Streaming has hollowed out the non-blockbuster market, so studios need to quite literally go big or go home. Going big means the movie needs to have spectacle that brings people to the theater, which generally means huge cgi budgets that tv series could never replicate on a per frame basis. Superhero movies (and remakes) are exploiting preexisting social capital of franchises to be as successful as they are, otherwise it is really difficult to justify dropping hundreds of millions of dollars on producing and marketing a blockbuster spectacle nobody has ever heard of when marvel and other studios are dropping movies with familiar and popular IP constantly.

Superhero movies aren't even cheap, is the sad thing. Dune cost less than Black Widow to make, and that's a fairly wide-scope space opera with lots of practical effects making up large amounts of the movie.

Superhero movies are the current optima in (audience appetite, profit, time to delivery, box office saturation / crowding out competition). It makes business sense, it just sucks for those trying to do something different, as it sucks the money out of the system. Opportunity cost favors capes.

Hollywood is going to change dramatically over the next few decades as more projects move to post production rendering pipelines and the entire film process gets upended. Maybe this will provide much needed air to those seeking to do new and unusual things.

The international market is the main reason. These type of movies play well globally and are easily understood compared to dialogue heavy / complex story / local knowledge required stories.

I'd like to see some statistics for that. IIRC most of the big marvel/dc comic movies did significantly better in the US than outside. It sort of makes sense as well, those comic books were not as big for the generation that is 30+ now in those other countries.

The too complex dialogue argument also doesn't really make sense considering that movies get translated in the biggest overseas markets.

Stats:

https://www.boxofficepro.com/box-office-rewind-a-history-of-...

Marvel films make most of their money internationally, the bigger the film, the bigger the foreign share. E.g. Infinity War $357.1 million domestically and $1.2 billion worldwide.

> The too complex dialogue argument also doesn't really make sense considering that movies get translated in the biggest overseas markets.

The argument is that it's much easier to get plot, jokes, and moderate character development across in translation (and more convincing to dub!) with a base script that uses simpler English.

Comic books have little to do with it. Guardians of the Galaxy never sold many books, and only to pretty hardcore fans.

Movie theatres in the Netflix era need spectacular and bombastic films in order to draw a crowd. The kind of stuff that doesn't translate well on a 55 inch TV.

Dune is such a movie and yet Villeneuve basically had to beg and wait for the studio to greenlight Part II. This should have been shot back to back as it's simply an unfinished film in its current form.

> had to beg and wait

It was renewed within a month of release.

This is a franchise where individual movies cost $150m+ to make. I can see why a studio wouldn't be willing to greenlight all of it at one go, especially given how the previous adaptation attempt at the same franchise was not received well.

> as more projects move to post production rendering pipelines

I don't understand - what are they currently doing if not rendering in post-production?

Not so sure about post-production rendering, if anything movies are moving to real-time rendered CGI environments [1]. Unreal/Epic have been a big player in this space.

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUnxzVOs3rk

In practice, for digital production backgrounds like the volume they actually set the part of the screens that intersect the camera frustum to a green screen in case they want to change anything in post. The main benefit you get from digital volumes like this is immersion for the actors and lighting conditions that match the CG environment.

It’s unclear to me why that transition would mean that writers/directors/storytellers would win. Lower costs make creative risks more viable?

Eventually teenage kids will be making Star Wars at home. Or Star Wars meets Scarface.

GPUs will surpass 2010's Pixar. This, coupled with real time motion capture and photogrammetry, will enable more creativity than ever before from more people than have ever been involved. A democratization that even Disney won't be able to counter.

But to directly answer your question, the process of writing moves off the text editor and directly into the production fold. Changes can be made dynamically or even in post. We'll see tools for graphical story arcs, character development radar charts, backstories, and more as these things all morph into real time activities.

> Eventually teenage kids will be making Star Wars at home.

Perhaps, but the same was promised when camera and editing equipment became commodities. There are a few examples like the Blair Witch Project, or Tangerine, a great movie which was filmed with two iPhones. But in general successful movies are still expensively made by professional teams.

The problem is: Even if the technical equipment is cheap, successful movies still require time and talent and lots of hard work.

I would bet if young people had the kinds of rents and the accompanying amount of slack time we had in the early 90s, paired with modern tech, tons of good movies and bands would be created.

But they don't and the creativity of the young, in many fields, is being wasted.

You can't compare making music and movies.

A talented person can make groundbreaking music using only a guitar or a piano. With a mac, a microphone, a midi-keyboard and enough skill, one person can produce professional level recordings. Technology is not the limiting factor, it has been available for decades.

Movies are different - they require so many more specialized skills and resources. You need actors, sets, lighting, music, sound design, costume design, a script etc. It is great the technology becomes more affordable, but putting your neighbor into a motion-capture suit will not make him a great actor and having Final Cut available on a mac will not make you into a talented movie editor.

Just compare the number of credits on you favorite piece of music compared to you favorite movie.

There wasn’t more slack time in the 90s, but there wasn’t time wasted on social media either.

Young people need to work a lot more hours to pay rent now and whether it is because sharing places is less popular or not, there are far less places to rent for groups. There are now far more 1 or 2 bedroom apartments and many larger houses have been divided. Practice spaces and studio spaces are also much, much more difficult to come by. In city after city, what used to be dirt cheap warehouses are now pricey condos and fancy apartments.

As creative tools evolve (Instagram -> TikTok, Minecraft -> Roblox / VRChat marketplaces, Kickstarter -> Patreon subscriptions and communities, Twitch ...), there may be a wealth of new opportunities for young people to start making money being creative.

There wasn't an easy way to build content and find an audience. Now there's an ever increasing opportunity.

I think we're early in this game and only getting our first look at what's to come.

I believe it. That’s wonderful. Though I’m teaching now - in a previous life, I was a Local 600 2nd AC. The storytelling industry fascinates me, but I would love to see user generated, interactive fiction become prominent. All the better if talent can be the central stakeholder.

Unreal/Epic got a shout out above. Can you point out anyone else who is working seriously in the space?

That’s exciting.

> I was a Local 600 2nd AC

That's awesome! I know a bunch of IATSE folks and they're all super cool.

It's such a unique industry, and the excitement on set is totally palpable.

> The storytelling industry fascinates me, but I would love to see user generated, interactive fiction

I'm working on exactly this now! Collaborative motion capture and environmental control with audience participation. I haven't launched publicly yet, but used to demo my progress with a live audience on Twitch. They loved it, but I think I loved it even more.

This workflow beats film by miles and opens up so many new and unique storytelling techniques that have never been explored. It's incredibly fun, too.

I bought the domain name "storyteller.io" to launch with. I should be releasing two minor tangentially-related pieces this week: Twitch TTS for audience monetization and a 3D volumetric/voxel camera that can be injected directly into games. The motion capture, face animation, and interactive world pieces should follow early next quarter. (I need more people - I'm barely getting sleep and keep missing my own deadlines.)

I've had a few people that heard my "this is the future" pitch tell me I should join YC, but I'm trying to release more stuff before the deadline. As a backup I have animated "deepfake as a service" versions of Garry Tan, Justin Kan, Alexis Ohanian, Paul Graham, Peter Thiel, and Palmer Luckey and was thinking of cold emailing them. You type something, and they say it in a video. As a service. It's stupid, but I think it'd get their attention.

I want this because I'm a storyteller that hates film. Not the creatives and the excitement, just the mundane, repeatable work. And the projects that seem out of reach for budget and practical reasons.

Great idea. In the near future, it may be possible to type a message and have your persona actually get on a call and say it.

I wish you the best of luck, and will try to check in once in a while.

Get some sleep.

You keep making this argument and it’s no more realistic than the “anyone can code” if you come up with a low code environment.

We saw the results of the low code movement with impossible to maintain Access and FoxPro “applications” and the Excel spreadsheets with VB.

I have all of the equipment I need to make a great movie or music video - a 4K camera, a computer, and movie and music editing software. I technical know how to use all of the software well enough to make videos and to mix music.

But I don’t have the talent.

You have people like Blumhouse , Tyler Perry, and Jordan Peele who whether you like their movies or not, know how to make successful low budget movies. Not every YouTuber can.

We’ve seen democraticization of creating music, books, and movies. But still all of the money is being made by a relatively few.

GPUs have already surpassed 2010s Pixar’s. The Intel Mac Pro and the M1 Pro Macs can already do amazing things - in the hands of the right people.

Isn't TikTok an early indication of the power of creative tooling being put in people's hands? Literally millions of people out there being creative on a daily basis. And we're so early in this game.

Apple is just dumb hardware. It's not helping any more than a pencil. Yes, you can make art with it, but in my mind it's like programming with a hole punch. We can now build tools that translate the thoughts in your head directly into media. And even improve upon them. This wasn't possible just five years ago.

Like I said before, let's come back in ten years and see.

I think we are in violent agreement about how technology makes being creative easier. My contention is that it’s not technology that’s the limiting factor to being successful.

I have the know how and equipment to edit videos. I can edit “well enough” for internal videos and demos for YouTube. You put those same tools in the hands of someone with talent, they can be amazing tools.

Just like WordPress in my hands will still look like a table driven layout from the 2000s

It’s hard to break into any media industry well enough to make it a sustainable business. It’s about how do you stand out in the crowd and get people to pay you money? It’s not better technology that’s going to make it easier to find “one thousand true fans” that will give you money and it takes a lot more than one thousand true fans to make it based on just advertising.

Could be true. Some of the last star wars feel like the storyline was made by teenagers.

It's not about costs, it's about getting tight feedback loops because you can see exactly what the camera is filming straight away instead of having to wait for the green screen -> post processing loop.

I think OP means that more content will be the Mandolorian where all the backgrounds and sets are virtual, perhaps.

That's the opposite of post-production rendering isn't it?

Studios want profit.

When only superheroes or reboots are profitable, that's what they'll finance.

Not sure if Netflix and the other streamers work differently.

>Not sure if Netflix and the other streamers work differently.

Right now they work differently. They are throwing around big money for the middle tier budget movie--not blockbusters and not small indies.

But all it takes is for the data to suggest that its better to make 5 Red Notices than 10 middle budge adult movies and they'll just stop making them.

Or they were waiting for a hero with power to fix things.

Superhero films have confused the ideas of what heroes and power are.

Tell me what you think about what you think Trudeau is doing in Canada next.

Two thoughts.

1. If we know what a government can do when it’s not on “your side” whichever your side is, then why do most people on HN always want the “government to pass a law to do $x to private businesses” giving the government more power?

2. Exactly what does “being American mean”? I bet you dollars to donuts when you talk to your parents about the good old days, the story is different than talking to my parents who grew up in the segregated south.

For me being American means getting away from the culture that caused injustices in the South and moving towards a kinder future for everyone. And then the villain tried to take us back there.

But democracy prevailed and for that I am hopeful.

The point of my comment was that all we had were superhero movies talking about right and wrong but it was so silly and childish and on the surface that it didn't do the real work that great movies do of making people examine what is really good and what is evil.

You mean the same culture where statistically to this day minorities get harsher sentences for the same crime than non minorities and that the “War on Drugs” became the “War on Black People” and when drugs started affecting rural America it became a “disease” that needs “treatment” and not “caused by moral failings” like it was in the “inner city”. Even the idea that the crack got harsher punishment than the same amount of cocaine is evidence that not much has changed.

It’s not a Republican vs Democratic thing. The Clintons and Biden were big proponents of the “War on Crime” and it was disproportionately aimed at minorities.

I have no idea why criminal justice reform didn’t gain more traction. The mainstream Republicans on the national level supported it as well as Democrats - even up to Trump before.