In your opinion what are the biggest problems in Hollywood cinema right now?

[StevenHarvey1990]

The biggest one for me is movie trends. This is everything that is wrong with film-making. It's more of a problem now than it ever was IMO. Any time a movie comes out and is successful all you get is a barrage of countless imitators or idiot execs coming out with shit like "we need one of those" or "we need to make our very different movie more like that" or "this story is totally R but we can do a PG-13 one and cut its balls off", like that one hit is the only movie anyone knows how to make or think anyone wants to see. My big belief is that "variety is the spice of life".

All anyone ever wants to do is copy what worked in the recent past. One example is the, "Oh Marvel made money, because they have a Cinematic Universe, we'll do that too" attitude. NO NO NO! First of all, Marvel are not a success because they have a Cinematic Universe, they are a success because they know how to make good ****ing movies with their characters! Can't you copy that you clowns? A good movie, there's a novel idea!!

Someone mentioned it in the 'Terminator 6' thread that someone involved in the "creative process" (I use that term loosely) said that for Terminator: Genisys they wanted to emulate Marvel and make the movie more superhero-y. What the ****! Honestly, I'm glad the movie shit the bed! How can you be so dumb and be trusted with so much god-damn money! Superhero movies and Terminator are worlds apart. WORLDS APART! I see comments like this all the time, so I don't doubt someone involved with Terminator franchise said that at all. Always putting the cart before the horse! Announcing trilogies and sequels left and right BEFORE your steaming pile of disaster is even released etc. Thinking people actually give a shit about an Aunt May movie. Seriously these people need a good hard slap then fired. Dumb shits!

Within this problem the biggest example is the Horror genre! God, it seems there is only room for one sub-genre at a time. As a Horror fan I like all sub-genres as do most fans of the genre. But noooo, we can't handle variety according to these imbeciles running studio's and green-lighting movies. It's so plain to see. Late 90's, early 00's post-Scream all the Horror you'd see was Slashers and poor rip-offs and imitators of that film. "Hey look, that worked because it was a Slasher" never mind the fact that it was a great Horror film. Then that dies down, not because people were sick of the sub-genre but because no-one had the nuts to do anything different, they'd just copy Scream. After that a guy called James Wan comes along. He smashes it with another great film that'd virtually create a new sub-genre with Saw in 2004. Thus the imitation game starts again! We're inundated with nothing but copycat films. Hostel and the like. That movie with Elisha Cuthbert, Captivity et al. All the while not being offered any counter programming, no 'original' Creature Features or Slashers to break the monotony. The 'torture porn' trend burns bright and fast and dies from fatigue and a lack of creativity rather quickly. Then Paranormal Activity hits and by Christ's beard I'm sick to my back teeth of its imitators and cheap cash- ins. Oh and another thing, why on earth aren't there more Horror movies released around Halloween time? Like, the one time of year when even casual Horror fans are craving something scary to go see! "I know, this Horror film will play best in the middle of August". IDIOTS!

This is my biggest hate with modern cinema. There are far too few trailblazers (or even sensible people like Jason Blum) and far too many idiotic sheep and glad-handing businessmen and women calling the shots when they haven't the foggiest ****ing idea on the creative side! Get your shit together Hollywood!!!

PS. I'm not talking about 'Indies' because for the most part they do have the nuts to try something new and/or innovative. Sad thing is, most lot of them are crippled by budget restrictions and bad acting. Then the the good ones a la Behind The Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon are overlooked because of a lack of marketing etc.

[Moviefan2k4]

I could sum it up my opinion this way: "Many in Hollywood seem to have a complete lack of desire for common decency or personal responsibility." They make films and TV shows which often pander to groups that complain the loudest about "offense", real or perceived, and push every boundary without thinking of the consequences. To paraphrase one of my fave films, such folks in the industry are "so concerned with whether they could, they didn't stop to think if they should".

Thankfully, there's still some respectful people though, whose work I continue to admire.

[Eagles612]

Lack of story and true creativity in the story. Writers today don't seem to put their emotions, their heart, etc. into their stories/characters nowadays. To me the story is the most important part of a film, everything else is secondary imo (actors, shot selections, locations, etc.).

I also completely agree with the OP. One hit movie brings a bunch of others that don't come close. But I understand why they do it. It's like they say in the nfl. It's a copycat league.

[trevanian]

Unwillingness on part of money folk to invest in innovative storytelling above a very tiny price point ... that's why most of the genuinely interesting and/or fresh stuff is on the tube.

Kubrick had only one hugely profitable hit when MGM gave him 6 mil to do 2001 50 years ago ... and they let that go to 10.5 (work out with inflation that this budget is probably equivalent to 350mil now, especially if you consider the interest on the money invested built up over the better part of 4 years from deal being signed in 64 to film releasing in 68.) By comparison now, you pretty much have to operate on Spike Jones budgets to get a genuine artistic visiion in a theater, which is fine in some cases, but crippling with others.

Plus the usual any-innovation-that-slips-through-gets-recycled-endlessly thing, with the 'baddie gets himself captured to effect plan from within' thing being SO overused after TDK.

And to give the devil his due, it is OUR fault too, because for so long as we (worldwide audience) ponies up cash for what they are putting out there, we're going to get more of the same. I consider myself a rabid cinephile -- used to see at least 100 movies in the theater each year -- and yet I have not set foot in a movie theater in over a year, and for that it was because I was required to see a screening before writing about a particular film. The last time I saw something more than once in a theater was SERENITY, and more than twice was THE MATRIX (if I'd known how good CHILDREN OF MEN was going to be, that would have been a 3- or 4-timer, I missed bigtime on that.)

It isn't that silence gives assent -- no matter how loud we get about how crappy most films there, that ain't gonna change. And with a large element of the worldwide market seemingly a ton less discerning even than us , the die seems cast.

[trevanian]

Originally Posted by Eagles612

Writers today don't seem to put their emotions, their heart, etc. into their stories/characters nowadays.

That's why they are better off being showrunners on TV, because their heart and their vision doesn't HAVE to get diluted by the inevitable rewrites that occur with pretty much all features. Can you imagine what FIELD OF DREAMS would play like if the studio insisted Lindelof do a 'punch-up' before shooting? Costner would probably hear 'the voice' coming from a burning bush or first-base bag.

[Tony208]

Everything is awesome.

[Coenskubrick]

I guess there are a million things I could say, including how development and pandering to audiences often destroys what originality and uniqueness a film might have, and how so much is dumped into remakes without reason (especially the latest trend of Disney ones), but you know, it's not something that's going to change from yelling about it, though that can sometimes be cathartic. Maybe people need to build a new industry, a new "new wave". It sure would be nice if we could generate excitement about non-Hollywood productions, and start seeing some real conceptual innovation again...

[P-Rock]

Creativity: everything is a copy of a copy of a...

[dgoswald]

Originally Posted by Eagles612

Lack of story and true creativity in the story. Writers today don't seem to put their emotions, their heart, etc. into their stories/characters nowadays. To me the story is the most important part of a film, everything else is secondary imo (actors, shot selections, locations, etc.).

They don't have any meaningful experiences to draw on that can be translated into compelling stories for any medium, be it film or something else. Instead, you get sterile, comfortable, uninspired "products" from the minds of people living congenial, safe, relatively content existences. Where's that burning desire to turn life into compelling art when the most you desire is fame and fortune? That may motivate some, but it's not my idea of brilliance.

Maybe there's a closed-shop hegemony that means anyone who DOES have those experiences, for whatever reason - not to do with skill or competence - isn't allowed into that world because he or she doesn't know the right people. This is the biggest problem facing creativity in all fields in the world today, particularly in Hollywood whereby It's become a pursuit for the well-connected and already well-to-do. Anyone wishing to rise to the top based purely on merit is going to have an impossible time of it.

[trevanian]

Originally Posted by dgoswald

They don't have any meaningful experiences to draw on that can be translated into compelling stories for any medium, be it film or something else. Instead, you get sterile, comfortable, uninspired "products" from the minds of people living congenial, safe, relatively content existences.

That's an argument I've seen posited with respect to original STAR TREK vs what came along in the 80s and since. You had ww2 vets who had lived through some stuff writing the originals, but most creative folks on TNG and later had only READ about people who had lived such, so you were getting a diluted and warmed-over view rather than a fresh one.

[Number 6]

Lack of creative writing. Years ago I watched a interview with Clint Eastwood. During the interview he mentioned he had a hard time finding a studio that would make "Mystic River" because the studios weren't interested in making a movie with a story. The same holds true today. The trend in Hollywood has been to hire a popular leading male, compliment him with a sexy actress, and rely on a heavy dose of sex, violence and special effects. Then clone and franchise it.

[Doctor Jack]

It's a business. They do what makes money. Everyone can complain about this and that but guess what, it is never going to change. It won't change until audiences get smarter and demand better stories. When a movie like Jurassic World, which went full retard, makes as much money as it did, what incentive does Hollywood have to change?

[42041]

The same problem Hollywood cinema's always had: mediocrity. These days mediocrity is more expensive and professional-looking, which almost makes it worse in a way, at least ineptness has its creaky charm. Movies like Jurassic World are such competently made and well-crafted creative voids that it's somehow worse for it.

[Astro Zombie]

I would totally watch an Aunt May movie

[Abby is Q]

The nerds who go and watch mediocre movies twenty times in the theaters and give execs a reason to pump hundreds of millions of dollars into another mediocre movie.

[JeffTheMovieGuy]

A series of movies that are Rated R and then they release a sequel and it's PG-13.

Purchasing a ticket to a rated R movie should be a coming of age experience.

[sandman slim]

In a word, money. The people in charge are all rich, and like all rich people, the only thing they understand is more money. They've come to think of films as commodities rather than art, as a financial process rather than a creative one, so when things go wrong, the solution simply must be to throw more money at it. Which is how you get to where we are today, with blockbusters costing upwards of $200 million each being the new normal, and everything being planned as a multi-picture universe before the first film has even finished filming.

(The exception that proves the rule being Jason Blum. His movies are cheap, without looking cheap, are generally popular, and almost always turn a good profit. The creative people are happy, because they get to tell the stories they wanted to. The audiences are happy, because they get to see a good movie. The investors are happy because they make money. Hopefully, the next trend Hollywood imitates will be Blumhouse.)

[The Debts]

The mentality that EVERYTHING must have a sequel. For example, though I'm bummed for Del Toro's sake, Pacific Rim does not need another installment. It's a perfect open and shut case. No loose threads, the bad guys are defeated, characters have complete arcs - Bing, bang boom. There's no need for another film.

Another one is marketing and release dates. Some of the best movies out there can get totally screwed by either the way they try to present them to the public (a recent example like Edge of Tomorrow, which had a way better title from the light novel it was based off of) or straight up underestimating the competition (poor old Man From UNCLE, which got screwed by the double whammy of MI5 and Straight Outta Compton).

Limited releases. When there's a movie out there I want to see, I want to see it locally, not travel all the way to New York or some bull**** just because you're afraid that people might be forced to read while watching a movie or that you want to scoop up that meaningless gold stature.

[MrBlonde]

Originally Posted by Abby is Q

The nerds who go and watch mediocre movies twenty times in the theaters and give execs a reason to pump hundreds of millions of dollars into another mediocre movie.

This.

The problem is the people who complain about "DAE THINK HOLLYWOOD IS OUT OF IDEAS?" and then go see every generic Hollywood vomit that comes out.

[mdonovan]

I don't want to write a huge diatribe so I will just put a list together ...

1. Lack of story ingenuity
2. Over used special effects at the expense of good dialogue .. see Peter Jackson.
3. Not enough location shooting or physical set building ... too many green screen shoots
4. Derth of acting talent ... Fassbender's seem to be a rarity. this could be a result of over reliance on digital fx for environment and prosthetic fx. the actor is acting in a vacuum using their imagination.
5. Studios are afraid to spend money on something that is not a 'sure thing'. This less originality.
6. Lack of a middle ground between art house and blockbuster.
7. Overuse of digital prosthetics instead of physical makeup. Watch Crobenburg's The Fly ... you know it's a guy in a rubber suit ... but the immediacy of Goldblums's presence would be hard to replicate digitally
8. lack of trust in the audience by the studio .. movies are being dumbed down to the lowest common denominator because some studio exec says 'they won't get it' ... Kubrick's head might have exploded if he was told that while filming 2001.