic, into which a child is born. These precede the birth of a child, which is why Lacan can say that language is there from before the actual moment of birth. It is there in the social structures which are at play in the family and, of course, in the ideals, goals, and histories of the parents. This world of language can hardly be grasped by the newborn and yet it will act on the whole of the child's existence."

Stay informed on protecting your freedom of speech and civil rights.

SoNowThen

#7
February 24, 2004, 10:38:36 AM
Quote from: godardian
Quote from: SmellyBoobFunguspeople feel the need to interact with a medium instead of just watching.

That's much too general a statement. Who are these "people"? It's certainly true of some and a possibly growing number of people, but I'd say there's hope left, and it exists in the educational system and in righting our sociocultural priorities therewith.

In other words: "Turn off those fucking videogames and do your goddamn homework!!"

More righting our priorities than the system itself. But I agree.

I think this has less to do with cinema, and more with just society in general. Movies are no more or less pure than tv or books or music.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

godardian

#8
February 24, 2004, 10:49:38 AM
Quote from: SoNowThen
Quote from: godardian
Quote from: SmellyBoobFunguspeople feel the need to interact with a medium instead of just watching.

That's much too general a statement. Who are these "people"? It's certainly true of some and a possibly growing number of people, but I'd say there's hope left, and it exists in the educational system and in righting our sociocultural priorities therewith.

In other words: "Turn off those fucking videogames and do your goddamn homework!!"

More righting our priorities than the system itself. But I agree.

I think this has less to do with cinema, and more with just society in general. Movies are no more or less pure than tv or books or music.

Don't you think that at least as culpable as video games is a peculiarly American strain of anti-intellectualism and disdain for anything that requires attention, thought, or contemplation but does not "produce" something immediately, physically tangible? And that, in fact, video games are a symptom of this, rather than the root cause of anything? Though the rest of the world is following in our (anti)-intellectual, glibly "postmodern" (read: subliterate or illiterate) footsteps, I think the other way around would be far preferable, and that our (American) culture-wide blissfully ignorant lack of humility makes us suffer not only in the obvious world-political ways, but also in our abilities to think, reason, and be culturally cognizant and literate, i.e. have the desire and ability to understand anything beyond the quick, superficial thrill.
""Money doesn't come into it. It never has. I do what I do because it's all that I am." - Morrissey

"Lacan stressed more and more in his work the power and organizing principle of the symbolic, understood as the networks, social, cultural, and linguistic, into which a child is born. These precede the birth of a child, which is why Lacan can say that language is there from before the actual moment of birth. It is there in the social structures which are at play in the family and, of course, in the ideals, goals, and histories of the parents. This world of language can hardly be grasped by the newborn and yet it will act on the whole of the child's existence."

Stay informed on protecting your freedom of speech and civil rights.

SoNowThen

#9
February 24, 2004, 11:03:33 AM
Yep, but replace "American" with "most regular people".


EDIT: also, to be fair, the tendency of the elitist "intelligencia" to over analyse things is equally as destructive, imo.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Gold Trumpet

#10
February 24, 2004, 11:05:51 AM
Cinema is in dark ages, but I don't think its black. A niche in the market will always want to see challenging films. However, I don't believe the expansion of availability of movies (dvds and such) are a good thing for films. When VHS first appeared, it sprung no new movement of cinema appreciation, but actually, just the opposite: people seemed more and more ignorant of older films. By that time, though, film became an accepted enough art to devote university study to and all the fans of cinema saw their hobby and love in terms of homework. Rock N Roll and Rap Music will continue to accelerate in terms of youth appeal because no one can think of making schools to teach you how to rap or be a rock star. With dvd, we do get older films available, but yet another layer of corporatization with how heavily marketed all the mainstream films will be. Also, it is moving films to the level of conveniance with playing video games and both are being intertwined as dvds come with goodies of effects to play with like a video game and now you can even watch dvds on console systems. All the gloss on dvds have little to do with appreciating the movie as they do with getting you to buy it. DVD extras actually decide for people whether to buy some dvds or not.

SoNowThen

#11
February 24, 2004, 11:09:35 AM
Very VERY good points, GT. But can't the spinoff of all this dvd mania surely allow some fringe films to reach more people?

Not to mention, for us cinephiles, it's a plus to get to revist our favorite harder-to-find flicks over and over in relative comfort. Whereas back in the day you had to get your hands on a print, and sit at a shitty editing console and go back and forth...
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Jeremy Blackman

#12
February 24, 2004, 11:23:09 AM
Quote from: SoNowThenEDIT: also, to be fair, the tendency of the elitist "intelligencia" to over analyse things is equally as destructive, imo.
I disagree... the only destruction there is elitism that isolates and separates, and the false intellectualism that comes from that, not intellectualism itself. For example, it annoys me when college professors want their students to use only "academic" sources (i.e. generally isolated scholarly journals).

SoNowThen

#13
February 24, 2004, 11:28:04 AM
But some people just want to over-think something to the point where they're just putting their ideas into something where the original author had no intent whatsoever, and that gets dangerous.

English teachers and university students = red flags

:)
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Gold Trumpet

#14
February 24, 2004, 11:28:26 AM
Quote from: SoNowThenVery VERY good points, GT. But can't the spinoff of all this dvd mania surely allow some fringe films to reach more people?

Not to mention, for us cinephiles, it's a plus to get to revist our favorite harder-to-find flicks over and over in relative comfort. Whereas back in the day you had to get your hands on a print, and sit at a shitty editing console and go back and forth...

Its a plus to the niche market that already appreciates challenging films. For the regular movie viewer, with all the dvds here and there, its just they are likely to get lost in the shuffle and over praise Spiderman because it has so much more on its dvd than most other films.
Print
Go Up Pages1 2 3
User actions