Movies and TV Shows

5229 readers

4 users here now

General discussion about movies and TV shows.

Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.

Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain [spoilers] in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title's subject matter.

Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown as follows:

::: your spoiler warning
the crazy movie ending that no one saw coming!
:::

Your mods are here to help if you need any clarification!

Subcommunities: The Bear (FX) - [[email protected]](/c/thebear @lemmy.film)

Related communities: [email protected] [email protected]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

264

Indiana Jones and Flash flopped hard. Could this be the beginning of the end for franchise films? (lemmy.film)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

138 comments fedilink hide all child comments

For the last few years franchise movies like star wars, marvel, etc. made money regardless of quality. However now it seems like audiences are being choosier when it comes to these kinds of tentpole releases. I've seen some people online say that the movie/theater industry is losing people in general but I don't think that's the case.

Super Mario and spiderverse made a lot of money. And Oppenheimer, Barbie, and Dune seem to be tracking well. I think the problem is that people are getting sick of the same old stuff and need more than just a brand name to go to the theater. What do you you think?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Apollonius_Cone 12 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I don't understand the apathy for Indiana Jones. It was a great film. Very entertaining and fun and was dedicated to the previous films. Some very touching moments. Maybe people want to wait until it comes out on a streaming service rather than watch it on the big screen. The big screen experience was worth it with lots of action scenes and Harrison being de-aged and fighting Nazi's, what's not to love.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's because 4 was bad and it's hard to believe that 80yr old Indy is still doing anything. Throw in the wonkiness of de aging and it's not exactly an attractive use of time.

[–] Apollonius_Cone 6 points 1 year ago

The traction that films with older actors such as Grumpy Old Men have limited appeal due to the age of the actual actor. I guess as I get older I just want to see my favourite actor in anything regardless of age. However, the expectation and delivery of entertainment is still there. I guess what George Lucas and Steven Speilberg have always tried to accomplish with their movie making is to grasp some of the anticipatory excitement that they garnered as children watching serials at the Bijou. Sure its campy and all in all mildly unbelievable, but the action delivers and so does the entertainment. The ability to escape was there.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Also a really really stupid name imo