The only two shows on TV that aren't The Daily Show/Colbert Report are the Venture Bros and It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia. I generally like even horrible movies (unless they just bore the piss out of me).
Has anyone else noticed the trend with TV and movies lately
- Thread starter radioactive lemur
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Just curious but is this "The Walking Dead" show based on the comic series I used to collect? If so I might give it a shot.Woodsey said:
All of a sudden I'm reminded of Sturgeon's Law e.g. 90% of everything is shit. I still think there are a good enough number of quality(subjective term I know) movies being created.
I'm sick of this viewpoint that "everything I don't like is shit" and "everything that is mainstream must be shit". The same thread pops up every three days, and the same post is posted in many threads multiple times a day. It breads unnecessary negativity, something this site really doesn't need more of.Spot1990 said:
Lol, just to be clear. When saying TV is really good lately I'm referring ONLY to to the kind of shows with actual actors and plots and stuff. I'd only watch shit like Survivor or Dancing with the Stars, or that show about hoarders if I was strapped to a chair with my eyelids pried open. Reality TV, Contest shows like American Idol, stupid game shows, and the like can DIAF as far as I'm concerned. Oh, and Jersey Shore needs to do something worse than DIAF.Twad said:
And now for something funny: Vampires suck and meet the Spartans are from the EXACT same people. Even worse: Meet the spartans and Epic Movie are the same film.Warbandit said:
OT: The general rule I use to weed out shit is by not to go to anything you've heard about before. If you heard about it, it's hyped, therefore needs the hype to sell and therefore it can't be good. This brought me to a good night out with a girl to Inception.
Also: evade anything of Uwe Boll, the infamous video-game adapter. He is the number one reason video-game adaptations are bad by definition. His movies are bad like the Star wars christmas special, ergo NOT fun. If anyone wants to see a bad movie with you and suggests Uwe Boll, hit him in the face and suggest a movie from Troma studios (including movies like 'Killer Condom', 'Tromeo and Juliet' and 'Teenage cat girls in heat') or go for a movie like 'Repo the genetic opera'.
Geez bro, I said it was just an opinion and was wondering if other people felt the same way. I'm not begrudging people who feel differently or calling them idiots. Also, the only opinion I expressed is that MAINSTREAM TV is better lately than MAINSTREAM movies. Where did you get the impression I was some kind of hipster? I personally hate most inde and foreign stuff.Sturmdolch said:
Nope, I see some good and some bad in both. Then again I've pretty much stopped watching TV, so I'm not entirely sure.
You aren't aware of how long autopilot takes, are you? :CPirate Kitty said:
I did, now excuse me I have to go pretend to bullet proof my car with phone-books, and kittens.Numb1lp said:
Gratz!Twad said:
There is a trend towards making TV with DVD box sets in mind.
Not only are they immensely popular and also rather profitable, that latter point gets one-upped when you consider the cost-time-tradeoff for a box set vs bittorrent (piracy) actually tends to favour buying legit. In countries with archaic "internet quota" systems still (quite a few of them actually), buying the box set is almost always, morality aside, a better deal than downloading.
So you have increased profit on TV compared to the days of old. Only thing needed to capitalise on that are TV shows that lend themselves well to marathon sittings. Thats where deeper stories spanning multiple edisodes come in, as well as easter egss that require rewinding to unravel. These are all hallmarks of quality, and shit that there was simply no logical reason to include in a TV show whose profits came purely from syndication and commericals (although some, like Twin Peaks tried).
TLDR: DVD box sets -> changing audience expectations -> more profit potential -> more quality to back those expectations.
In contrast, cinema hasn't changed a damned bit.
Not only are they immensely popular and also rather profitable, that latter point gets one-upped when you consider the cost-time-tradeoff for a box set vs bittorrent (piracy) actually tends to favour buying legit. In countries with archaic "internet quota" systems still (quite a few of them actually), buying the box set is almost always, morality aside, a better deal than downloading.
So you have increased profit on TV compared to the days of old. Only thing needed to capitalise on that are TV shows that lend themselves well to marathon sittings. Thats where deeper stories spanning multiple edisodes come in, as well as easter egss that require rewinding to unravel. These are all hallmarks of quality, and shit that there was simply no logical reason to include in a TV show whose profits came purely from syndication and commericals (although some, like Twin Peaks tried).
TLDR: DVD box sets -> changing audience expectations -> more profit potential -> more quality to back those expectations.
In contrast, cinema hasn't changed a damned bit.
Cripes, I read your post wrong and came off as a total douche. Sorry about that! Also, I didn't mean to directly address you in my post, more the people that do think mainstream automatically = bad.radioactive lemur said:
Well, right now Hollywood seems to be on focusing on nostolgia trips, and super hero movies. We still have the ever-present kids movies, and chick flicks, but they are just that: ever present, and always generally a rung below whatever the current focus is. There are exceptions but that is where it's at.radioactive lemur said:
The thing to consider is that Super Heroes aren't all that deep, even when you go into the mythology behind them. Typically long-running characters simply have very long histories of things that happened due to consistant publications, very few story arcs are really all that complicated, even in "Adult" type titles and imprints. Nostolgia movies are generally aimed at the simplistic TV of yesterday, and at shows oriented at a younger viewership. "The Dukes Of Hazzard" was never paticularly deep for example, and you can't expect a movie made out of it or say "Miami Vice" to really change that. Shallow media is where it's at... things move in cycles. I think right now the desire for people in the USA is to experience simple things, since they are trying to get away from thinking about stuff that bothers them right now, rather than wanting to have their attention focused on yet more problems, or stretch their brains.
When it comes to TV, the guys doing those shows have a somewhat differant focus, and it's what they are doing that Hollywood is departing from and trying to be differant from on a lot of levels. Sure you see some overlap through things like "Smallville", but that represents something of an exception.
What's more movies have to be over with in 2 hours or so, TV shows typically get at LEAST six hours/episodes even in a trial run, and as much as 26 or so hours in some case. With less of a focus on doing totally stand-alone episodes, and networks letting them work with metaplots even through shows with a heavy focus on stand alone episodes, you can see them do a lot more.
The big problem I have with TV shows nowadays is that they seem to be doing too much "on the cheap", probably due to the economy. A lot of the coolest concepts they have come up with have ultimatly failed because they simply couldn't get the FX budget to do them right, and had to right around the limitations. I think what killed "Heroes" is that it turned into a mess because the writers spent most of their time coming up with stupid reasons to prevent people from doing much that was flashy and super, because that costs money that they simply did not have to put into the show. Fans never got a good Peter Vs. Sylar fight because they just couldn't afford to do one.
Such are my thoughts.
Very true. I don't really watch tv much now and couldn't get into things like 24 and Lost as I found them abit bland and boring but thats just me. In regards to movies its the same. There isn't really anything major that got me interested in regards to the "blockbusters" of this year. The only 2 movies I wanted to see this year and unfortunately haven't yet are The Expendables and Iron Man 2. Avatar I really couldn't give a shit about and I still don't. The only other movie I'm waiting for isn't out yet and thats Kung Fu Hustle 2, loved the 1st and the 2nd is gonna hopefully be even more awesome!Doctor Insanovic said:
I can't stand most TV shows. The plot is either predictable or retarded, the humor pathetic, the acting/voice acting in some shows is terribly bad (the Simpsons), and 99% or more of scientific information blatantly wrong (Futurama gets a pass on much of that, since it is mostly intentional when they get stuff wrong).
Don't get me wrong, movies aren't any better. With the occasional exceptions most newer ones are inane and mindless. But if Michael Bays monuments to shitty films (the Transfromers movies) are any indication, this bullshit still sells, so I'm not expecting any deep or engaging films ever again (oh sure, there will be some. I just don't care; I don't want to go wading in shit to look for them).
Don't get me wrong, movies aren't any better. With the occasional exceptions most newer ones are inane and mindless. But if Michael Bays monuments to shitty films (the Transfromers movies) are any indication, this bullshit still sells, so I'm not expecting any deep or engaging films ever again (oh sure, there will be some. I just don't care; I don't want to go wading in shit to look for them).
I agree with that in general. It is sad when the only director/writer to look forward to is Chris Nolan. There used to be many more. But the thing about TV though, is that you have to find it. Everything seems to be drowning in reality TV shows which I am not fond of.radioactive lemur said: