Rendered at 07:38:44 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
peteforde 2 days ago [-]
I'm a long-term "OG" Kane Pixels fan. I took a friend to see the opening night preview and we both loved it.
Anyone not familiar with Kane - who was 16 when he started making his "found footage" films in Blender - the guy is a truly brilliant mind. Listening to him talk... you can close your eyes and he speaks like someone middle aged. It's almost uncanny.
Anyhow, in addition to his genuinely excellent Backrooms videos, I highly recommend you turn off the lights and take in his The Oldest View series as well.
He painstakingly recreated a random demolished suburban Texas mall from archival footage. It's wild how good he is at this.
samtheDamned 2 days ago [-]
I wasn't aware he was behind the oldest view. That makes me more excited to see this movie because that was really good on what couldn't have been much of a budget to begin with.
thrance 2 days ago [-]
The Oldest View is really great. And it's surprisingly deep if you care to look into it a little.
asmodeuslucifer 2 days ago [-]
It's amazing how scary an obvious puppet in a grocery cart can be.
2 days ago [-]
tnvmadhav 2 days ago [-]
he also did a one shot found footage on the “attack on titan” final chapters.
It was unsettling but maybe that was the point.
idbnstra 2 days ago [-]
I’m pretty sure someone else did a majority of the mall recreation, but i may be wrong
ramenat2am 2 days ago [-]
That really shows the hunger for original stories and IC among cinephiles.
Major studios were too afraid to produce something fresh instead of numberless sequels and reboots in the last decade or so.
darth_avocado 2 days ago [-]
Matt Damon talked about this somewhere. The risk aversion stems from the move away from DVD sales. Historically a lot of low and mid budget movies relied on DVD sales to recoup costs even if theater releases didn’t get you as much money as you expected. With the safety net gone, studios don’t want to take the risk. They make big budget movies with massive marketing budgets that rely on known IP and established fan bases to guarantee income. This also ensures that the story itself is average because you want an average fan to like it.
I think calculus somewhere has changed that is allowing these small/mid sized movies to be made again.
> I think a scenario lots of viewers can relate to is sitting on the couch on a Friday night, going through the streaming services, cycling through the movies and thinking to themselves "they're not making movies for me anymore". As somebody who's been intimately involved in movie making for 30 years, what are the macro Hollywood conditions behind that sentiment?
> Matt Damon:
> Well, so what happened was the DVD was a huge part of our business - of our revenue stream - and technology has just made that obsolete. And so, the movies that that we used to make: you could afford to not make all of your money when it played in the theater because you knew you had the DVD coming behind the release and 6 months later you'd get a whole other chunk - it would be like reopening the movie almost.
> And when that went away, that changed the type of movies that we could make. I did this movie "Behind the Candelabra" and I talked to a studio executive who explained: it was a $25 million movie. I would have to put that much into print and advertising to market it - what we call P&A - so now I'm in $50 million. I have to split everything I get with the exhibitor, the people who own the movie theaters, so I would have to make $100 million before I got into profit. The idea of making $100 million on a story about this love affair between these two people... Yeah, love everyone in the movie, but that's suddenly a massive gamble in a way that it wasn't in the 1990s when they were making all those kind of movies - the kind of movies that I loved and the kind of movies that were my bread and butter.
weird-eye-issue 2 days ago [-]
But there must be residual revenue over time from the streaming services, I guess it's just a lot lower on average?
CGMthrowaway 2 days ago [-]
Same thing happened with music and CDs vs streaming
dcrazy 2 days ago [-]
I thought Behind the Candelabra was a direct to HBO release.
Edit: yes, it was direct to HBO. So maybe Damon was just using it as an example because he knew the production cost off the top of his head.
overfeed 2 days ago [-]
This would be congruent with Damon's retelling of how a studio exec walked him through how the math of a traditional theatrical release wouldn't work out for the movie.
glenngillen 2 days ago [-]
I guess another way to interpret what he was trying to say could also be:
"the kind of movies that I loved and the kind of movies that were my bread and butter (are no longer affordable if I was to do a cinema release)"
So maybe Behind the Candelabra was direct to HBO precisely because of the economics he was pointing out?
lazypenguin 2 days ago [-]
It’s because nobody has made Steam for Movies. Let me have a movie collection that I can buy movies $1-$5 per movie and never lose it and I promise you I will buy a lot more movies. Just like people buy hundreds of steam games
mrkpdl 2 days ago [-]
The iTunes movie store launched 20 years ago. It’s far from perfect but it is essentially steam for movies. Sadly it’s been de-emphasised over time. But it is still there and was pretty good for a while.
righthand 2 days ago [-]
The iTunes movie store is not friendly outside of the Apple ecosystem. Making the entire idea not really affordable since you need a expensive electronic device to utilize it sanely. Might as well find another way to get to it at that point.
e40 2 days ago [-]
It’s not even friendly inside the Apple ecosystem.
extra88 2 days ago [-]
MSRP of an Apple TV device is $129. The iPhone's market share in the U.S. is already over 60%.
But neither matters because the Apple TV app is available on basically everything and can be used to buy movies.
But if you use the app you’re only streaming from Apple servers. That Apple server copy can be revoked at any time. And 60% is not 100%, my point stands you need an expensive device just to purchase and watch it. Probably multiple expensive devices if you want to actually watch it on your TV. When can I download my movie onto my Linux laptop and play it through an HDMI cable?
GeekyBear 2 days ago [-]
Steam games with DRM can be revoked as well.
We've also seen Apple upgrade 480p movies purchased in the past to HD which is an improvement compared to buying physical media.
arusahni 2 days ago [-]
A "Steam for Movies" service (as expressed in an ancestor comment) is basically that, though. One doesn't own their Steam games.
lmm 2 days ago [-]
But you can run Steam on Linux. You don't have to worry about whether they're going to discontinue the cheap Steam Box you were relying on. And they have built up credibility from decades of not pulling the rug, in a way that Apple hasn't and probably can't.
redwall_hp 2 days ago [-]
Apple has been running the iTunes Store without "pulling the rug" for about as many years as Steam has existed.
Hell, they ditched DRM on music in that time period too and will sell you lossless ALAC as well as MP4 audio. (They obviously weren't able to talk Hollywood into that.) Steam is DRM that ensures the capability to pull rugs.
lmm 2 days ago [-]
> Apple has been running the iTunes Store without "pulling the rug" for about as many years as Steam has existed.
Maybe. It's not been a very prominent line of business for them, and even then I can recall a couple of significant dramas over that time - didn't they merge two different kinds of libraries and cause confusion? The unremovable U2 album is also a cause for concern, not because an extra album is bad but because it implies they see the contents of your library as up to them rather than you. Most of all, they went out of their way to break music being sold by Real for iPods, which hardly suggests a company committed to interoperability and open platforms.
> Hell, they ditched DRM on music in that time period too and will sell you lossless ALAC as well as MP4 audio. (They obviously weren't able to talk Hollywood into that.) Steam is DRM that ensures the capability to pull rugs.
Not "obvious" at all, and precisely the point at issue. I'm happy to buy music from Apple, but movies require another level of trust that they haven't reached yet. I will grudgingly, cautiously buy games from Steam when they're not available on itch/GoG, and maybe that's unfair, but Apple have never sent me the message that they want or care about me (a non-Apple hardware user) as a customer of their movies.
GeekyBear 2 days ago [-]
> The unremovable U2 album is also a cause for concern
Open the settings and uncheck "automatically download purchased music that isn't on the device".
Fixed.
> movies require another level of trust
When Apple paid the studios extra to alliw them to upgrade previously purchased 480p movies to HD, I'd say they earned it.
freejazz 2 days ago [-]
> But you can run Steam on Linux
And how many people run linux that this is even relevant?
esseph 2 days ago [-]
> Despite astronomical price hike, the Steam Deck has sold out again in North America
Not to mention reading this on Linux with Steam in the background.
righthand 2 days ago [-]
The number of people doing it is irrelevant because the larger point was being able to download the movie on any platform. Steam on Linux is just a good example of supporting almost all platforms to distribute media.
righthand 2 days ago [-]
You can download a copy of the installers and game files on steam. Steam allows you to install on any hard drive or device that runs Steam. Streaming apps download and store data in drm encrypted formats and by and large do not allow you to keep copies of that data for your own use.
extra88 2 days ago [-]
You're moving goalposts and ignoring what I wrote. An Apple TV box is not expensive and you can use even cheaper streaming devices to buy and watch instead.
redwall_hp 2 days ago [-]
I buy/rent films on my phone, and play them through the Apple TV Roku app. (Roku sucks for its own reasons, but most TV platforms have Apple TV apps.)
righthand 2 days ago [-]
No you’re ignoring the criteria for why someone would want Steam for Movies. It’s not for the pleasant thought that they can stream movies from Apple and download it when they want through specific hardware. People back up their games from Steam and actually do own a copy of the installer and game files. That is a huge difference.
The DRM in Steam is not one of ownership. It’s one of needing a Steam account to buy and access those installer and game files.
“You can just stream your movies from proprietary device through apple tv app” isnt Steam for Movies in the spirit of the idea. What you have described is no different than having a streaming only subscription where you dont own the files and can’t access a copy of it offline. However you are correct that if you don’t care then you probably never wanted to own a copy of the files in the first place.
extra88 2 days ago [-]
That's not what your original message was about and please don't invent quotes that are not what I wrote or anything like what I wrote. You wrote:
> The iTunes movie store is not friendly outside of the Apple ecosystem. Making the entire idea not really affordable since you need a expensive electronic device to utilize it sanely. Might as well find another way to get to it at that point.
I pointed out that buying a movie from Apple does not require an expensive device and does not require buying any hardware from the Apple ecosystem.
You ignored the facts and kept going on about having to buy expensive Apple hardware, which it isn't and you don't.
You moved the goalposts by requiring not only that purchases not require hardware that's expensive or from Apple, you added that it must not be revocable or streamed and must work on Linux.
I am not advocating for the iTunes store or any other source for buying media, I lost interest in owning TV or movies long ago, I was just providing factual information about what doing so requires.
righthand 1 days ago [-]
No I’m not arguing about the specifics of the Apple ecosystem, you are. And you’re still ignoring what a Steam for Movies would be. That’s the conversation, not “iTunes Movie store can stream movies”.
And I am providing factual information on what a Steam for movies is.
Also when I write things in “quotes”, does not mean someone is quoting you or inventing things you said. Quotes have many uses and contexts. Perhaps if you cannot stay on topic or focus on the criteria of what is being discussed and dont understand how quotes work, this forum is not for you.
Steam for Movies and how iTunes store does not fit that description is exactly what my original message was about. Please stop pretending otherwise.
radley 2 days ago [-]
> When can I download my movie onto my Linux laptop and play it through an HDMI cable?
Probably because the Linux market is too small to support an iTunes for Linux.
By my understanding, the Linux market prefers free, open source, community effort. So essentially the real question is: why aren't you making movies yourself and sharing them free with your Linux peers?
esseph 2 days ago [-]
> So essentially the real question is: why aren't you making movies yourself and sharing them free with your Linux peers?
This is always the dumbest style of argument.
P1: Healthcare sucks!
P2: Oh yeah? Why aren't you a doctor?
Be serious. It's perfectly fine to criticize things and the answer is extremely rarely change your life and become a domain expert in something else to meet some kind of "oh yeah, be the solution" nonsense by somebody that often themselves refuses to get off the couch for anything meaningful.
2 days ago [-]
chillfox 2 days ago [-]
And yet, Steam is on Linux.
If the Linux market is large enough for steam to support it, then it should be big enough for a movie store to support.
vintermann 2 days ago [-]
Valve made the Linux market work by bloody persistence, because Gabe Newell saw the Microsoft Store as a threat to turn Windows into a walled garden (which would have hurt Steam a lot). It's not the Linux user base as such which attracted Valve.
But it's really beside the point, since supporting games on an OS is a hell of a lot harder than supporting video. You're right that movie stores have no excuse - except the control argument, working the other way than it did for Valve.
2 days ago [-]
righthand 2 days ago [-]
I actually have made movies and they are all available to download online for free. Not the gotcha you think. And also totally unrelated to the idea of Steam for Movies.
perching_aix 2 days ago [-]
That description befits GOG a lot more than Steam. You can absolutely lose you Steam games, both practically and legally. Practically because of DRM, and legally because you only recieve a non-transferable, revocable license.
1123581321 2 days ago [-]
You can buy at several places that interop with each other—iTunes and Amazon are the two biggest. They don’t have literally every movie, but they have most that most people want to watch. https://moviesanywhere.com/participants
Cost ranges from $5-30. Fewer dirt cheap sales than Steam, but the standard price point at launch is lower, in exchange.
(Having to explain “buying movies” makes me feel old!)
im3w1l 2 days ago [-]
Unlike with steam, things can appear disappear from your iTunes library if you move countries. At least music can.
1123581321 2 days ago [-]
Same issue with movies, true.
2 days ago [-]
2 days ago [-]
whyenot 2 days ago [-]
As someone already mentioned. Steam for movies already exists (iTunes, also Amazon’s offering). The problem seems to be that hardly anyone wants to actually own a movie anymore. There are places where the ownership model seems to still be thriving (books), but for video and audio, ownership (vs. streaming or renting) is largely dead.
Steltek 2 days ago [-]
No, streaming services like iTunes and Amazon are absolutely not "Steam for movies". Those services take active steps to restrict access to my purchased content.
I can't watch my Amazon purchases in HD because I run Linux. I get downgraded garbage 480p instead.
I can't watch any of this while on an airplane because I'm not allowed to download it.
And I don't own any Apple hardware so iTunes is a bit of a nonstarter.
In contrast, Steam lets me play offline and bends over backwards to get games to run (e.g. Proton and many other compatibility tools). And my Steam Deck doesn't earn me any extra special privileges over anything else.
2 days ago [-]
simonbw 2 days ago [-]
People are saying that you can buy movies online, but I think they're missing the key point of putting lots of movies on massive discounts and promoting the movies that are currently discounted. Like sure you can buy basically any movie on Amazon or Apple's store or wherever, but I know that wherever I go, it's going to cost $4 to rent a movie, except every once in a while when it's on sale and I get it for $3, and buying it is going to be some higher amount that is almost certainly not worth it. When steam has sales, I might browse and buy quite a few games that I'm not gonna play right away. Or I buy things in bundles because it just seems like such a good deal. If movies were usually $10 to buy, but the Amazon store had a very visible section of movies that were $5 or less, but for a limited time, I'd be way more likely to buy multiple movies that I'm not intending to watch right now.
slg 2 days ago [-]
I just opened the Apple TV app on my phone and "$4.99 Essential Movies" is listed prominently just under the top charts and new releases. I'm not trying to be rude, but this whole thread has people just speculating on stuff with limited self-awareness. The reason you aren't building a big film library is probably because you aren't that passionate about films, it isn't because no one is providing you a list of cheap movies. It's all there already, you just had to open the app.
simonbw 2 days ago [-]
You might be right. I think the other thing is that there are a ton of free things for me to watch on various streaming platforms.
slg 2 days ago [-]
>I think the other thing is that there are a ton of free things for me to watch on various streaming platforms.
Yes, I think it's just people today have more options for entertainment. There are lots of people in this thread trying to rationalize their declining interest in movies as the failing of someone else with "there's no Steam for movies", "they don't make good original movies anymore", or "they don't hire talented people anymore" but that stuff is all happening and has been for a while. People just found other stuff to do with their time so they aren't seeking movies out as much anymore, but it's all out there if you put in a little effort to find it.
1123581321 2 days ago [-]
Games industry has an oversupply problem that is the root cause of flash sales. I thought about mentioning that in my answer.
HeWhoLurksLate 2 days ago [-]
Steam had John Wick on it at one point
2 days ago [-]
laughing_man 2 days ago [-]
The problem for Hollywood is it's art, and when you create an assembly line that produces safe art, it's not going to be very good. The calculus is changing because so many of those "safe" films have been bombing recently.
AAA video game makers are having the same problem.
anamax 2 days ago [-]
> Matt Damon talked about this somewhere. The risk aversion stems from the move away from DVD sales.
DVDs and even video tape are relatively recent.
Hollywood was a lot less risk averse before DVDs and video tape. Heck, Hollywood was less risk averse before TV became mainstream.
protocolture 2 days ago [-]
When Hollywood didnt have to compete so much for spectacle with television and could afford to have a cheaper B movie on every roll as a value add.
redwall_hp 2 days ago [-]
There was a lot more competition in the industry back then, before decades of consolidation. And less entertainment options competing for customers' attention.
freejazz 2 days ago [-]
>DVDs and even video tape are relatively recent.
Yeah and it was a different business model before then with a lot more people going to theatres
legitster 2 days ago [-]
I think this explanation is incomplete. There were still plenty of mid-size movies after the DVD era that still had profitable theatrical releases. The prototypical example to me is Baby Driver.
Pre-Covid there was simply not enough major weekends to release a big movie. They end up competing with each other.
Sure, Baby Driver made $300m on a $40m budget. But for pure profit maximization you are better off making a billion dollars on a $500m budget.
famouswaffles 2 hours ago [-]
>Sure, Baby Driver made $300m on a $40m budget. But for pure profit maximization you are better off making a billion dollars on a $500m budget.
Lol no you're not. $1B off a 500M production budget would be a disaster bordering on a flop. You've not taking marketing into account. You've not taking having to split earnings with theaters into account. Baby Driver is the more desired outcome 10/10.
morgoo 2 days ago [-]
But if you make 10 $40m movies and 2 of them make $300m you've spent less for more revenue and a lot more profit, and that's assuming the other 8 make exactly $0
legitster 2 days ago [-]
But again, there are a limited number of money-making weekends in a year, and you're competing with other movies those weekends.
If you have only 4-5 good chances to make money in a year, you're going to maximize revenue over profitability.
delfinom 2 days ago [-]
The calculus has changed because people don't give a flying fuck about celebrities on golden thrones these days, especially since your average YouTuber is more popular. The cost of celebrities in movie spins is fucking massive.
Hollywood has also completely failed to cultivate a new generation of celebrities. God, we had a few years of nothing but Pedro Pascal to the point we have memes inside memes.
And the cost of production has gone way down, you don't need a specialized studio to put in CGI these days when some guys Blender can do better.
So Hollywood is busy being in a downward spiral eating itself while so much room has opened for "indie" to eat their lunch and dinner.
jasondigitized 2 days ago [-]
I would like to know what the difference between DVD sales and 'rent whatever you want' from Prime is. That seems even more profitable.
petercooper 2 days ago [-]
This year seems to be turning a bit of a corner. Of the top box office movies so far this year there's Michael, Project Hail Mary, Hoppers, Wuthering Heights, GOAT.. with Obsession and Backrooms rapidly rising.
Last year it was basically F1 and Minecraft (and while not sequels, both are arguably well known "franchises" outside of movies - but I guess MJ and Wuthering Heights are too ;-)).
torben-friis 2 days ago [-]
Wuthering Heights was a remake, and Hail Mary was also a safeish bet since it's a novel by the same guy as The Martian.
Not to say that it isn't an improvement, but we're still pretty far from seeing American cinema catching up to the world stage in originality, let alone to the golden Hollywood era.
CGMthrowaway 2 days ago [-]
I remember reading Project Hail Mary years before the movie was announced, and thinking "this is written, if not exactly as a screenplay, in such a way to make it SO easy to adapt to a screenplay that given this is from the Martian author there is no way this will not be made as a movie"
I enjoyed both the book and the movie btw
torben-friis 2 days ago [-]
Yeah a lot of authors nowadays just write screenplay, either thinking on licensing or just by being influenced by tv. Sanderson and Abercrombie come to mind as other authors that basically have action scenes and movie cuts baked into the books.
mrandish 2 days ago [-]
At least Hail Mary was an original IP with no built-in sequel opportunity. These days, I'd be happy if more major studio, big budget releases were adapted from original IP books.
Sadly, I heard that the studio is apparently trying to figure out how to make a Hail Mary sequel (sigh).
tancop 1 days ago [-]
> Sadly, I heard that the studio is apparently trying to figure out how to make a Hail Mary sequel
they put a lot of subtle hooks in the ending montage. i just hope they dont try to force it and make a direct sequel with ryan as the lead.
muglug 2 days ago [-]
And Michael was based on some of the most expensive & beloved IP in the world (extremely popular with Gen X despite everything)
peteforde 2 days ago [-]
I don't think it's a hot take to say: give Kane Parsons the keys to the kingdom.
hgoel 2 days ago [-]
Agreed, I've already been to the movies twice this year (PHM and Backrooms), usually it's maybe once every other year for some one-day anime movie airing. Really enjoyed both of them, just as with PHM, I think Backrooms is best viewed on a big screen.
manquer 2 days ago [-]
Is it though?
Backrooms was a quite successful web series on YT which in turn originated in 4chan boards.
Only the medium being sourced from is changing from successful Broadway shows, popular novels or comic books in the years past. The calculus remains the same - properties with name recognition even from other formats tend to be green-light.
vintermann 2 days ago [-]
The web series and the film also defaulted to a very SCPified generic horror formula with conspiracy, "containment" and monster jumpscares.
But the original element that set backrooms/liminal spaces apart wasn't what was in them, but what wasn't. Sure it's creepy to be all alone, you may be afraid to get jumped, but you aren't. Some of the backrooms-inspired video games stay true to this concept.
So point is, the "Backrooms" film author may be an outsider, but he sticks to a very well-tried formula - one mainstream authors probably avoid for being too cliche more than anything.
Barrin92 2 days ago [-]
it's the exact opposite of an original story. It's so successful because it is so strongly based on viral and meme-able internet content that is immediately recognizable to any person who spends time on the internet, it has its roots literally in creepypasta.
What A24 is doing with this movie is what the large studios have been doing, they're just doing it for a different audience. It's franchise driven content but simply 'gamer-coded' and sourced from Youtube or game-related media rather than from more traditional sources, mobilizing the gen-z fans of that content.
jfengel 13 hours ago [-]
I don't think that cinephiles are a huge target market, though.
Major studios produce movies that most people want to see. The cinephiles don't like those films, but conveniently, they do like films that don't cost a quarter of a billion dollars to make.
The headline here is about a movie that took in $81 million. The Mandalorian took in about the same amount in its first weekend, and it's considered a financial disaster.
If people would start going to see more of those low-budget movies, they'd see a lot more interesting films. The cinephiles would be thrilled, because it would get those films into major theaters (over 2,000 for this film), rather than having to seek them out in tiny arthouse theaters for very few showings.
canpan 2 days ago [-]
A similar thing is happening in video games. Big studios rarely have interesting games. Just GameTitle2026. Reboot of game from the 90s and no one is left of the original staff.
Still a lot of people buy those, so studios continue to make them.
Also indie games are too cheap. I noticed the need to correct my own thinking: Why should the boring game of a big publisher cost more than the great game made by a single guy? And allowed myself to use more money when I want to support smaller studios.
imgabe 2 days ago [-]
This is something people keep saying out of inertia. It hasn't really been true for a few years. There's been a ton of original movies lately. I guess they just don't get a lot of press or people don't go to the movies anymore. Here's a few from the last couple years:
Mike & Nick & Nick & Alice
Good Luck, Have Fun, Don't Die
Honey Bunch
Cold Storage
Send Help
Marty Supreme
Dust Bunny
Fackham Hall
Eternity
Rental Family
Bugonia
Roofman
Ok, going to cut this short because I'm only back to October 2025 and it's already long. Seriously, there's lots of movies out there that aren't part of a franchise or other IP (other than maybe books).
tanepiper 2 days ago [-]
Sorry to tell you but Bugonia is a remake of a Korean movie "Save the Green Planet"
matthewdgreen 2 days ago [-]
I think the key complaint about remakes isn't "the idea isn't totally original", the complaint is that studios are only willing to make IP that customers are already deeply familiar with. I don't think Green Planet really counts.
2 days ago [-]
gcr 2 days ago [-]
Between this, Iron Lung, and The Amazing Digital Circus finale getting a cinema release, I think this is shaping up to be a great year for small movie productions
sandworm101 2 days ago [-]
But is this fresh content? Back rooms and liminal spaces have a history in games and websites. This wasnt an out there pitch. This was an identified interest area put on screen. A good movie, but not something totally new.
reshlo 2 days ago [-]
The trailer also reminded me strongly of House of Leaves.
Joeboy 2 days ago [-]
The big IP films got better distribution and marketing, but there hasn't really been a shortage of original films produced over the last decade. The big franchise movies are a small proportion of films produced.
fontain 2 days ago [-]
Does it qualify as something fresh? I guess fresh to cinemas but it is well established IP that has a readymade audience. Certainly a risk compared to Spider-Man: Another Adventure Again but the risk was in the execution. A lot like the Slenderman movie. Something like Iron Lung would be a better example of fresh cinema?
matthewdgreen 2 days ago [-]
I'd never heard of any of the YouTube stuff and I was hooked by the premise. Whereas my son wanted to see Iron Lung because of the game.
atleastoptimal 2 days ago [-]
All they had to do was simply hire a talented person who knows how to make compelling narrative art. This is lost on the movie industry, though Hollywood has been treading water for over a decade now, failing to examine its failures and coasting on inertia.
In general, there is sooo much free money on the ground for large, hierarchical American corporations to do the following
1. Give young talented people resources and freedom
2. Don't put them through endless bullshit internal status games
The reason why the tech industry in the US thrives so much is partially due to the fact that it is one of the few industries that gives people high salaries and agency in their roles without a huge amount of experience.
Almost everywhere else is just an artifically gated series of internal politics, nepotism and pointless rituals in too-big-to-fail industries, which attract people who prefer these games over actual results.
Triphibian 2 days ago [-]
I saw a Youtuber recently make a compelling argument that one of the features Hollywood has been missing is the pipeline of young, imaginative talent that music video direction used to provide. Backrooms, Iron Lung, etc. make a good case that YouTube can be that new pipeline.
jtokoph 2 days ago [-]
My first thought is that it would be the very successful YouTubers that get approached by hollywood. And those people are already doing well for themselves independently and would most likely not want to move to the corporate culture without creative control.
Triphibian 1 days ago [-]
The Backrooms kid got to spend three years working on a project he was clearly passionate about. He wasn't chasing clicks, creating daily content to keep the algorithm happy or worrying about ever mysterious ebb and flow of Google's payouts. He had an agent and manager that got him a deal and probably points on profit and who will make sure he gets paid. Sounds like a pretty sweet deal to me.
ip26 2 days ago [-]
That's the exactly the role talent scouts fill - spot the ones that show glimmers of promise before it's obvious, and offer them opportunity.
Hollywood is looking for a slightly different skill set than what YouTubers do, but what they do want is that relationship with an audience. Filmmaking chops can be taught and nurtured, but that trust that some of these creators have earned is gold to them.
Triphibian 2 days ago [-]
I suppose if The Daniels were the last directors to enjoy the music video > Hollywood path then Neil Blomkamp might be the proto-example of Internet content > Hollywood.
donatj 2 days ago [-]
If anything I feel like the last decade has been the decade of individual contributors losing all agency in tech.
combyn8tor 2 days ago [-]
I think that holds true for any industry where the consequences of failure are no more than loss of money.
the_real_cher 2 days ago [-]
You idealize young people. There's talented people of all ages. I just want talented people to get money...in general.
atleastoptimal 2 days ago [-]
I single out young people because they tend to be significantly undervalued with respect to their ability to contribute, especially in many industries which heavily gate on experience and connections.
the_real_cher 2 days ago [-]
People who dont live in San Francisco or New York are significantly undervalued with respect to their talent and ability to contribute in the tech industry. Same with women and black people.
Give talented people money period.
jordwest 2 days ago [-]
[dead]
freejazz 2 days ago [-]
Backrooms is Marvel for 4chaners and other very online people, let's be honest.
Modified3019 2 days ago [-]
I really enjoyed it. I had no idea what a “backrooms movie” would end up being, but it was exactly what I could have hoped for having enjoyed his other work.
Honestly creators from youtube putting out movies recently has probably been the most interested in going out to see something in years.
mbonnet 14 hours ago [-]
The potion seller guy wrote Challengers
ChrisMarshallNY 2 days ago [-]
I enjoyed Impulse.
It looked a lot more polished than what I'd expect from an indie producer, though.
I liked it, and it's a shame that it was killed. Kind of a "slow burn," though, so I think I know why it was killed.
portly 2 days ago [-]
I also thought obsession was decent. Spooked me a bit like horrors used to do when I was little.
toomuchtodo 2 days ago [-]
Haven’t seen it yet, but it’s a fun trope from what I’ve read, there’s an old Tales from the Crypt episode that is a shorter version of it.
wewewedxfgdf 2 days ago [-]
I saw it. I'm not a young Internet kid. And I enjoyed it - it's quite clever, I never cringed at terrible dialogue, people behaved in ways that you would expect them to in strange circumstances. Worth seeing. Amazing it was made by a 20 year old.
Zetaphor 2 days ago [-]
You should definitely check out his YouTube series if you haven't seen it and want more context
lwansbrough 2 days ago [-]
I think people are excited for new ideas in cinema. A24’s track record is far from perfect, but I respect their willingness to try things. In my opinion, this movie is no exception. Very meandering and largely devoid of any real plot. Did a good job holding the tension at points, but ultimately fell flat in delivering on that tension.
Probably worth a watch if you enjoy the genre. If you’re someone who just enjoys a good story, this is a pretty easy skip.
dgan 2 days ago [-]
I practically never watch any movies because they are almost always trash, but decided to go watch Obsession after seeing a youtuber (penguinZ) talking positively about it
Yeah it's pretty good. I am in my late 30. Excited for Backrooms which isnt yet available
Triphibian 2 days ago [-]
Backrooms and a new Boards of Canada record coming out on the same weekend feels like some kind of cultural signal.
njoyablpnting 2 days ago [-]
Also consider that Backrooms features a song from the new Boards of Canada album
yoz 2 days ago [-]
Mind absolutely blown by this
Triphibian 2 days ago [-]
Liminception.
fmajid 2 days ago [-]
Chiwetel Ejiofor is a phenomenal actor, that probably helped. This is more of an indictment of Hollywood’s creative bankruptcy than anything, strip-mining Star Wars or Marvel will only take you so far.
spartanatreyu 2 days ago [-]
No spoilers below:
The movie was great but it's not a stand-alone movie, it is a small piece of the full story so don't go in thinking that everything will be explained and tied up in a neat little bow.
It makes a lot more sense if you watch the full youtube series first.
daveisfera 8 hours ago [-]
I watched the YouTube series and didn't notice anything specific that it added or answered. It provided a bit more context about ASync, but that wasn't really a core part of the movie (or at least didn't actually answer anything other than they had discovered it and had been researching/experimenting with it).
Is there something I missed?
spartanatreyu 7 hours ago [-]
Spoilers below (use rot13 to decipher):
Vg nafjrerq gur gvzryvar bs ubj gur onpxebbzf jrer perngrq.
Bapr ur svtherq bhg gung vg unq orra genafcbegrq vagb n qvssrerag fcnpr, ur crgvgvbarq gur tbireazrag sbe rkgen shaqvat. Vs gur HF tbireazrag pbhyq perngr rkgen fcnpr ng jvyy, vg jbhyq or n fpvragvsvp oernxguebhtu ba gur beqre bs fcyvggvat gur ngbz naq jbhyq punatr gur jbeyq. Vg sryy haqre gur cheivrj bs gur Qrcnegzrag bs Raretl (gur fnzr qrcnegzrag vaibyirq jvgu ahpyrne jrncbaf).
Guebhtu gurve rkcrevzragf gelvat gb perngr n ynetre qbbejnl ("guerfubyq") gb n arj fcnpr, gurl pnhfrq gur snzbhf 1989 rnegudhnxr naq trarengrq gur onpxebbzf nf jr xabj gurz, qvfpbirerq gur ragvgvrf jvguva, naq jrer erfcbafvoyr sbe gur nppryrengvat zvffvat crefbaf pnfrf nf zber naq zber bcravatf orpnzr cbccvat hc.
Gurl xarj gur ceboyrz jnf trggvat jbefr, naq gurl pbagvahrq gb pbire vg hc naq pbagvahr gur rkcrevzragf, nyy va gur ubcrf bs zbargvfvat gurz be hfvat gurz gb tnva n fgengrtvp nqinagntr bire bgure pbhagevrf.
Gur zbivr fubjrq jung unccrarq jvgu bayl bar bs gubfr qbbejnlf. (naq gur qbbejnl gur frnthyy pnzr guebhtu, naq gur bevtvany guerfubyq va gur Nflap snpvyvgl).
Jr nyfb fnj gung gur onpxebbzf pbagvahrq gb ribyir bire gvzr orpbzvat zber ernyvfgvp, riraghnyyl sbezvat gur "fgvyy-yvsrf" jvgu rqvoyr juvgr znff syrfu.
Juvpu yrnqf gb gur gehr ubeebe:
Nf gur jnyy orgjrra obgu fcnprf orpbzrf guvaare ng na rire vapernfvat engr, naq nf gur onpxebbzf pbagvahrf gb ribyir, jung unccraf arkg, naq jvyy jr or noyr gb fnir bhefryirf?
daveisfera 5 hours ago [-]
That's a fascinating concept and interesting story but I didn't see it told in either the movie or the YouTube shorts. There's tons of little pieces you've referenced but neither really does more than just throw a bunch of stuff at the wall.
Basically, my concern/complaint is that there's a lot of interesting concepts there and you could pull those threads for a long time, but now of it is really developed or delivered on in either the movie or the YouTube shorts.
spartanatreyu 44 minutes ago [-]
All of what I said (except the direct reference to the movie crossing over) came from Kane Pixel's youtube series.
Make sure you're not getting confused with random analog-horror / backrooms videos from random creators. Those videos are connected to the movie in any way.
Kane Pixels (Kane Parson)'s youtube series and the movie were both made by him and are in the same canon. It's definitely a canon where you need to pay attention and rewatch things to see the connections. It's probably the closest thing Hollywood has ever been to a House of Leaves style story.
collinmcnulty 2 days ago [-]
I am aware of the existence of the web series but have never seen any of it, and I felt it was a great standalone experience. The lack of explanation I think worked really well.
mrandish 2 days ago [-]
I haven't seen the movie yet. While the entire YT series is good, the part I liked best (and am most interested in going forward) was the later episodes where some mysterious organization starts exploring the Backrooms for unknown reasons. I really dug the more sci-fi X-Files / Stranger Things vibe than straight horror but the web series stopped before that direction was ever developed. It sure felt like it could be going somewhere really interesting.
To fair, the original WTF appeal of the web series' creepy Backroom vibe was great but it did start to get a little tired for me right before Kane expanded things beyond the initial "I'm trapped all alone in this endless place." But I've never been a big fan of horror plots that revolve too much around "two minutes of suspenseful creeping" building to an inevitable jump scare. Now that the movie is doing great, I'm hoping we'll get a follow-up that further develops the later parts of web series and keeps going.
breezybottom 2 days ago [-]
I don't know, it made sense enough to me — movies don't have to explain everything to work. I actually appreciate that there wasn't a big lore dump, I don't care about any of that.
daveisfera 8 hours ago [-]
But they should do something. The first 1 hour or so was very well done and engaging, but then it just wraps up all of the sudden without digging into or addressing any of the topics they brought up.
It wasn't bad but it wasn't great either. I'd say it was an interesting YouTube series of crazy ideas to watch as a few shorts, but not enough there to warrant a movie.
prvc 2 days ago [-]
The new Star Wars movie grossed $81.6 million at its debut last weekend, for comparison.
mrandish 2 days ago [-]
The Mandalorian TV series wasn't bad but the Star Wars franchise has been in reset/turnaround for ~7 YEARS (since the last movie). It's incomprehensible that Disney bet their relaunch on a spin-off streaming series based on a tertiary character miraculously swimming back upstream from online to cinema.
The two leads are a guy you never see and a small puppet (with the big reveal new character being a CGI alien). As great as they were, C3PO, Yoda and Chewbacca couldn't have carried Empire Strikes Back as the leads. What was Disney thinking?
overfeed 2 days ago [-]
> What was Disney thinking?
"We continue to make a shit-load of money off toys and merchandizing"
ndsipa_pomu 2 days ago [-]
Andor is the now the gold standard for Star Wars productions - serious themes, adult oriented, great writing and top tier acting. The Mandalorian was definitely aimed at a younger audience.
triceratops 2 days ago [-]
But Star Wars was never about serious, adult themes, and great writing. It was about amazing space battles, laser swords, witty one-liners, adventure, and slapstick comedy, in a fun, kid-friendly package. Andor is a fine production. It isn't really Star Wars though.
My opinion: the closest movie, in spirit, to A New Hope is The Mummy (the 1999 one with Brendan Fraser).
ndsipa_pomu 1 days ago [-]
Star Wars did also include a fair amount of politics as you can't have rebels without something to rebel against.
I find your Mummy/New Hope idea intriguing and maybe raise you Raiders of the Lost Ark.
triceratops 1 days ago [-]
> Star Wars did also a fair amount of politics
You might be thinking of The Phantom Menace with its trade negotiations. The movie that Red Letter Media panned because of its focus on this plot point.
The feeble nod to politics in A New Hope mostly went over my head as a kid. It was already obvious the Empire was evil. They had a guy who choked people at a whim and another who blew up planets. The scene telling us the Emperor had dissolved the Senate meant nothing to me.
> maybe raise you Raiders of the Lost Ark
Fair point.
bluefirebrand 2 days ago [-]
I think Mando season 1 is what Star Wars should be. A space themed throwback to old pulp novels, cowboys and samurai and pirates, with a veneer of lasers and spaceships painted on top.
Andor is great, don't get me wrong. But Star Wars is best when it's pulp adventure stuff.
mrandish 2 days ago [-]
> But Star Wars is best when it's pulp adventure stuff.
This is the way. I saw the first Star Wars the week it opened as a tween and it rocked my world. Both SW and Raiders of the Lost Ark had a clear vision of building on the proven structure of the old B&W movie serials like Flash Gordon but updating them with modern storytelling tools and larger budgets. It was a truly great concept and then Empire raised the stakes higher and even better.
You're right that Mando Season 1 was an attempt to get back to the original concept and it got close. Skeleton Crew is perhaps the only other SW series where the core idea was to update a proven structure of the past in a pure and focused way - except it chose a different genre than 1930s serials. Initially I didn't know what to make of Skeleton Crew but once I got that it was building on the 1980s tween adventures like Goonies, I appreciated how it absolutely nailed what it was going for. My own kids are now older than Skeleton Crew's target audience, so it obviously wasn't for me but I applaud it as Disney's only other pure attempt at applying the 'big idea' that made OG SW great to another genre.
As a sci-fan who loved the original IP to the point of reverence, even bad Star Wars is usually at least interesting but it can also be frustrating when it evokes echoes of the OG by being set in the same universe without even trying to be great in the same ways as the OG. For example, Andor is unique in being a spin-off that is actually very good but I'd argue none of the things that make it so good require being set in the Star Wars universe. It might be even better if it had been unshackled from the rules of the Star Wars cinematic universe and was a new, original sci-fi IP.
ndsipa_pomu 1 days ago [-]
> Andor is unique in being a spin-off that is actually very good but I'd argue none of the things that make it so good require being set in the Star Wars universe.
I think it shows the potential of using the Star Wars setting to tell a wide variety of stories. However, although I loved the original trilogy, I wouldn't class myself as a huge Star Wars fan - probably more of a Trekkie.
mrandish 1 days ago [-]
> probably more of a Trekkie.
Unfortunately, all the Trek shows have been canceled, so it looks like you're not going to have much to watch for a while. There's a final short season of Strange New Worlds done and coming soon, followed by the last season of Starfleet Academy and that's it.
For the first time in decades no new Star Wars series or movie is even rumored to be in development. Paramount has brand new owners with very different ideas and even Alex Kurtzman's (current Head of Trek) contract is expiring and hasn't been renewed. It's not clear SkyDance has any appetite for funding mega-expensive prestige sci-fi series. The currently unaired episodes were already finished or in production when SkyDance took over and they've approved nothing Star Trek since. When production wrapped, the huge sets built for both SNW and Academy (the most expensive in Star Trek history) weren't even put in storage, Paramount just had them dumpstered instead.
I actually thought SNW was pretty good as it was getting back to the core of what made TOS and TNG Star Trek good. But my 17 year-old daughter had sub-zero interest in Starfleet Academy and she was the target demographic. Sadly, things aren't looking good. The 60th year of Trek could be the last. Personally, I'm hoping that Paramount at least sells the Star Trek IP to someone - maybe Netflix or Amazon? All the billions that were being thrown at buying streaming market share for over a decade has dried up, so it's a bad time for an expensive property whose last few outings weren't big hits to be looking for a new home.
ndsipa_pomu 24 hours ago [-]
I also enjoyed Strange New Worlds (including the musical episode) and was hoping that was the direction that they were taking. Starfleet Academy seemed to be heading away from the original focus on science fiction ideas and instead tried to be Starfleet 90210, though bizarrely, I did enjoy watching Holly Hunter's performance and thought that is was more fun than annoying. Tig Notaro's character is also very watchable - they should make whole series based around her. Kerrice Brooks was also excellent as SAM and her performance won me over after initially thinking her character was just designed for comic relief.
However, the best modern Star Trek has to be The Orville.
mrandish 13 hours ago [-]
> (including the musical episode)
Oh... you had to go and bring up the musical episode. :-)
Let me preface with: I actually like some more modern, top-tier musicals. I saw Wicked on Broadway with the original cast and was blown away by how good it was. Greatest Showman has 3 killer songs and I have 3 or 4 songs from Rent on my playlist, even though I've never seen the play. As for the broader musical genre, I don't mind the best of Lloyd Webber and I respect the craft of Gershwin and Sondheim but don't enjoy it enough to listen to - and average-quality musicals just aren't my thing.
That said, the SNW musical episode featured shockingly good songs in the musical genre and several of the cast are extraordinary singers. While I appreciated the way SNW committed to going all-in on an edgy concept, and it was clearly a labor of love which consumed many unpaid hours... to me, it just isn't Trek. Even a very good Trek musical can only exist in an uncanny valley for me. I know people who loved it. I get that they were watching it and feeling "OMG, I love that Trek is 'boldly going...' with such creative experiments!" and "OMFG, they can really SING!", "the songs are actually GOOD!" but those are all meta-thoughts, and if most of my thoughts during first-watch are meta-thoughts, something's wrong. Another sign of trouble: I can't actually recall any of the major plot points of the episode.
I grew up in the 70s and fell in love watching TOS re-runs after school and dutifully watched all the ST movies
during first-run, liking the even numbered ones more. Then as an adult, I loved TNG's entire run. As we said about OG Star Wars earlier in this thread, Trek represents a strong core premise to me (Roddenberry's concept pitch to NBC for TOS was "Wagon Train to the Stars"). And I'm fine when they play with the premise a little. I didn't mind when TOS did 'humorous' episodes, Mudd's Planet is still a classic and even Trouble with Tribbles didn't bother me. But when an IP with such a strong core identity strays too far from the fundamental nature of "what it is", I start to lose connection with it.
As I said about Andor, it's not that I reject branching out creatively. It's more that beyond a certain point, it's gone so far it starts becoming a different thing. To me, that's a sign it should have been born as it's own thing from the start. That lets the new thing define itself, find its unique core and be great on it's own terms. But when the root IP is one with decades of legacy core identity, anything that should be a new thing inherits creative baggage the size of a planet. This is bad because the new thing will inevitably start creatively rubbing up against the constraints of the root IP.
A simple litmus test for any high-concept in this context is to ask "Would it work if it was launched as it's own series in this existing universe?" I can imagine a Mudd's Planet spin-off series focused on Harry's adventures working great. It would benefit creatively from being set in the Star Trek universe and could even strengthen the Trek-verse in occasional cross-over episodes. Now ask the same question about a musical sci-fi series. How much would it creatively gain versus what it loses from being limited to the Trek-verse? The benefit would mainly be brand recognition drawing Trek fans to early episodes but, by definition, it's so different it'll inevitably have to stand or fall on its own. How would a musical cross-over with a different Trek series even work? As someone who's never seen Lower Decks, I found the SNW / LD cross-over episode not only weak but disorienting. The problem wasn't animation, it was tonal divergence between two things that work apart but not together (a sign that Lower Decks probably didn't gain as much from being in the Trek-verse as it lost). Two inverse examples are the excellent movie Galaxy Quest and John Scalzi's outstanding novel Red Shirts. Both are obviously completely inspired by the Trek-verse, but not being Paramount licensed, they are based on "a generic long-running, beloved sci-fi TV series" and neither suffers for it. In fact, they each diverge from the Trek-verse in several ways that allow them to be even better in ways they couldn't have been if they were set in the Trek-verse.
That's why I'd rather see a new musical sci-fi series have the freedom of creating it's own universe that best serves its unique creative needs.
mrandish 11 hours ago [-]
I'll add one other thought which just occurred to me: Most of the serious fans who like the "gimmick" episodes such as the musical and Lower Decks cross-over, like them because of the gimmick. Whether the specific reason is that it's so different, creative, fun, well-executed etc - it's still about the gimmick. While various gimmick episodes certainly have their fans, those episodes are not commonly found near the top of "Best Episodes Ever" lists.
Conversely, there are a quite a few creatively bold Trek episodes which branch significantly into different genres, yet don't go too far which are commonly found at the top of "Best Episode Ever" lists. For example, TOS episode "City on the Edge of Forever" is considered one of the greatest episodes of not just Trek but any sci-fi show - and it's a 1930s noir detective story! Yet when you read descriptions of it, it's not described as "that noir detective episode", it's more "the amazing Star Trek story Harlan Ellison wrote." It's not remembered for the gimmick, it's revered for the story. Similarly, TNG episode "Inner Light" is an adult drama that could easily be a non-sci-fi fantasy movie starring Tom Hanks - yet is ranked in the top five TNG episodes of all time. The key difference is they are great episodes with gimmicks, not episodes with great gimmicks.
11 hours ago [-]
bluefirebrand 2 days ago [-]
> For example, Andor is unique in being a spin-off that is actually very good but I'd argue none of the things that make it so good require being set in the Star Wars universe
Yes, exactly. Andor could easily have been a story of French Resistance against Nazi Germany during WW2
Star Wars is definitely at its best when it is not just being Star Wars
Same with Marvel, but that's another discussion
ndsipa_pomu 2 days ago [-]
Well George Lucas did borrow a lot of stuff from samurai films (The Hidden Fortress being the main one), so that is a return to its roots. Personally, I think that Firefly did the cowboys in space a lot better, but maybe that's due to better writing. I did enjoy the Mandalorian, but it's a bit too shallow.
mrandish 2 days ago [-]
+1 for Firefly nailing the 'cowboys in space' vibe.
bluefirebrand 2 days ago [-]
The concept in Mando is pretty much a direct rip of Lone Wolf and Cub, so I think it's really doing "Samurai in Space" more than "Cowboys"
Of course the cowboy and samurai pulp genres are pretty similar and borrowed a lot from each other. Lone Gunslinger with a code of honor versus a Lone Swordsman with a code of honor
ndsipa_pomu 2 days ago [-]
I hadn't realised the link between those two, but you're right - I don't know why that never occurred to me as I do enjoy a lot of Asian cinema.
insane_dreamer 2 days ago [-]
The Mandalorian and Andor shows are the best of the SW universe. As for movies, Rogue One also stands above the others.
I'd love to see a serious live-action show based on the idea of the Bad Batch (not copying the same story as the animated series, of course).
com2kid 2 days ago [-]
I was not aware there was a new Star Wars movie out until I just read your comments. So maybe that is part of their problem...
kev009 2 days ago [-]
I wonder how much of this is a kind of alternate nostalgia like Vaporwave. Similar to the aesthetic draw of Severance.
Wandering around the halls of some functional institution was definitely a childhood past time of mine. Now still wondering how our parents and grandparents enjoyed private office space, lounge furniture designed by professional celebrities like Eames, and time, doing more with less. Now stuck at home or wandering in some open plan space that looks like college kids got permission to use a charge card at Ikea.
ejj28 2 days ago [-]
Interestingly enough, the original Backrooms creepypasta was cited by the creator of Severance as one of his inspirations for the show.
schlauerfox 1 days ago [-]
I'm convinced it's from the old JCPenny/Sears/mall back hallways that were minimally decorated that housed the photo studio and layaway filtered through the eyes of a 5 year old.
deadbabe 2 days ago [-]
Now that Backrooms has been a hit, I wonder if we’ll ever get a House of Leaves movie, which was somewhat of an inspiration for the original backrooms lore.
squidsoup 1 days ago [-]
House of Leaves form of hypertextual academic satire is so firmly bound to the written word that it would be un-filmable, but you could make a film from the Navidson Record (and it would potentially be much more interesting than Backrooms).
deadbabe 1 days ago [-]
The Navidson Record is the most interesting part of House of Leaves. Everything else is pretentious literary indulgence.
smithcoin 2 days ago [-]
I swear I used to see shorts or reels with a Kevin Bacon version of the House of Leaves story
ChicagoBoy11 2 days ago [-]
What is the recommended way to watch this? Watch the movie first AND THEN try to see the YouTube content, or vice-versa?
jakebasile 2 days ago [-]
I saw the film without seeing the YouTube stuff and didn't feel like I missed out on anything. The film is self contained (and excellent).
haunter 2 days ago [-]
The music from the new Boards of Canada album (which just got released this weekend) was the cherry on the top for me
2 days ago [-]
HDBaseT 2 days ago [-]
Sucks this film had exclusivity rights for different cinemas.
frozenseven 2 days ago [-]
This is where internet lore and 'YouTuber'-made movies will begin to pass stuff like Star Wars and the DCU in popularity and the mainstream consciousness. Backrooms will gross just as much as the Mandalorian movie and the upcoming Supergirl flop, if not more. Glad to see it. In terms of good will, this point was passed well over a decade ago.
squidsoup 2 days ago [-]
Showing alongside Obsession, another horror film made by a YouTuber.
unsnap_biceps 2 days ago [-]
Neither of these two movies are my jam, but I'm glad they are finding success. It's giving me hope that we're going to get a revitalized movie industry focusing on new IP and talent.
candlemas 2 days ago [-]
And Iron Lung earlier this year.
TheAngush 2 days ago [-]
Brian McElhaney and Nick Kocher, otherwise known as the off-and-on YouTube sketch duo BriTANicK, also have two comedy films that came out in April. One they wrote, the other they wrote & directed.
HDBaseT 2 days ago [-]
Iron Lung was pretty shit though.
moralestapia 2 days ago [-]
Glad to see another 4chan original going mainstream.
<:)
hanzeweiasa 2 days ago [-]
[flagged]
iluvcommunism 2 days ago [-]
[dead]
aaron695 2 days ago [-]
[dead]
yobid20 2 days ago [-]
omg my family we all went to see this today and we were all raging at the end. this is one of the dumbest movies any of us have ever seen. no plot. no point. complete waste of my life that i will never get back.
ChrisArchitect 2 days ago [-]
The what? Horror something? ....started on 4chan? Yeah, immediate aboutface here. And reading wiki articles about it that throw around words like "creepypasta" like that's widely understood?
Liminal spaces I get. Reminds of Severance. And anyways, how is this worth going to a theater for? <Shrug> A24 has done well. Is 81M considered breaching 'mainstream'? Because these niche horror things being portrayed as part of the greater 'culture' is tiring.
peteforde 2 days ago [-]
This is not the reaction of someone trying to keep an open mind, especially given that this isn't your usual cup of tea.
If you can get over your preconceived notions, I'd bet that you'd really enjoy this movie. It's extremely well executed and genuinely unsettling without ever getting gory, comedic or stupid.
cheschire 2 days ago [-]
I must be the weirdo for not wanting to feel unsettled like that. Doesn’t reality have enough unsettling stuff? Why pile onto that?
Give me comedy. Oh how I miss the 90 minute comedy movie.
peteforde 2 days ago [-]
What I find unsettling is that large swathes of mainstream society seem to consistently tack towards safe, unchallenging pablum. Why watch Parasite when you could watch a Happy Gilmore sequel?
I'm not saying this to be contrarian or give you a hard time. You should watch whatever makes you feel joy.
However, you shouldn't be surprised that for a lot of people, music, movies, television and books (I kid, I kid) that don't surprise, challenge, shock, confuse or inspire us feels vapid, hollow and intellectually insulting.
I would rather go watch Weekend at Bernie's for the 100th time.
tinyplanets 2 days ago [-]
Amen to that!
SSLy 2 days ago [-]
Backrooms does have comedy, or at least comedic moments in it.
peteforde 1 days ago [-]
... I'm genuinely intrigued to hear what you found funny.
altairprime 2 days ago [-]
A darkened theater with a glowing screen is precisely the sort of liminal space that is the topic of the movie. $20 to fall through the skin of the world for a couple hours? Seems like a no-brainer to me, given how rare and precious any liminal feeling at all is these days. And, if I go support this, maybe they’ll finally make a House of Leaves movie. One can dream.
Slow_Hand 2 days ago [-]
I’d hardly consider a movie theater a liminal space. To me a theater is a destination, not a transitional area.
That said I do like your description of “falling through the skin of the world.” A+.
altairprime 2 days ago [-]
Try seeing the movie using https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48018066 and sit in the center back row so that you can see the entire empty room as you watch it. Obviously this doesn’t work if everyone does it their first time (though I see some empty seats just a half hour away, so for evening Sunday showings it might be solidly reliable); I bet it hits different the second time too :)
BLKNSLVR 2 days ago [-]
I'm 150 pages away from the end of my current book. At which point House of Leaves shall become my current book. I'm looking forward to the experience.
smithcoin 2 days ago [-]
The faster you read House of Leaves the better the meta-experience.
altairprime 2 days ago [-]
I’ve lost three copies so far!
smithcoin 2 days ago [-]
Another comment reminded me that there is a similar one called You Should Have Left.
tinyplanets 2 days ago [-]
Severance was inspired by the backrooms (not the other way around). And why do people feel the need to yuck someone else's yum?
Anyone not familiar with Kane - who was 16 when he started making his "found footage" films in Blender - the guy is a truly brilliant mind. Listening to him talk... you can close your eyes and he speaks like someone middle aged. It's almost uncanny.
Anyhow, in addition to his genuinely excellent Backrooms videos, I highly recommend you turn off the lights and take in his The Oldest View series as well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjY897CCu4g&list=PLVAh-MgDVq...
He painstakingly recreated a random demolished suburban Texas mall from archival footage. It's wild how good he is at this.
It was unsettling but maybe that was the point.
Major studios were too afraid to produce something fresh instead of numberless sequels and reboots in the last decade or so.
I think calculus somewhere has changed that is allowing these small/mid sized movies to be made again.
> Sean Evans:
> I think a scenario lots of viewers can relate to is sitting on the couch on a Friday night, going through the streaming services, cycling through the movies and thinking to themselves "they're not making movies for me anymore". As somebody who's been intimately involved in movie making for 30 years, what are the macro Hollywood conditions behind that sentiment?
> Matt Damon:
> Well, so what happened was the DVD was a huge part of our business - of our revenue stream - and technology has just made that obsolete. And so, the movies that that we used to make: you could afford to not make all of your money when it played in the theater because you knew you had the DVD coming behind the release and 6 months later you'd get a whole other chunk - it would be like reopening the movie almost.
> And when that went away, that changed the type of movies that we could make. I did this movie "Behind the Candelabra" and I talked to a studio executive who explained: it was a $25 million movie. I would have to put that much into print and advertising to market it - what we call P&A - so now I'm in $50 million. I have to split everything I get with the exhibitor, the people who own the movie theaters, so I would have to make $100 million before I got into profit. The idea of making $100 million on a story about this love affair between these two people... Yeah, love everyone in the movie, but that's suddenly a massive gamble in a way that it wasn't in the 1990s when they were making all those kind of movies - the kind of movies that I loved and the kind of movies that were my bread and butter.
Edit: yes, it was direct to HBO. So maybe Damon was just using it as an example because he knew the production cost off the top of his head.
"the kind of movies that I loved and the kind of movies that were my bread and butter (are no longer affordable if I was to do a cinema release)"
So maybe Behind the Candelabra was direct to HBO precisely because of the economics he was pointing out?
https://support.apple.com/en-us/119890
We've also seen Apple upgrade 480p movies purchased in the past to HD which is an improvement compared to buying physical media.
Hell, they ditched DRM on music in that time period too and will sell you lossless ALAC as well as MP4 audio. (They obviously weren't able to talk Hollywood into that.) Steam is DRM that ensures the capability to pull rugs.
Maybe. It's not been a very prominent line of business for them, and even then I can recall a couple of significant dramas over that time - didn't they merge two different kinds of libraries and cause confusion? The unremovable U2 album is also a cause for concern, not because an extra album is bad but because it implies they see the contents of your library as up to them rather than you. Most of all, they went out of their way to break music being sold by Real for iPods, which hardly suggests a company committed to interoperability and open platforms.
> Hell, they ditched DRM on music in that time period too and will sell you lossless ALAC as well as MP4 audio. (They obviously weren't able to talk Hollywood into that.) Steam is DRM that ensures the capability to pull rugs.
Not "obvious" at all, and precisely the point at issue. I'm happy to buy music from Apple, but movies require another level of trust that they haven't reached yet. I will grudgingly, cautiously buy games from Steam when they're not available on itch/GoG, and maybe that's unfair, but Apple have never sent me the message that they want or care about me (a non-Apple hardware user) as a customer of their movies.
Open the settings and uncheck "automatically download purchased music that isn't on the device".
Fixed.
> movies require another level of trust
When Apple paid the studios extra to alliw them to upgrade previously purchased 480p movies to HD, I'd say they earned it.
And how many people run linux that this is even relevant?
> May 28, 2026
https://mastersingaming.com/2026/05/28/despite-astronomical-...
Not to mention reading this on Linux with Steam in the background.
The DRM in Steam is not one of ownership. It’s one of needing a Steam account to buy and access those installer and game files.
“You can just stream your movies from proprietary device through apple tv app” isnt Steam for Movies in the spirit of the idea. What you have described is no different than having a streaming only subscription where you dont own the files and can’t access a copy of it offline. However you are correct that if you don’t care then you probably never wanted to own a copy of the files in the first place.
> The iTunes movie store is not friendly outside of the Apple ecosystem. Making the entire idea not really affordable since you need a expensive electronic device to utilize it sanely. Might as well find another way to get to it at that point.
I pointed out that buying a movie from Apple does not require an expensive device and does not require buying any hardware from the Apple ecosystem.
You ignored the facts and kept going on about having to buy expensive Apple hardware, which it isn't and you don't.
You moved the goalposts by requiring not only that purchases not require hardware that's expensive or from Apple, you added that it must not be revocable or streamed and must work on Linux.
I am not advocating for the iTunes store or any other source for buying media, I lost interest in owning TV or movies long ago, I was just providing factual information about what doing so requires.
And I am providing factual information on what a Steam for movies is.
Also when I write things in “quotes”, does not mean someone is quoting you or inventing things you said. Quotes have many uses and contexts. Perhaps if you cannot stay on topic or focus on the criteria of what is being discussed and dont understand how quotes work, this forum is not for you.
Steam for Movies and how iTunes store does not fit that description is exactly what my original message was about. Please stop pretending otherwise.
Probably because the Linux market is too small to support an iTunes for Linux.
By my understanding, the Linux market prefers free, open source, community effort. So essentially the real question is: why aren't you making movies yourself and sharing them free with your Linux peers?
This is always the dumbest style of argument.
P1: Healthcare sucks!
P2: Oh yeah? Why aren't you a doctor?
Be serious. It's perfectly fine to criticize things and the answer is extremely rarely change your life and become a domain expert in something else to meet some kind of "oh yeah, be the solution" nonsense by somebody that often themselves refuses to get off the couch for anything meaningful.
If the Linux market is large enough for steam to support it, then it should be big enough for a movie store to support.
But it's really beside the point, since supporting games on an OS is a hell of a lot harder than supporting video. You're right that movie stores have no excuse - except the control argument, working the other way than it did for Valve.
Cost ranges from $5-30. Fewer dirt cheap sales than Steam, but the standard price point at launch is lower, in exchange.
(Having to explain “buying movies” makes me feel old!)
I can't watch my Amazon purchases in HD because I run Linux. I get downgraded garbage 480p instead.
I can't watch any of this while on an airplane because I'm not allowed to download it.
And I don't own any Apple hardware so iTunes is a bit of a nonstarter.
In contrast, Steam lets me play offline and bends over backwards to get games to run (e.g. Proton and many other compatibility tools). And my Steam Deck doesn't earn me any extra special privileges over anything else.
Yes, I think it's just people today have more options for entertainment. There are lots of people in this thread trying to rationalize their declining interest in movies as the failing of someone else with "there's no Steam for movies", "they don't make good original movies anymore", or "they don't hire talented people anymore" but that stuff is all happening and has been for a while. People just found other stuff to do with their time so they aren't seeking movies out as much anymore, but it's all out there if you put in a little effort to find it.
AAA video game makers are having the same problem.
DVDs and even video tape are relatively recent.
Hollywood was a lot less risk averse before DVDs and video tape. Heck, Hollywood was less risk averse before TV became mainstream.
Yeah and it was a different business model before then with a lot more people going to theatres
Pre-Covid there was simply not enough major weekends to release a big movie. They end up competing with each other.
Sure, Baby Driver made $300m on a $40m budget. But for pure profit maximization you are better off making a billion dollars on a $500m budget.
Lol no you're not. $1B off a 500M production budget would be a disaster bordering on a flop. You've not taking marketing into account. You've not taking having to split earnings with theaters into account. Baby Driver is the more desired outcome 10/10.
If you have only 4-5 good chances to make money in a year, you're going to maximize revenue over profitability.
Hollywood has also completely failed to cultivate a new generation of celebrities. God, we had a few years of nothing but Pedro Pascal to the point we have memes inside memes.
And the cost of production has gone way down, you don't need a specialized studio to put in CGI these days when some guys Blender can do better.
So Hollywood is busy being in a downward spiral eating itself while so much room has opened for "indie" to eat their lunch and dinner.
Last year it was basically F1 and Minecraft (and while not sequels, both are arguably well known "franchises" outside of movies - but I guess MJ and Wuthering Heights are too ;-)).
Not to say that it isn't an improvement, but we're still pretty far from seeing American cinema catching up to the world stage in originality, let alone to the golden Hollywood era.
I enjoyed both the book and the movie btw
Sadly, I heard that the studio is apparently trying to figure out how to make a Hail Mary sequel (sigh).
they put a lot of subtle hooks in the ending montage. i just hope they dont try to force it and make a direct sequel with ryan as the lead.
Backrooms was a quite successful web series on YT which in turn originated in 4chan boards.
Only the medium being sourced from is changing from successful Broadway shows, popular novels or comic books in the years past. The calculus remains the same - properties with name recognition even from other formats tend to be green-light.
But the original element that set backrooms/liminal spaces apart wasn't what was in them, but what wasn't. Sure it's creepy to be all alone, you may be afraid to get jumped, but you aren't. Some of the backrooms-inspired video games stay true to this concept.
So point is, the "Backrooms" film author may be an outsider, but he sticks to a very well-tried formula - one mainstream authors probably avoid for being too cliche more than anything.
What A24 is doing with this movie is what the large studios have been doing, they're just doing it for a different audience. It's franchise driven content but simply 'gamer-coded' and sourced from Youtube or game-related media rather than from more traditional sources, mobilizing the gen-z fans of that content.
Major studios produce movies that most people want to see. The cinephiles don't like those films, but conveniently, they do like films that don't cost a quarter of a billion dollars to make.
The headline here is about a movie that took in $81 million. The Mandalorian took in about the same amount in its first weekend, and it's considered a financial disaster.
If people would start going to see more of those low-budget movies, they'd see a lot more interesting films. The cinephiles would be thrilled, because it would get those films into major theaters (over 2,000 for this film), rather than having to seek them out in tiny arthouse theaters for very few showings.
Still a lot of people buy those, so studios continue to make them.
Also indie games are too cheap. I noticed the need to correct my own thinking: Why should the boring game of a big publisher cost more than the great game made by a single guy? And allowed myself to use more money when I want to support smaller studios.
In general, there is sooo much free money on the ground for large, hierarchical American corporations to do the following
1. Give young talented people resources and freedom
2. Don't put them through endless bullshit internal status games
The reason why the tech industry in the US thrives so much is partially due to the fact that it is one of the few industries that gives people high salaries and agency in their roles without a huge amount of experience.
Almost everywhere else is just an artifically gated series of internal politics, nepotism and pointless rituals in too-big-to-fail industries, which attract people who prefer these games over actual results.
Give talented people money period.
It looked a lot more polished than what I'd expect from an indie producer, though.
I liked it, and it's a shame that it was killed. Kind of a "slow burn," though, so I think I know why it was killed.
Probably worth a watch if you enjoy the genre. If you’re someone who just enjoys a good story, this is a pretty easy skip.
Yeah it's pretty good. I am in my late 30. Excited for Backrooms which isnt yet available
The movie was great but it's not a stand-alone movie, it is a small piece of the full story so don't go in thinking that everything will be explained and tied up in a neat little bow.
The movie takes place in Kane Pixel (the movie director's) youtube series: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLVAh-MgDVqvDUEq6qDXqO...
It makes a lot more sense if you watch the full youtube series first.
Vg nafjrerq gur gvzryvar bs ubj gur onpxebbzf jrer perngrq.
Va 1972 Vina Orpx jnf qbvat culfvpf rkcrevzragf naq jnf noyr gb znxr znggre qvfnccrne sebz bhe fcnpr.
Bapr ur svtherq bhg gung vg unq orra genafcbegrq vagb n qvssrerag fcnpr, ur crgvgvbarq gur tbireazrag sbe rkgen shaqvat. Vs gur HF tbireazrag pbhyq perngr rkgen fcnpr ng jvyy, vg jbhyq or n fpvragvsvp oernxguebhtu ba gur beqre bs fcyvggvat gur ngbz naq jbhyq punatr gur jbeyq. Vg sryy haqre gur cheivrj bs gur Qrcnegzrag bs Raretl (gur fnzr qrcnegzrag vaibyirq jvgu ahpyrne jrncbaf).
Guebhtu gurve rkcrevzragf gelvat gb perngr n ynetre qbbejnl ("guerfubyq") gb n arj fcnpr, gurl pnhfrq gur snzbhf 1989 rnegudhnxr naq trarengrq gur onpxebbzf nf jr xabj gurz, qvfpbirerq gur ragvgvrf jvguva, naq jrer erfcbafvoyr sbe gur nppryrengvat zvffvat crefbaf pnfrf nf zber naq zber bcravatf orpnzr cbccvat hc.
Gurl xarj gur ceboyrz jnf trggvat jbefr, naq gurl pbagvahrq gb pbire vg hc naq pbagvahr gur rkcrevzragf, nyy va gur ubcrf bs zbargvfvat gurz be hfvat gurz gb tnva n fgengrtvp nqinagntr bire bgure pbhagevrf.
Gur zbivr fubjrq jung unccrarq jvgu bayl bar bs gubfr qbbejnlf. (naq gur qbbejnl gur frnthyy pnzr guebhtu, naq gur bevtvany guerfubyq va gur Nflap snpvyvgl).
Jr nyfb fnj gung gur onpxebbzf pbagvahrq gb ribyir bire gvzr orpbzvat zber ernyvfgvp, riraghnyyl sbezvat gur "fgvyy-yvsrf" jvgu rqvoyr juvgr znff syrfu.
Juvpu yrnqf gb gur gehr ubeebe:
Nf gur jnyy orgjrra obgu fcnprf orpbzrf guvaare ng na rire vapernfvat engr, naq nf gur onpxebbzf pbagvahrf gb ribyir, jung unccraf arkg, naq jvyy jr or noyr gb fnir bhefryirf?
Make sure you're not getting confused with random analog-horror / backrooms videos from random creators. Those videos are connected to the movie in any way.
Kane Pixels (Kane Parson)'s youtube series and the movie were both made by him and are in the same canon. It's definitely a canon where you need to pay attention and rewatch things to see the connections. It's probably the closest thing Hollywood has ever been to a House of Leaves style story.
To fair, the original WTF appeal of the web series' creepy Backroom vibe was great but it did start to get a little tired for me right before Kane expanded things beyond the initial "I'm trapped all alone in this endless place." But I've never been a big fan of horror plots that revolve too much around "two minutes of suspenseful creeping" building to an inevitable jump scare. Now that the movie is doing great, I'm hoping we'll get a follow-up that further develops the later parts of web series and keeps going.
The two leads are a guy you never see and a small puppet (with the big reveal new character being a CGI alien). As great as they were, C3PO, Yoda and Chewbacca couldn't have carried Empire Strikes Back as the leads. What was Disney thinking?
"We continue to make a shit-load of money off toys and merchandizing"
My opinion: the closest movie, in spirit, to A New Hope is The Mummy (the 1999 one with Brendan Fraser).
I find your Mummy/New Hope idea intriguing and maybe raise you Raiders of the Lost Ark.
You might be thinking of The Phantom Menace with its trade negotiations. The movie that Red Letter Media panned because of its focus on this plot point.
The feeble nod to politics in A New Hope mostly went over my head as a kid. It was already obvious the Empire was evil. They had a guy who choked people at a whim and another who blew up planets. The scene telling us the Emperor had dissolved the Senate meant nothing to me.
> maybe raise you Raiders of the Lost Ark
Fair point.
Andor is great, don't get me wrong. But Star Wars is best when it's pulp adventure stuff.
This is the way. I saw the first Star Wars the week it opened as a tween and it rocked my world. Both SW and Raiders of the Lost Ark had a clear vision of building on the proven structure of the old B&W movie serials like Flash Gordon but updating them with modern storytelling tools and larger budgets. It was a truly great concept and then Empire raised the stakes higher and even better.
You're right that Mando Season 1 was an attempt to get back to the original concept and it got close. Skeleton Crew is perhaps the only other SW series where the core idea was to update a proven structure of the past in a pure and focused way - except it chose a different genre than 1930s serials. Initially I didn't know what to make of Skeleton Crew but once I got that it was building on the 1980s tween adventures like Goonies, I appreciated how it absolutely nailed what it was going for. My own kids are now older than Skeleton Crew's target audience, so it obviously wasn't for me but I applaud it as Disney's only other pure attempt at applying the 'big idea' that made OG SW great to another genre.
As a sci-fan who loved the original IP to the point of reverence, even bad Star Wars is usually at least interesting but it can also be frustrating when it evokes echoes of the OG by being set in the same universe without even trying to be great in the same ways as the OG. For example, Andor is unique in being a spin-off that is actually very good but I'd argue none of the things that make it so good require being set in the Star Wars universe. It might be even better if it had been unshackled from the rules of the Star Wars cinematic universe and was a new, original sci-fi IP.
I think it shows the potential of using the Star Wars setting to tell a wide variety of stories. However, although I loved the original trilogy, I wouldn't class myself as a huge Star Wars fan - probably more of a Trekkie.
Unfortunately, all the Trek shows have been canceled, so it looks like you're not going to have much to watch for a while. There's a final short season of Strange New Worlds done and coming soon, followed by the last season of Starfleet Academy and that's it.
For the first time in decades no new Star Wars series or movie is even rumored to be in development. Paramount has brand new owners with very different ideas and even Alex Kurtzman's (current Head of Trek) contract is expiring and hasn't been renewed. It's not clear SkyDance has any appetite for funding mega-expensive prestige sci-fi series. The currently unaired episodes were already finished or in production when SkyDance took over and they've approved nothing Star Trek since. When production wrapped, the huge sets built for both SNW and Academy (the most expensive in Star Trek history) weren't even put in storage, Paramount just had them dumpstered instead.
I actually thought SNW was pretty good as it was getting back to the core of what made TOS and TNG Star Trek good. But my 17 year-old daughter had sub-zero interest in Starfleet Academy and she was the target demographic. Sadly, things aren't looking good. The 60th year of Trek could be the last. Personally, I'm hoping that Paramount at least sells the Star Trek IP to someone - maybe Netflix or Amazon? All the billions that were being thrown at buying streaming market share for over a decade has dried up, so it's a bad time for an expensive property whose last few outings weren't big hits to be looking for a new home.
However, the best modern Star Trek has to be The Orville.
Oh... you had to go and bring up the musical episode. :-)
Let me preface with: I actually like some more modern, top-tier musicals. I saw Wicked on Broadway with the original cast and was blown away by how good it was. Greatest Showman has 3 killer songs and I have 3 or 4 songs from Rent on my playlist, even though I've never seen the play. As for the broader musical genre, I don't mind the best of Lloyd Webber and I respect the craft of Gershwin and Sondheim but don't enjoy it enough to listen to - and average-quality musicals just aren't my thing.
That said, the SNW musical episode featured shockingly good songs in the musical genre and several of the cast are extraordinary singers. While I appreciated the way SNW committed to going all-in on an edgy concept, and it was clearly a labor of love which consumed many unpaid hours... to me, it just isn't Trek. Even a very good Trek musical can only exist in an uncanny valley for me. I know people who loved it. I get that they were watching it and feeling "OMG, I love that Trek is 'boldly going...' with such creative experiments!" and "OMFG, they can really SING!", "the songs are actually GOOD!" but those are all meta-thoughts, and if most of my thoughts during first-watch are meta-thoughts, something's wrong. Another sign of trouble: I can't actually recall any of the major plot points of the episode.
I grew up in the 70s and fell in love watching TOS re-runs after school and dutifully watched all the ST movies during first-run, liking the even numbered ones more. Then as an adult, I loved TNG's entire run. As we said about OG Star Wars earlier in this thread, Trek represents a strong core premise to me (Roddenberry's concept pitch to NBC for TOS was "Wagon Train to the Stars"). And I'm fine when they play with the premise a little. I didn't mind when TOS did 'humorous' episodes, Mudd's Planet is still a classic and even Trouble with Tribbles didn't bother me. But when an IP with such a strong core identity strays too far from the fundamental nature of "what it is", I start to lose connection with it.
As I said about Andor, it's not that I reject branching out creatively. It's more that beyond a certain point, it's gone so far it starts becoming a different thing. To me, that's a sign it should have been born as it's own thing from the start. That lets the new thing define itself, find its unique core and be great on it's own terms. But when the root IP is one with decades of legacy core identity, anything that should be a new thing inherits creative baggage the size of a planet. This is bad because the new thing will inevitably start creatively rubbing up against the constraints of the root IP.
A simple litmus test for any high-concept in this context is to ask "Would it work if it was launched as it's own series in this existing universe?" I can imagine a Mudd's Planet spin-off series focused on Harry's adventures working great. It would benefit creatively from being set in the Star Trek universe and could even strengthen the Trek-verse in occasional cross-over episodes. Now ask the same question about a musical sci-fi series. How much would it creatively gain versus what it loses from being limited to the Trek-verse? The benefit would mainly be brand recognition drawing Trek fans to early episodes but, by definition, it's so different it'll inevitably have to stand or fall on its own. How would a musical cross-over with a different Trek series even work? As someone who's never seen Lower Decks, I found the SNW / LD cross-over episode not only weak but disorienting. The problem wasn't animation, it was tonal divergence between two things that work apart but not together (a sign that Lower Decks probably didn't gain as much from being in the Trek-verse as it lost). Two inverse examples are the excellent movie Galaxy Quest and John Scalzi's outstanding novel Red Shirts. Both are obviously completely inspired by the Trek-verse, but not being Paramount licensed, they are based on "a generic long-running, beloved sci-fi TV series" and neither suffers for it. In fact, they each diverge from the Trek-verse in several ways that allow them to be even better in ways they couldn't have been if they were set in the Trek-verse.
That's why I'd rather see a new musical sci-fi series have the freedom of creating it's own universe that best serves its unique creative needs.
Conversely, there are a quite a few creatively bold Trek episodes which branch significantly into different genres, yet don't go too far which are commonly found at the top of "Best Episode Ever" lists. For example, TOS episode "City on the Edge of Forever" is considered one of the greatest episodes of not just Trek but any sci-fi show - and it's a 1930s noir detective story! Yet when you read descriptions of it, it's not described as "that noir detective episode", it's more "the amazing Star Trek story Harlan Ellison wrote." It's not remembered for the gimmick, it's revered for the story. Similarly, TNG episode "Inner Light" is an adult drama that could easily be a non-sci-fi fantasy movie starring Tom Hanks - yet is ranked in the top five TNG episodes of all time. The key difference is they are great episodes with gimmicks, not episodes with great gimmicks.
Yes, exactly. Andor could easily have been a story of French Resistance against Nazi Germany during WW2
Star Wars is definitely at its best when it is not just being Star Wars
Same with Marvel, but that's another discussion
Of course the cowboy and samurai pulp genres are pretty similar and borrowed a lot from each other. Lone Gunslinger with a code of honor versus a Lone Swordsman with a code of honor
I'd love to see a serious live-action show based on the idea of the Bad Batch (not copying the same story as the animated series, of course).
Wandering around the halls of some functional institution was definitely a childhood past time of mine. Now still wondering how our parents and grandparents enjoyed private office space, lounge furniture designed by professional celebrities like Eames, and time, doing more with less. Now stuck at home or wandering in some open plan space that looks like college kids got permission to use a charge card at Ikea.
<:)
Liminal spaces I get. Reminds of Severance. And anyways, how is this worth going to a theater for? <Shrug> A24 has done well. Is 81M considered breaching 'mainstream'? Because these niche horror things being portrayed as part of the greater 'culture' is tiring.
If you can get over your preconceived notions, I'd bet that you'd really enjoy this movie. It's extremely well executed and genuinely unsettling without ever getting gory, comedic or stupid.
Give me comedy. Oh how I miss the 90 minute comedy movie.
I'm not saying this to be contrarian or give you a hard time. You should watch whatever makes you feel joy.
However, you shouldn't be surprised that for a lot of people, music, movies, television and books (I kid, I kid) that don't surprise, challenge, shock, confuse or inspire us feels vapid, hollow and intellectually insulting.
Long live the counterculture.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujJ8talVp90
That said I do like your description of “falling through the skin of the world.” A+.
Backrooms for me was definitely a yum!