I think this sentiment reveals one of the major flaws within the movie industry, specifically that reviewers feel compelled to watch (and review) movies. But going to the movies is a self-selecting process. If you don’t enjoy Hallmark Christmas movies because they are all the same, or you hate comic book movies because you’ve seen all of them, or you think auteur experiments are self-indulgent and pointless, you can just watch something else. Those movies weren’t made for you.
But capitalism has turned snark into a commodity. People don’t click on glowing reviews. Take-downs, drama, and wit entertain readers the same way that Hallmark Christmas movies do. The audience and the creators attract each other.
If you want it to go away, the best advice remains the catchy jingle by Paul Anka and Lisa Simpsons: “Just don’t look.”
No, but then it probably isn’t for me. I also haven’t seen Glitter. I might have gone to see it if Coppola was there to lead a discussion on the themes of the film, though. Good or bad, that would be a fascinating experience.
I remember one time at the Philadelphia Film Fest, I saw a terrible movie starring Alan Cumming and David Boreanaz, and while I didn’t think it was a great film, Boreanaz was there for a post-film Q&A. Cumming might have also been there, but it’s hard to remember exactly who was on the panel. I just vivdly remember Boreanaz because he mentioned his dad was in the audience, and he pointed to the guy seated next to me. Regardless, it would be fun to hear any creator talk about their labor of love, their process, and what they were trying to create.
I agree, but I also think as part of the larger conversation about movies and cinemas it’s pretty obvious how this fits in. People with enough money or sway can force their poorly conceived garbage down the public’s throats long after it’s clear it doesn’t perform well. Hard for me to go along with the sympathy movie theaters are trying to drum up when there are plenty of local or indie movies I’d happily pay to see but instead they’re screening this. Not to mention that articles like this, even though they’re negative, prompt more conversation about the movie and may be the reason some people go and see it. It’s a failure of capitalism in the microcosm. The market decided this was bad, but capital does not care. They will force it to the forefront out of sheer vanity.
I mean, nobody is forcing anyone to see any of this. I haven’t even seen the movie. I might. I might not. It’s up to me.
I think this sentiment reveals one of the major flaws within the movie industry, specifically that reviewers feel compelled to watch (and review) movies. But going to the movies is a self-selecting process. If you don’t enjoy Hallmark Christmas movies because they are all the same, or you hate comic book movies because you’ve seen all of them, or you think auteur experiments are self-indulgent and pointless, you can just watch something else. Those movies weren’t made for you.
But capitalism has turned snark into a commodity. People don’t click on glowing reviews. Take-downs, drama, and wit entertain readers the same way that Hallmark Christmas movies do. The audience and the creators attract each other.
If you want it to go away, the best advice remains the catchy jingle by Paul Anka and Lisa Simpsons: “Just don’t look.”
Your comment sounds wise and probably is. But have you actually tried watching Megalopolis?
I gave Glitter a 7/10, and even I couldn’t watch Megalopolis.
No, but then it probably isn’t for me. I also haven’t seen Glitter. I might have gone to see it if Coppola was there to lead a discussion on the themes of the film, though. Good or bad, that would be a fascinating experience.
I remember one time at the Philadelphia Film Fest, I saw a terrible movie starring Alan Cumming and David Boreanaz, and while I didn’t think it was a great film, Boreanaz was there for a post-film Q&A. Cumming might have also been there, but it’s hard to remember exactly who was on the panel. I just vivdly remember Boreanaz because he mentioned his dad was in the audience, and he pointed to the guy seated next to me. Regardless, it would be fun to hear any creator talk about their labor of love, their process, and what they were trying to create.
Glitter is an 8/10 so-bad-it’s-good movie for sure, just randomly watched it last night!
I agree, but I also think as part of the larger conversation about movies and cinemas it’s pretty obvious how this fits in. People with enough money or sway can force their poorly conceived garbage down the public’s throats long after it’s clear it doesn’t perform well. Hard for me to go along with the sympathy movie theaters are trying to drum up when there are plenty of local or indie movies I’d happily pay to see but instead they’re screening this. Not to mention that articles like this, even though they’re negative, prompt more conversation about the movie and may be the reason some people go and see it. It’s a failure of capitalism in the microcosm. The market decided this was bad, but capital does not care. They will force it to the forefront out of sheer vanity.
Well then, sir, the internet will shame you until you do see the movie… or don’t.
You should try it. Can you endure it for 15 minutes? Are you strong enough?
It is on Netflix (Germany), and so I already paid for it. Had to give up after 6 minutes.
I honestly hadn’t even heard about it before this post, so talking about it certainly just brings it more attention