(no subject)

[case]

F!S Anon Meme (the Tenth?)

Secrets, rants, opinions, anything you want to say about your fandom or a fandom or fandom in general, do it here! Anonymously, of course. Get it all off your chest.

Some ground rules:
1. Going anon is encouraged but not absolutely required (for those who struggle with captchas and stuff).
2. No autoplaying/autolooping embeds, or embeds that cover/stretch the screen.
3. No dropping personal info or IRL contact info, etc.

That's about it!

List of General Threads (for easy access!)
a. Vid Rec thread
b. Positivity thread
c. What do you think of other F!S members?
d. Best Comments thread
e. Canceled Shows thread
f. Confessions thread
g. TMI thread
h. Which fictional character would you be...
i. "Is this offensive?"
j. In the good ol' days of fandom...
k. Popular fanfic you don't like
l. Really weird things you read in fanfics

Comments

"Normal" movies were more diverse in the past than they are now

[(Anonymous)]

Don't get me wrong -- when it comes to really unique movies, summer/winter blockbusters, adaptations of books/plays, and independent movies, we've been getting better and better. But so-called "normal" movies -- crime movies, comedies, movies about historical events, plotty movies with original plots that focus on the story, or most especially, romances -- things were a whole lot more diverse and interesting in the past.

There only seems to be two ways to make these sort of movies nowadays -- dumb OTT Apatow-ish comedy or pretentious, dull, faux-'realistic', dreary narcissism about some boring person's life. (Even movies whose premises are technically interesting generally get forced to conform to the second type as much as possible.)

Does anyone else agree, or have I just not been seeing the right movies?

Re: "Normal" movies were more diverse in the past than they are now

[(Anonymous)]

I can agree - we get boring faux 'Shock value' shit or boring Oscar bait.

I also think we're seeing less disaster movies, which is a pity.

Re: "Normal" movies were more diverse in the past than they are now

[fingalsanteater]

I hate to agree because I hate the whole "get off my lawn, "it was better in the old days" bullshit, but I hate or am meh about 99% of newer stuff. Which is super hypocritical because I love the shit out of some '90's action shlock and the like. Maybe those movies were better or maybe it's nostalgia goggles, but I enjoy the fuck out of crap like True Lies and The Rock, but hate The Expendables, for example.

Re: "Normal" movies were more diverse in the past than they are now

[quantumreality]

I will say from the POV of drama and storytelling? Some movies made in the 1940s to the 1970s easily rival anything made today.

But in terms of sheer realism of the special effects that can be brought to bear? No contest. Something like the Hunger Games just couldn't have been filmed prior to maybe 1995.

Re: "Normal" movies were more diverse in the past than they are now

[(Anonymous)]

Not as sure about movies in general, but I feel TV definitely was.

Like Fresh Prince and the Cosby Show weren't "black" shows. They were shows. That also happened to have black casts. Same goes for stuff like Sister Sister and Smart Guy and Kenan & Kel.

And then you had stuff like the Magic School Bus and Captain Planet and even the Burger King kids. And yeah, it can be argued "tokenism" and stuff. But as long as the character weren't defined by their race (which they weren't), I really don't see problem.

Well, I think there have been a lot of interesting movies about historical events/real people

[(Anonymous)]

12 Years a Slave, Zero Dark Thirty, Captain Phillips, Dallas Buyers Club, Philomena, American Hustle, Argo, Lincoln