h a l f b a k e r yLike you could do any better.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Oscars 2020 had no host
Oscars 2021 might have no movies
Since the shooting schedules are massively affected, and
since
Spielberg's rule (that eligible movies must be shown in
theaters) is impossible to follow...
Instead of Oscars 2021, create a produced show of all the
old
great movies
and performances that have been
overlooked by
Oscars.
Right at Your Door
https://www.imdb.co...67/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
Interesting [8th of 7, Apr 13 2020]
[link]
|
| |
"Right at Your Door" might do well ... <link> |
|
| |
And of course "Contagion", and "Outbreak" ... |
|
| |
This is very good. Also might serve to shame
Hollywood for creating such a crapfactory by
comparing old quality products to the new assembly
line garbage comic book re-hash flicks that are the
mainstay of the industry now. |
|
| |
Ah, nostalgia isn't what it used to be ... |
|
| |
The public get what they pay for. Nobody spends millions making a movie that won't sell, so careful research is done. The result is that the studios know that what the public will pay for is poor-quality third-rate mindless rubbish. |
|
| |
So that's exactly what they get. |
|
| |
If they want something different, and will pay to watch it, that's what they'll get too. |
|
| |
There's two reasons to get into any industry, to
advance the art form, or to set it back for financial
gain. Sort of like getting into medicine and
realizing "Hey, people are stupid and will take
herbal crap and I'll make more money. Real
medicine takes research, time and investment. A
simple lie brings immediate financial gain. I'll get a
big house, a car that can go faster than I'll ever
drive and a trophy wife who hates me but loves my
money!" |
|
| |
Hollywood has discovered the profitable latter
concept, but investing in a crappy product isn't
always the smartest long term move. (not that
they care) Eventually they'll wonder why nobody
goes to the movies anymore. |
|
| |
.... at which point another entity will arise to fill that economic/ecological niche. |
|
| |
Live theatre goes back millennia. Until 150 years ago it was the only option, so the audience paid for what they could get. |
|
| |
Then came photography, magic lanterns, finally movies. Live performances were partially supplanted, but survived. |
|
| |
Then came television. Live performance gained a new outlet. Movies were pressured, but evolved and survived. |
|
| |
Then came the internet ... |
|
| |
Now, class, is anyone seeing a pattern here ? |
|
| |
[doc], would you like to come up to the front and explain to everyone what conclusions, if any, can be drawn ? |
|
| |
If you wouldn't, there are other options, but we assure you that all of them are substantially more unpleasant for you than the one immediately offered. |
|
| |
(Steps up, aggressively grabs the pointer stick.) |
|
| |
As the information flows faster and faster, the
human
mind's wiring will evolve to adjust. Entertainment
is one
area where the data flow is going to have to keep
up.
This little dip where an entire industry wasted the
good
work of the people who created that industry is
endemic
of that change, but it isn't the cause. |
|
| |
The hours of sitting quietly and reading a book will
be
gone, an anachronism like a 5 megabyte hard drive
the
size
of a washing machine. The stories are still valid,
but Moby
Dick and Nineteen Eighty Four will have to be
assimilated
in a matter of seconds, not hours. |
|
| |
The mechanism for this data transfer is unclear,
but the
science of data technology is only about six
seconds old in
the grand scheme of things. While this evolution
takes
place, creators of entertainment will need to find
ways to
keep people's attention in the meantime. |
|
| |
For instance, see how sleepy you're getting? With
each
word I write, neurons and synapses are looking
desperately for something else to stimulate and
trigger
them. |
|
| |
And like a light-switch.... they're onto another
task, and
you're looking at something about custard. |
|
| |
I know I am. I almost fell asleep writing that. |
|
| |
That's because it's time for you to step into your regeneration alcove to recharge. |
|
| |
You have done well, and as a reward you will be allowed to sit some distance away from [Voice], thus sparing you the unpleasant odour of warm, damp, urine-soaked garments (other than your own, that is). |
|
| |
//Nobody spends millions making a movie that won't sell// |
|
| |
Actually, that does sometimes happen. |
|
| |
I'd prefer to get rid of those obnoxious award shows altogether. This seems like the perfect opportunity. |
|
| |
And mindless superhero movies do quite well in
China. A guy in a cape flying through the air and
punching a bad guy in the face doesn’t need a lot
of dialog. Or plot, or creativity, or artistry. But
China buys it so enjoy your new art controllers
America. And your incredibly mindless assembly
line movies. |
|
| |
// mindless assembly line // |
|
| |
1. America buys cheap mindless assembly line consumer goods from China. |
|
| |
2. China buys cheap mindless assembly line consumer movies from America. |
|
| |
This is not "art". The stereotype of the "artist starving in a garret" is predicated on the fact that true artists are often driven to create whether their creations are saleable or not. Artists who make any money from their work are a small minority, but they continue to create. |
|
| |
Movies, like TV, are a consumer product. Thus they are driven by what will sell, not what is "artistic". "Art" movies are indeed made, and very occasionally one bobs up into the mainstream, but mostly they are merely a cost to their creators. |
|
| |
However, it would be wrong to categorize them as "vanity projects". They are rarely created for reasons of personal vanity, but more the "creative impulse". |
|
| |
The thing is, art and practical commerce aren't
mutually exclusive. |
|
| |
The Star Trek franchise was very successful. It was
created by and American B-17 pilot who flew many
missions in the Pacific in WW2. Working class guy,
very smart. After he served, became a motorcycle
cop in southern California. In his spare time he
worked on screen writing gigs, wrote for western
tv shows etc. Came up with an idea for what he
called "wagon trains to space". |
|
| |
Gene Rodenberry created his
secular humanist view of the future with lots
stories about how mankind might approach
theoretical challenges with exciting stories of discovery,
bravery,
technology and being in the hight of the cold war,
even left open the possibility that our former
enemy, the Russians, might be given low level jobs
taking directions from Americans as we flew our
starships about the universe finding green women
to bang. The English, Scottish, whatever, would be
employed in the engine room given consideration
that they did technically invent the first engine.
Hillbillies would be allowed on the bridge if they
could provide proof that they've been certified as
a doctor able to use the medical technology which
made procedures which were formerly very complicated
as
easy as pointing a ballpoint pen that made a
whirring noise at the person's head. |
|
| |
It was quite socially progressive. It had vision, it
had guts and it had financial success. |
|
| |
As of July 2016, the Star Trek franchise has made
ten billion dollars in revenue. |
|
| |
However that's a long term visionary investment.
Stupid people wouldn't be able to do that. Looking
at a short term bottom line is easy, any idiot with
a Harvard degree can do that, and they do. |
|
| |
// aren't mutually exclusive // |
|
| |
This is correct. There are always outliers. |
|
| |
But on the average, P. T. Barnum had it nailed. |
|
| |
But where is he now? Dead that's how. |
|
| |
So are you all ... eventually. |
|
| |
<Obligatory Blade Runner Misquote> |
|
| |
"Too bad you won't live ... but then again, who does ?" |
|
| |
Here, have an origami unicorn. |
|
| |
<Carefully places unicorn on shelf next to Voight-Kampff machine/> |
|
| |
The value money is set in society. dictates the outcomes. Set high. every one will be doing all the tricks in the book to get the return and stay on the escalator. The pressure on everyone then increases to follow suit and the large money good/average movies result. |
|
| |
Set lower, other dimensions on society can come into play and people are freer to do what they want, for better or worse. Artistic and new thought lines then have capital to widen movie possibilities. |
|
| |
Basically. the virtual realm has warped basic monetary value and I don't know how this will be redressed. Hopefully money ends up being just tool in humanities life rather than a goal supported by the burning of human life. |
|
| |
By the way, Oscar's for unheard of movies is a good idea. |
|
| |
//the virtual realm has warped basic monetary value// |
|
| |
What does unwarped basic monetary value look like, and
what are the boundaries of the virtual realm, [wjt]? If you
can give good answers to those questions, then some
accountants in Panama will be very keen to buy you lunch. |
|
| |
//What does unwarped basic monetary // |
|
| |
I'll trade you this little empty Manhattan island which just
has lots of big rocks and trees, for that great shell necklace |
|
| |
//What does unwarped basic monetary value look like// |
|
| |
True that, it's hard putting a price on large groups of ones and zeros that can be copied in a blink of an eye and supplied on a very low cost communication system. |
|
| |
Monetary "value" at anything more than a barter level is just a social consensus, an abstraction, a consensually-shared illusion. It has no objective reality. |
|
| |
It's just one of the many things that humans invent to make their lives more difficult and miserable. |
|
| |
Yes, of course it does. Politicians use it all the time. Most people are predisposed to be fooled if they can be convinced that they can get something for nothing. |
|
| |
Some people came up with money and market prices so that they could exploit other people who had a less clear understanding. John Law; the South Sea bubble; the Railway mania; Tulip mania; the Dot-Com boom-and bust. Result ? Misery for the many, enrichment for the few. |
|
| |
Wikipedia will be your friend on that one. |
|
| |
"Some" indicates "not all" - i.e. a minority. This group recognises the innate weakness of the majority, and sets out to exploit it. |
|
| |
While the majority do indeed benefit -most of the time - from an abstracted system of exchange, it also creates inherent vulnerabilities. For example, it allows governments to depreciate the currency, impoverishing the already poor to the benefit of the wealthy and powerful, who tend to invest in non-depreciating assets such as land. |
|
| |
Textbooks on basic economics are available online free of charge if you wish to study them You don't even have to barter. |
|
| |
We are of above-average stature. |
|
| |
"Goood .... gooood.... let the hate flow through you ... give in to your anger .... good ..." |
|
| |
Hey, how come there's a flame war here and I'm not
at the center of it? |
|
| |
Could we please check the invitations again? I think
there's been some mistake. |
|
| |
Shhh, if you want to spar, we'll meet you outside, please don't spoil this. We saw him first, find your own victim to pick on. |
|
| |
Less of a flame war, more of a kicking match with a millipede, but we'll take whatever we can get to relieve the monotony. |
|
| |