After SuperHeroes , What Do You Think Will be the Next Big Thing in The Movies?

[Harpo]

Superhero films are popular now but once they fade front he scene what do you think will take their place? What do you think will be the next popular movie trend?

“Once they fade from the scene” - more than eight years since the start of this thread, let’s see how that long fade-out is going.
Of the all time top thirty biggest films, eleven were superhero films. Pretty big.
Of those eleven, only three had been released when this thread started, and only two were not Marvel films.

Conclusion: the fade-out is still a long way off

 

[KGeo777]

It is also a lot easier to re-show movies since they just stick in a 2k or 4k dvd.

 

[beccabear67]

It is an experience to see some of the great films on film, especially silents, in a theater. I've never seen Lawrence Of Arabia and I suspect on a big screen would be the ideal way, same with 2001. Basically, as with comic books, what sells best is something very visual.

 

[BAYLOR]

It is an experience to see some of the great films on film, especially silents, in a theater. I've never seen Lawrence Of Arabia and I suspect on a big screen would be the ideal way, same with 2001. Basically, as with comic books, what sells best is something very visual.

They looked great on the big screen .

I can remember at one of the local movie theaters on the billboard was 2001. This was about 4 or 5 years after the film's initial run.

 

[paeng]

The Inevitable Decline of Movies

The increasing consolidation of studios, streaming platforms’ limited reach original films, and the rise of TV all point to the inevitable contraction of movies.

observer.com

Less is more. Except when it’s not. And in the current case of movies, it is most decidedly not. The film industry is shrinking—by revenue, volume, value and old fashioned chutzpah. The past poor decisions by major executives and the present market realities are creating an ecosystem with heightened risk for theatrical films, a declining number of buyers in the market, and an economic model that favors alternative mediums.

...

As Blood, Sweat & Tears made famous, what goes up must indeed come down. From 1995 to 2009, the six major Hollywood studios—Disney, Warner Bros., Universal, Paramount (PARA), FOX (FOXA) and Sony—combined to release nearly 112 theatrical films per year on average. In the ensuing 14 years, excluding the phantom 2020, that number shrank to an average of just 83. The quiet demise of 20th Century Fox under Disney didn’t help. The five remaining big legacy studios still largely drive the box office and pop culture conversation and stand as Hollywood’s bellwethers of fortune. Yet their Jurassic Parkian T-Rex sized footprint is shrinking. Over the last 10 years, the number of theatrical movie tickets sold in the U.S. has dropped by 38 percent while the average ticket price has increased by 33 percent, per The Numbers. That means we are paying more for less wide-release studio product.

 

[Robert Zwilling]

"The past poor decisions by major executives and the present market realities are creating"

Most industries and enterprises are facing this situation today. It may mean that the original suppliers dry up but it also opens up the door for competition to come in out of left field which normally wouldn't be able to get a foothold. This opens up the market. The same way a car is a car body with wheels and and a engine. Looks the same on the outside but internally it doesn't look at all like the original model. If something is needed, it will get replaced.

 

[BAYLOR]

"The past poor decisions by major executives and the present market realities are creating"

Most industries and enterprises are facing this situation today. It may mean that the original suppliers dry up but it also opens up the door for competition to come in out of left field which normally wouldn't be able to get a foothold. This opens up the market. The same way a car is a car body with wheels and and a engine. Looks the same on the outside but internally it doesn't look at all like the original model. If something is needed, it will get replaced.

The return of the B type movie perhaps ?

 

[Harpo]

The return of the B type movie perhaps ?

Such as all those modern Sinbads?

After SuperHeroes , What Do You Think Will be the Next Big Thing in The Movies?

Of course film history matters but you bemoan modern business models when compared to old ones. If there is one thing we learn from history is that society and technology changes. People are still the same greedy, self-interested short-termist, arseholes they always have been (for the most part)...

www.sffchronicles.com

And of course probably the same goes for a hundred other old franchises

 

[KGeo777]

Art and sports aren't that different in that they are both biological expressions.
What can be more routine in theory than a sports match? And yet people are glued to watching them because there are individual factors and spontaneity etc. There is a woman basketball player in the US league who is breaking records and immensely popular--so that's a case where someone's individual merit has become a cultural force---a huge audience-magnet.
That could happen in film too--but there has to be a certain spontaneous development and opportunity for showcasing that.
It currently doesn't exist in the gatekeeper media. They have a brain-wasting disease at present. They want to reduce creative variety and personnel and thematic range.

I think they have to bring back focus to the performer and the writer. Seek to find interesting performers to watch and provide them with good writing to showcase their abilities.
And recruit filmmakers outside of their bubble.
I saw an article from 1969 where Chuck Connors was saying that Hollywood was the only business where they waste money and make reckless decisions and yet remain in business.
So it isn't new--although in 1969, there were dozens of film companies outside of Hollywood.
If they exist today--they are in some way tied in the corporate realm to Hollywood gatekeepers--if they are on the radar at all.

 

[beccabear67]

At a social as well as tech level many 'movie theaters' now are essentially large tv rooms. That is the experience I've found over the last couple of decades or so... thus the desire to try 3-D and larger screens which last was tried back when tv first became a competitor. People can now have pretty large sized screens and surround sound in their own home, so as well as something very visual there needs to be an experience not of simply a large tv room. Even in a post-film situation if you have no theaters, or no use for them... you have no actual box offices, and no 'movies'; you simply have video. You will rent a video or pay for a video service on the size and sound/picture quality you are capable of getting for yourself.

When almost all people stop wanting to see something in a theater setting that will be the end of that phase on what we've called 'the movies'. Let's be honest, you're usually talking about a movie theater audience in minuses more than positives (popcorn breath, people talking or using devices, kids behaving badly, wearing whatever), plus the having to travel to the theater, which might be not all convenient or inviting. I hope we'll always have the arthouse cinemas, same as for printed books and magazines, but we certainly don't have to. I suspect kids getting away from their parents is the last major act 'the movies', and why the majority have been aimed at that demographic for quite some time now.

 

[paeng]

For producers, movie theaters mean earning the equivalent of one month's worth of streaming from each person viewing a film once. Meanwhile, the same viewer might insist on getting his money's worth, which is why "the next big thing" will have to look as expensive as superhero movies. At the same time, with population ageing and more economic troubles, theater owners (which would get up to half of earnings from showing movies) would have to find ways to stay afloat, like earning more from concessionaires or banking on nostalgia.

With what might be lower earnings from streaming (as viewers can watch movies with others who don't pay, and watch them more times), producers will also have to keep budgets low. And with lower budgets we might see more producers, and streaming platforms saturated with lots of lower-budget movies. Given that, the "next big thing" but be a lot of "small things".

 

[Parson]

For producers, movie theaters mean earning the equivalent of one month's worth of streaming from each person viewing a film once. Meanwhile, the same viewer might insist on getting his money's worth, which is why "the next big thing" will have to look as expensive as superhero movies. At the same time, with population ageing and more economic troubles, theater owners (which would get up to half of earnings from showing movies) would have to find ways to stay afloat, like earning more from concessionaires or banking on nostalgia.

With what might be lower earnings from streaming (as viewers can watch movies with others who don't pay, and watch them more times), producers will also have to keep budgets low. And with lower budgets we might see more producers, and streaming platforms saturated with lots of lower-budget movies. Given that, the "next big thing" but be a lot of "small things".

I suspect that the next big thing, will not be as big a thing as before. Maybe not a bunch of small things because buzz means a lot. I've said it before, but I really suspect that theater going is going to become an "event" experience not something many people do more than once a month or so, and most of us will do once a year or so. Outside of the bigger/huge screen and maybe better sound, there's nothing about going to a theater that attracts me. I have a better place to sit at home. I can pause the stream when I want. I can go back to it a half hour later or even 3 days later if necessary. And I can afford to stream a month of stuff for the cost of one popcorn in the theater -- six weeks if I get a soda. Three months if I bring my wife. If I add in the price of my ticket and one for my wife we are almost up to a half year of streaming. With all of that it has to be something quite out of the ordinary to get me and I suspect many others to travel to the theater and spend my hard earned money on what MAYBE better than a stream.

 

[paeng]

I suspect that the next big thing, will not be as big a thing as before. Maybe not a bunch of small things because buzz means a lot. I've said it before, but I really suspect that theater going is going to become an "event" experience not something many people do more than once a month or so, and most of us will do once a year or so. Outside of the bigger/huge screen and maybe better sound, there's nothing about going to a theater that attracts me. I have a better place to sit at home. I can pause the stream when I want. I can go back to it a half hour later or even 3 days later if necessary. And I can afford to stream a month of stuff for the cost of one popcorn in the theater -- six weeks if I get a soda. Three months if I bring my wife. If I add in the price of my ticket and one for my wife we are almost up to a half year of streaming. With all of that it has to be something quite out of the ordinary to get me and I suspect many others to travel to the theater and spend my hard earned money on what MAYBE better than a stream.

That's right: imagine paying for the family, and then add the costs of snacks (some theater owners have been reporting that they have to earn more from concessionaires because they're not earning enough from ticket sales), parking, and meals before some shopping and watching, and it'll be like buying one hard drive. And then to watch a movie that looks like it should have been released on streaming or FTA TV.

Another problem is that this might change the content of many movies. That is, studios earn more from theaters because they can charge the equivalent of a month's worth of subscription to streaming platforms to each viewer to watch the movie only once. If that's no longer possible, then they will have to make movies with much smaller budgets, and they and platform owners will expect more people to subscribe monthly.

Meanwhile, more viewers will complain even about subscribing to streaming as well, insisting that they have to subscribe to different platforms because some movies (and TV shows) they want to watch are spread out among them, especially when they're already paying for expensive broadband. And with smaller budgets, they'll be seeing many more movies and shows made. And most of them might fail if not enough people watch them.

With that, more viewers, especially given long hours of work, will tend to wait for a time when they get a break from work, then subscribe, binge-watch, and then unsubscribe.

Which is definitely not what streaming platforms want to happen because they can only continue paying for operating costs as long as viewers keep paying monthly. So the same platforms, working with studies or forming their own, have to come up with more material each time, and to get viewers attention, more expensive movies and TV shows, and added to the saturated library of cheaper works.

 

[BAYLOR]

More stylish , empty, gimmicky and un-scary Horror films.

 

[Harpo]

Nothing will replace superhero films until they are clearly (and without exception) scraping the barrel

 

[BAYLOR]

Nothing will replace superhero films until they are clearly (and without exception) scraping the barrel

View attachment 125176

Reminds me of of one and done super Hero comic book The Outsiders/