Posted on 06/24/2026 6:05:36 PM PDT by simpson96
Why is nothing new happening in film?
You’ve noticed. Sequel after sequel, unmemorable plots, films you don’t care about discussing the next day.
Yeah, it didn’t use to be like this.
Filmgoers in the 20th century had a bonanza of new genres or styles of film. Every decade birthed two or more. Film started in the 1910s with a big dose of Charlie Chaplin. Sound entered the picture in the ‘20s, and the films got bigger. The 1930s exploded with Gangster Films, Spectacle Films, Musicals, and Slapstick Comedy. In the 1940s came Power Women Films, Film Noir, and Italian Neorealism. The 1950s birthed the Teenager Films (”teenagers” didn’t really exist until that), Alien Scare Films, and Biblical Films. All of these genres were brand new to audiences at the time. Exciting stuff.
The 1960s blew the roof off film with a slew of new directors. The French New Wave (and all the rest of Europe) brought Godard, Antonioni, Tarkovski, and Fellini. And the start of Hollywood Maverick Films followed, with directors like Coppola, Lucas, and Friedkin. That Maverick filmmaking continued into the 1970s, where we saw the birth of the Blockbuster Film. (Yes, at one point it was a new concept.)
The 1980s birthed The Sequel as a genre of its own, as well as Buddy Cop Films, Big Glossy Comedies, and more Blockbusters. In the 1990s, we again got something new in film: Indie Film.
Starting with 2000, though, this continuous birthing of new film genres and styles stopped. You could still find a good film or two, but there was no new movement or genre, really. And you deserved one.
We should have had one in the 2000s. It was a fresh decade, century, and millennium all in one. The decade’s first half gave us more strong Indies from directors like David Lynch and Darren Aronofsky, and more blockbusters and their sequels. But, right when one would expect some new genre or style in film, Tech entered the picture in the form of “user-generated” online video and social media.
Filmgoers were understandably distracted by these two new tech engagements, which began pulling them away from filmgoing and shot fear through the hearts of studio executives. They didn’t want to suffer the same fate as the music industry just a few years before, so they went into fear mode. They were already dealing with DVD rentals and sales — major Studio revenue - taking a dive, thanks to Netflix’s online video hosting. They doubled down on what they felt was “safe”: more sequels and more films based on established IP (comic books, old TV series, nostalgia games and toys). No new film genre in that decade.
In the 2010’s, we got even further away from any new film genre or style. The top-20 box-office films consisted of 15 sequels, four new comic-book films, and one remake.
Not only had Indie film production waned, but original mid-range-budget films ($20-50m rom-coms, comedies, and dramas) were rare. There was a gap. So, while the studios went headlong into their “safe” films and endless sequels, tech companies (now streamers) filled in that Indie and mid-range budget film gap. This was great — at first. Many filmmakers celebrated what looked like a revival of those films the studios had abandoned. And thanks to the streamers, new films (and series) from Spike Lee, Cary Joji Fukunaga, and David Fincher emerged.
However, streamers have the DNA of tech companies, not film studios, and their hunger for “user scaling” overwhelms everything else. They needed to expand into other countries fast and also make sure their current subscribers didn’t quit. The result was not films and series, but “content” — just stuff for their websites. For foreign countries, they had to have content you could understand without knowing the language: action, horror, thrillers. To keep current subscribers, they needed stuff that you could have on in the background, a “second screen” to keep you company while you scrolled through your Instagram and answered emails on the “primary screen” of your phone or laptop. Some excellent films were still being done, but they were outliers. Basically, instead of getting a new film genre or style that would thrill us in the 2010s, we got the Content Conveyor Belt.
So far, the 2020s seem the same: no new film style or genre. There are 13 sequels in the top 20 box office films. Not great. The streamers, meantime, are making more and more “specious films” — films that look as if they have value (big stars, big marketing campaigns) but actually don’t. And now, as if on cue, there’s generative artificial intelligence (GAI), which allows Studio and streamer executives to cut labor overhead. If you can “generate content” without dealing with and paying filmmakers, actors, locations, and crew, your quarterly profit margins will really shine.
Because using GAl can eliminate most of the people who make a film, it will cause the structure of the film business to collapse. However (a big however), great filmmakers are not going to stop making films. It’s what they do; they can’t help themselves. A new film business is growing, one that is real and raw and human. When the audience becomes sick of the GAl content that is about to kill their culture altogether, these fresh new films will be waiting for them on the other side.
The Birth of the New is coming. And you deserve it.
What about the Mary Sue Girl Boss movies of the woke era? Many of them are sequels, but they follow different story arcs than the originals
I think Justine leans right, unlike her tard brother.
A great film is one you remember forever.
A bad film is one you forget while looking for your car in the parking lot.............
No digging required. Their search engine and genre pick list gets it done quickly.
GAI is just a tool. Used properly, the very same great movies can be made but made quicker and cheaper using GAI.
GAI can create sets, place people in positions normal movie making would take days or require high risks.
GAI can be a fantastic tool, but you I know the result will be just more chicks flying through the air with swords. Sorry, Kill Bill, but Uma Thurman was right, cinema is no longer what it used to be after that film.
The other week I was looking for a recent film to go and see at the theater. I was having a hard time finding something for adults, where the plotline ultimately wound up wrapping around Satan or manifestations thereof.
Sometimes, I’m in the mood for that kind of film, just not always. Such films usually end up being both gory, hyper violent and predictable. Late last year, there was a movie starring Marlon Wayans called Him. It was about this young quarterack who is invited to train at the isolated compound of an aging, legendary NFL superstar (Wayans), only to descend into a terrifying, cult like world of fame and obsession.
That movie quickly fell into high levels of bloody and gratuitous violence, with many dark allusions to Devil Worship. I didn’t think that part was going to happen at least not before the main characters had all been introduced and defined. I was wrong. I left early. Better luck next time. This is NOT the Wayans Family I used to see on that comedy show In Living Color.
Films died when the characters became ridiculously over-angry, brutal, and over-the-top aggressive, and when skinny 90 lb womenz began whooping the ever loving snot out of gangs of 20 or so burley 250 lb biker members single handedly. And also when the w9ke crap infested the movies!
Then you have directors like Greengrass. You can’t tell if it is a real movie or some guy on bike with a camera.
“Where the plotline DID NOT involve Satan”
is what I meant to say.
“Can also be said about popular music.”
Beat me to it!
There are many contributing factors. My theory is that film, music, etc. are all just mediums of dialogue and thought. Great scripts are not being produced, on the whole, because our culture has lost the ability to engage in deep dialogue and thought. This is a symptom of the moral and educational decay which began heavily in the mid century.
the furnace in a corner full of dust bunnies that have been there since 1987.>>> Yes and Greengrass who makes a point to move the camera around so you can’t really get a view on what he’s shooting. I gues he figure the bad acting can be surpassed by really bad camera work.
Meh I liked the movie kill Bill. It was over the top, sure, but that was the point I think, making fun of all the over the top crap in movies these days.
You see that is the problem.
There is almost no actual "new" stuff.
It is all based on old stuff.
It is not just movies either, books, music and even fashion is old stuff with a few tweaks.
“This is a symptom of the moral and educational decay which began heavily in the mid century.”
And also, what social media has done to the young generation’s attention spans. The younger they are, the shorter their attention span. You would be flabbergasted at how many pre-teens and teens can’t focus for more that 3 or 4 seconds. Having a conversation is impossible with them.
Women
As with most series…it gets pretty thin in the last few seasons. But I liked most of it.
Jason....or “Alex?”
Jason Batman.
I’m in the middle of season 3 and they started using older AI for ship wash... Kinda bummed me out but I’m still with it...
She wasn’t terribly solid on that until recently.
Check her donation record: https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/results?name=Justine+Bateman
She gave money to the Writer’s Guild PAC - the same Guild that is one big reason why modern movies are awful.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.