Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

How do!

So over my adult life, I’ve seen movie fads come, and movie fads go. Typically driven by a breakout genre hit, which is then rinsed and repeated like a teabag, with the same overall result of increasingly weakened offerings.

Stuff like Pulp Fiction, Blair Witch, Saw, Paranormal Activity, Iron Man (well, Phase One MCU to be fair). Films which came like a bolt from the blue, and were soon crudely copied in the dash for lazy cash. And it’s happened before my adult life, too. For instance Star Wars lead to an absolute rash of Sci-Fi, with only some of it of any real worth. Halloween drove the Slasher craze, with typically diminishing returns.

And it kind of feels like we’re due a New Next Big Thing. Especially in horror, where the budgets are typically low anyway, so even a normally modest box office can see significant profits made, and many copycats as a result.

But for the life of me? I just can’t think what it might be.

It will never be comedy. Comedy doesn't translate well between markets.

If you want to try and guess what the next tentpole film is going to be, look at some piece of media (traditionally books) and look for something that creates the thought in your head, "There is no way this could ever become a movie."

We have kind of seen it in comedy. For instance, Airplane! has seen similar attempts applied to various other genres, with generally mixed results.

But again, like horror, the key is they’re typically fairly cheap to make, and so pretty hard (but not impossible!) to lose money on.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
We have kind of seen it in comedy. For instance, Airplane! has seen similar attempts applied to various other genres, with generally mixed results.

But again, like horror, the key is they’re typically fairly cheap to make, and so pretty hard (but not impossible!) to lose money on.

OK, look at Airplane! In Deutschland, they had excellent translators that changed the jive dialog to match northerners and southerners. In other markets the translations were not as effective.

Horror translates to foreign markets quite well. Grr! Argh! Ahhh! The plots are typically easy to follow and the dialog is usually pretty shallow.

Cultural films also have issues. For every Slumdog Millionare, there are a hundred Bollywood films that will never see widespread release in the West.

I'd like to see decent writing make a big return...

The current big thing is streamers splurging out mediocre films that somehow make their arcane sales strategy ping in a positive way.

I saw that there is a mew Starship Troopers in the offing. Maybe it will stay closer to the source this time and spawn a trend in some other classic Sci fi stories. Rendezvous at Rama? Having said that, the streamers have been hitting that souce quite hard lately as well.

I feel like right now we are entering an end-times for comic hero films. Whilst they are still doing great and getting huge budgets they are losing that freshness feel and I kinda get a sense that people are slowly burning out on them.

From my perspective its too many repeated stories (at least what 4 spidermen film series now and god knows how many Batman); too many cross-film link ins to the point where some films you've got to watch dozens of others AND a few streamed TV series to work out what's going on.

Now Comics are not strangers to these problems and their normal solution is to either
1) Doubledown on the multiverse idea and just live off the most loyal and die-hard fans

2) Reboot everything - again.


I feel like we'll keep going down that pathway until something else rises up and right now I don't feel like there is anything big rising up. There's perhaps a rise in other genres getting good budgets and doing films; but there doesn't feel like there's anything really big happening to push superheroes out.


I would LOVE to see proper traditional or WOW inspired fantasy take a big leap into the market. I feel like Lord of the Rings showed there's huge interest in this, but oddly LotR didn't really spark a whole wave of fantasy films like comic superheroes or westerns did. Instead if kind of just utterly dominated all on its own.

The other issue is that fantasy kinda needs a LOT of set work and I think this is why its often been stuck in the kids section of animations
Or we get stuck with the "grey pallet of grey and mud colours so we can hide 50% of the screen from view so you can't see the errors/modern day things sneaking in.

Videogame adaptations seem to be the next big thing. It's the next wave of nostalgia made by people who want to show the world that that thing they liked as a kid is actually super serious.

That's really always been what drives these waves. Comic books were that way, as was the Young Adult fantasy craze, gangster movies, all the pulp adventure before that and 100% westerns. People grow up and try to recreate how something made them feel as a kid and when it works, it taps into that generation on a large scale.

By the box office, the next big thing is whatever Nezha 2 is.

 Quixote wrote:
It will never be comedy. Comedy doesn't translate well between markets.

If you want to try and guess what the next tentpole film is going to be, look at some piece of media (traditionally books) and look for something that creates the thought in your head, "There is no way this could ever become a movie."

Pretty sure the age of super success across international markets is over. China has deliberately moved away from promoting US films or allowing them to out compete Chinese films in China, and plenty of other international markets are moving towards similar homegrown cinema success. Also, now’s not a great time to export US culture.

If I had to guess what will become the most profitable genre, besides horror, I’d guess some kind of parasocial dramedy type about alienation and found family connections. Something cheap enough to produce to make a profit for under $50 million box office or via streaming. We’ve got a whole generation growing up in their screens who relate better to TikTok and YouTube characters than to traditional storytelling.

 LunarSol wrote:
Videogame adaptations seem to be the next big thing. It's the next wave of nostalgia made by people who want to show the world that that thing they liked as a kid is actually super serious.

That's really always been what drives these waves. Comic books were that way, as was the Young Adult fantasy craze, gangster movies, all the pulp adventure before that and 100% westerns. People grow up and try to recreate how something made them feel as a kid and when it works, it taps into that generation on a large scale.

Video games seem to be plagued with bad choices. It's a ripe market to be sure, but most of the attempts get snapped up by development teams and directors who either

1) Do an Uwe Bol half-effort attempt and mostly just moneyspin into their own subfirms and stuff so whatever you get feels cheap, is cheap and isn't that great

2) Do the classic Hollywood extreme of just getting the story entirely wrong. I think part of this is that comicbooks were held by two big firms who protected their IP; whilst video games are held by loads of different firms and smaller ones often don't protect their IP when hollywood offers them a case of money/deals/potential money. So they get bullied into a weaker position and then the story/lore/character goes out the window.



What it needs is one or two really break-out success stories that not only do really well with the source material but also catch the general public eye

 Overread wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
Videogame adaptations seem to be the next big thing. It's the next wave of nostalgia made by people who want to show the world that that thing they liked as a kid is actually super serious.

That's really always been what drives these waves. Comic books were that way, as was the Young Adult fantasy craze, gangster movies, all the pulp adventure before that and 100% westerns. People grow up and try to recreate how something made them feel as a kid and when it works, it taps into that generation on a large scale.

Video games seem to be plagued with bad choices. It's a ripe market to be sure, but most of the attempts get snapped up by development teams and directors who either

1) Do an Uwe Bol half-effort attempt and mostly just moneyspin into their own subfirms and stuff so whatever you get feels cheap, is cheap and isn't that great

2) Do the classic Hollywood extreme of just getting the story entirely wrong. I think part of this is that comicbooks were held by two big firms who protected their IP; whilst video games are held by loads of different firms and smaller ones often don't protect their IP when hollywood offers them a case of money/deals/potential money. So they get bullied into a weaker position and then the story/lore/character goes out the window.



What it needs is one or two really break-out success stories that not only do really well with the source material but also catch the general public eye

Which we've been seeing a notable uptick in already. Mario Bros was quite successful and Sonic has been huge with kids. While those of us past the prime target market might scoff at it, I suspect Minecraft is going to be a hit regardless of what you hear from YouTube.

It's basically the same general trend we saw with comic books. The Sonic films have essentially done a speed run of adaptations, starting with a weird movie with a ton of studio know how insisting on a human lead character, "realistic" designs and a villain who is far more about getting a big name in the role than adapting the character. Two movies in and they're doing massive one to one scene adaptations from one of the games in a film whose ties to its origins feel vestigial at best.

We're also seeing success in things like Fallout and Last of Us as mini series success. We're light years past the days of the video game curse, but not quite to the point where someone hits a formula. I doubt it'll ever get to Marvel levels, but I suspect we'll have a few huge successes and a lot of very poor attempts to cash in on the trend.

I sort of hope female led Rom-Coms make a big splash soon. However, the most recent efforts have not done well featuring Sandra Bullock and Sydney Sweeney.

 Easy E wrote:
I sort of hope female led Rom-Coms make a big splash soon. However, the most recent efforts have not done well featuring Sandra Bullock and Sydney Sweeney.

The main issue just seems to be that the audience is overwhelmed with the deluge of Hallmark films. It's hard to market what makes big budget rom-coms justifiably better when they were already pretty formulaic and samey before Hallmark turned it into an actual formula.

There’s also only so many times an audience can tolerate Jennifer “being less than mediocre at multiple things is apparently talent” Lopez playing a rags to riches Latina maid/au pair/office junior etc.

Then again, Rom-Coms were never my bag.

But it also seems a pretty stable genre. One where there’s not a huge demand for originality? Then again, we’re into a different era, post #Metoo and one where toxic relationships are something to be avoided. So who knows.

I’m hoping for anything that’s not a frickin sequel, reboot, remake, or rehash that’s trying to cash in on nostalgia.
I’d like to see some new ideas for once. But that’s just a pipe dream.

I’ve a hypothesis on reboot and late sequel fever, and I’d like to share it.

It is only a hypothesis, mind.

Anyways. We live in a new age. An age of digital streaming. Where We, The People, have greater, near instant, access to untold thousands of movies at our very fingertips.

From watching oldies, firm favourites and if you’re anything like me, a bunch of weird, and often not very good, crap from the depths of Prime.

Which is great. Despite all the awfulness in the world, we’re spoiled for choice when it comes to switching off from it all.

But. That comes at a price, and a price that, perhaps, we’ve overlooked. The people that make, and ultimately license the movies to streaming services learn. They’ve access to new data.

Whereas what, 15 or so years ago when Streaming was embryonic? They’d know what their box office was, and monitor home media sales (VHS, then DVD, not you HD-DVD and finally BluRay). But outside, arguably, of the Video Rental Market? They’d have limited insight into just how often we rewatched our favourites.

Now? Now they do. They know how often a given movie is streamed, and the streaming platform, in the name of Mighty Algorithmo (blessed be his dodgy recommendations), how often you, I and that bloke over there watch a given movie, and at what time of day.

That’s potent information. After all, if I’ve watched A New Hope, Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi hundreds of times each? I’ll be wanting more of that. Right? Right? And their Think Tank informs us that I want specifically more of that precise things specifically with specific precision, yes?

And so it’s my hypothesis that overwhelmed with this new stream of data on our viewing habits? They’re coming to only a partially accurate conclusion.

Yes. I want more Star Wars. Yes. I want more Creature Features. Yes. I want more Sword and Sandals.

But I want fresh ones. Not recycled. Not refurbished. Not regurgitated.

 Ghool wrote:
I’m hoping for anything that’s not a frickin sequel, reboot, remake, or rehash that’s trying to cash in on nostalgia.
I’d like to see some new ideas for once. But that’s just a pipe dream.

Did you see Mickey 17 or Novocain?

We need to support these kinds of movies if we want studios to make them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@MDG, audiences do not see original movies that are not sequels or linked to well known IPs in anywhere near the numbers that will go to see those things. An original, fresh take is worth maybe about $20-$50 million at the box office. Maybe $200 or $300 if it’s a breakout horror movie.

Audiences aren’t willing to pay for fresh material, only IP content.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 Ghool wrote:
I’m hoping for anything that’s not a frickin sequel, reboot, remake, or rehash that’s trying to cash in on nostalgia.
I’d like to see some new ideas for once. But that’s just a pipe dream.

Did you see Mickey 17 or Novocain?

We need to support these kinds of movies if we want studios to make them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@MDG, audiences do not see original movies that are not sequels or linked to well known IPs in anywhere near the numbers that will go to see those things. An original, fresh take is worth maybe about $20-$50 million at the box office. Maybe $200 or $300 if it’s a breakout horror movie.

Audiences aren’t willing to pay for fresh material, only IP content.

I haven’t watched movies in the theatre for half a year now.
When it costs over $100 for the family and I just to get seats, it had better be damn good. I support movies in the theatre, and have no problem spending that cash if my kids want to go.
But my kids are quite discerning, and they don’t like it when something that’s supposed to be entertaining is shoving a message down their throats. I don’t care personally, but my kids loathe it.

Back when movie tickets weren’t $25 dollars each, I’d go to the movies twice a week. Now? Once every couple of months because of the amount of trash being churned out. And it’s not worth the price of admission. If I spend $10 on a ticket, it didn’t matter if the movie was crap. At $25 per, it certainly does.

Most of the time I’ll just buy the Bluray because for 1/3 the cost, we can watch whatever we want.
However, we do go see movies often enough - I have a Cineplex membership, but I’ve cancelled it for now due to finances being very very tight due to me being on disability leave.
I’m pretty old school though, and I only watch anything streaming when a new season of Rick and Morty comes out, or any other stuff my kids want to watch.

Instead of monthly subscriptions to streaming services which usually have a fraction of things I actually want to see, I buy it instead. If I want to watch it again, I can. Instead of spending $50+ for television every single month, I instead spend that money on Blurays. Which is supporting the movie makers anyways.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 Ghool wrote:
I’m hoping for anything that’s not a frickin sequel, reboot, remake, or rehash that’s trying to cash in on nostalgia.
I’d like to see some new ideas for once. But that’s just a pipe dream.

Did you see Mickey 17 or Novocain?

We need to support these kinds of movies if we want studios to make them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
@MDG, audiences do not see original movies that are not sequels or linked to well known IPs in anywhere near the numbers that will go to see those things. An original, fresh take is worth maybe about $20-$50 million at the box office. Maybe $200 or $300 if it’s a breakout horror movie.

Audiences aren’t willing to pay for fresh material, only IP content.

As usual, we have sighted the enemy and it is us.

However, it could be argued that breakthrough innovation does not give customer what they said they wanted from products/services, it gives them what they did not even know they needed. That is innovation. .

Only partially.

Our viewing habits are our viewing habits, and are to be catered to.

But I’m arguing they’re not considering it fully. It’s not enough (except for me, I’m a slag) to just slap Star Wars on something and expect The Big Bucks. Instead, they need to consider what it is about, particular the OT, that people enjoyed.

It’s not the script. It’s not the acting. That’s all pretty middling. It’s the action, the effects, and their attention to detail.

For instance, the Cantina Scene. Dozens of no-named weirdo masks and some cunning gloves, and the whole galaxy explodes into being.

Canto Bight didn’t do that. Maz Kanata’s castle worked for me.

The space battles. Yavin blew our tiny minds. Endor stuffed them back in just to blow the all over again. Scariff absolutely nailed it and upped the ante, showing the Rebel’s desperate, unanticipated tactics were effective. Exegol? Now I do like that film, and that scene. But it’s too dark, too repetitive. The moment the free people’s fleet turns up is absolutely stellar. Only for all those ships to then do absolutely sod all. A case of so very near, but incredibly far.

So slow down, try to understand what it is that makes a film beloved, and try not to copy that, but to recreate it, in a hopefully novel way (Rogue One again nailed that, giving us more of the same but served up with spit, polish and some interesting new veggies)

The film industry is currently more interested in operating as a solid money spinner, rather than exploring boundaries and providing feedback on the human condition. Audiences are then left with what is produced, noting Ghool’s comments about affordability. The algorithm is all very well, but it too only operates on what has already been seen.

@Ghool, at those prices I can’t blame you. Where I live there is more competition, matinee pricing, $5 Tuesdays and options like that. In this case, I’ll blame the studios for pushing such high prices. At those prices, I would also only go to event movies.

And a lot of the smaller movies we want to see disappear from theaters before we get a chance to see them. We try to make sure to support them when watching them on streaming, if possible. It’s a shame that original movies consistently do poorly in theaters, though. I’d love to see more support for them and less Star Wars. Speaking of…


@Mad Doc Grotsnik. I don’t know how to say this without it coming across more insulting than I intend, but have you considered that you’re the reason they make stuff like Star Wars Lunchbox: the Movie? Why should they make good quality Star Wars when you will happily watch (and rewatch?) Rise of Skywalker level content? The non-captured customers have all left, and the ones who remain will watch anything?

 Flinty wrote:
The film industry is currently more interested in operating as a solid money spinner, rather than exploring boundaries and providing feedback on the human condition. Audiences are then left with what is produced, noting Ghool’s comments about affordability. The algorithm is all very well, but it too only operates on what has already been seen.

The previous generation of studio heads all moved up from the movie making industry. They made films. The current generation are all big business types who control studios as one part of their corporate empires. They make content.

Bobtheinquisitor wrote: Mad Doc Grotsnik. I don’t know how to say this without it coming across more insulting than I intend, but have you considered that you’re the reason they make stuff like Star Wars Lunchbox: the Movie? Why should they make good quality Star Wars when you will happily watch (and rewatch?) Rise of Skywalker level content? The non-captured customers have all left, and the ones who remain will watch anything?

No insult caused

But, I mean, kinda? But at the same time, and likewise no flame bait or drama etc? I can’t and won’t apologise for enjoying what I enjoy. And I’m typically happy enough with mediocrity.

What I do do (he, doo doo) is actively leave positive reviews for stuff I’ve genuinely enjoyed. For Star Wars, that’s Skeleton Crew (phenomenal), Andor (phenomenal) and Ahsoka (perfect continuation of Clone Wars and Rebels). Anything else I just sort of watch, and comment about in threads like this.

And remember folks, there’s a difference between discussing our often differing opinions, and outright questioning someone’s opinions.

Unless they enjoyed Section 31, in which we need to collectively seal them in a dustbin.

Finally I know who to blame for the downfall of civilized media for patricians.

"I gave given a name to pain, and it is Mad Doc Grotsnik" - Joker - Michael Scott

I regret nothing. I revel in cinematic filth.

 Ahtman wrote:
Finally I know who to blame for the downfall of civilized media for patricians.

"I gave given a name to pain, and it is Mad Doc Grotsnik" - Joker - Michael Scott

Lol, point taken.

Sorry, Mad Doc.

It’s all in good fun.

Unlike Section 31.

See. I do have some standards. They’re just really, really, really low.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
It’s all in good fun.

like Section 31.

See. I do have some standards. They’re just really, really, really low.

Is it Star Trek Discovery bad? Because I'm currently struggling through this series... and I've been lead to believe Section 31 is a Discovery tie-in.

First season in the Mirror Universe is good. Otherwise it’s not really worth bothering with.

Section 31 is a spin-off, and of absolutely no merit whatsoever, unless a tiny alien in a space scooter that can apparently just take over any machinery, that tries to blend in by wearing a Vulcan Skin Suit whilst not acting at all like a Vulcan and putting on the very worst Oirish (not Irish, Oirish, beggorah shelailagh top o’the mornin’ Jaysus Mrs Brown’s Boys actually pretty racist) accent ever is your idea of fun?

Or indeed if bothering to chase down the “baddie” that’s stolen a super weapon you know damned well can only be set off by yourself makes good plot sense to you.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
First season in the Mirror Universe is good.

It has a few good things but I'm not sure overall...