http://www.mpaa.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/MPAA-Theatrical-Market-Statistics-2015_Final.pdfCold Shiny said:"But movies are primarily made for a white audience"
What?
The go to comparison I'm seeing a lot is the 70's stepford wives movie, so more of a thriller for the most part.hentropy said:Personally I loathe the vast majority of traditional horror movies, so I have to ask, is this more of a thriller or suspense or more of a jumpscare-style traditional horror?
There are very few jump startles.hentropy said:Personally I loathe the vast majority of traditional horror movies, so I have to ask, is this more of a thriller or suspense or more of a jumpscare-style traditional horror?
The worst part of it is that they aren't even being possessed by anything interesting, it's all the same fluffmaninahat said:This does interest me. I'm kind of bored and annoyed at how seemingly every horror movie these days seems to be about bland, middle-class, white families moving into creaky houses and getting possessed. Considering how cheap horror movies are to make, you'd think people would be more adventurous with them.
Oh noes a scary movie is too scary so I'm gonna watch an action movie, cuz that's what people like.Caramel Frappe said:Well, i'm honestly relieved to know I was wrong about the movie. When I watched the trailer, I thought it was going to be bad mainly because of the movie 'trying to hard' vibe. However seeing the praise it's getting and the compliments, this puts me in a rather good mood. I should go and see this, although i'm kind of a wuss when it comes to horror. Might rent it instead when it comes out on DvD so I can handle it better on my normal sized TV lol.
Whites being a large demographic doesn't exactly equal "most movies being targeted to whites". Look no further than the movie we're referencing as evidence, the antagonists are white and there are serious overtones of racism, so the idea of it being marketed towards whites kind of falls flat. Yet so far it's been a big commercial success, it's almost as if the market isn't decided by the whims of a homogenous white majority.Thunderous Cacophony said:http://www.mpaa.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/MPAA-Theatrical-Market-Statistics-2015_Final.pdfCold Shiny said:"But movies are primarily made for a white audience"
What?
Pg. 12. At least in the USA and Canada, the white audience is larger than all other ethnicities combined, at 56% of frequent moviegoers (the runner up is Hispanics at 23%, well above their portion of the national race makeup). Besides that, the industry is largely dominated by white Americans both behind and in front of the camera, who tend to make movies for other white Americans.
It can't be both? I mean, Evil Dead is probably an almost perfect example of this kind of blend. Still a horror/slasher at heart but with healthy dose of camp. Evil Dead 2 doubles down on that, but not until Army of Darkness series turns into comedy foremost with some horror elements.Silentpony said:Wait...it IS a horror movie about racism?! 'cause everyone I've talked to who's seen it says its hysterical! Its an Evil-Dead comedy! Soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo over-the-top and campy and self-aware it can't, literally, not be a dark comedy movie.
Hmm, a very "it's snowing today, so much for global warming" handwave of the initial post. And yes I know those two issues are completely different, before jumping down that pointless rabbit hole, it's just the deflection being brandished is rather similar. Am not hanging around to see this turn into another circular thread though. Just thought it best to point that was a rather weak form of dismissal.Ebola_chan said:Whites being a large demographic doesn't exactly equal "most movies being targeted to whites". Look no further than the movie we're referencing as evidence, the antagonists are white and there are serious overtones of racism, so the idea of it being marketed towards whites kind of falls flat. Yet so far it's been a big commercial success, it's almost as if the market isn't decided by the whims of a homogenous white majority.Thunderous Cacophony said:http://www.mpaa.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/MPAA-Theatrical-Market-Statistics-2015_Final.pdfCold Shiny said:"But movies are primarily made for a white audience"
What?
Pg. 12. At least in the USA and Canada, the white audience is larger than all other ethnicities combined, at 56% of frequent moviegoers (the runner up is Hispanics at 23%, well above their portion of the national race makeup). Besides that, the industry is largely dominated by white Americans both behind and in front of the camera, who tend to make movies for other white Americans.
It's kind of telling that a successful movie with racial tones that was written, story-boarded and directed by a black man is still painted up as "the white man's insidious agenda!". The movie seemingly goes out of it's way to tear the wound of off racial tensions, but it's still somehow the machination of some unseen, super-white hand that controls the market.
That's... interesting.
What? I honestly don't know what you're talking about with the whole 'apples and oranges' comparison. I was pointing out that movies aren't blanket-ly made by white people for white people, looking no further than this movie as proof. Not that there aren't a million other fucking examples to point to. It wasn't so much a dismissal as much as me pointing out a flaw in logic. And I'm certainly not "defending" anything, I'm not the one who was making the initial argument. And calling what I said "weak" without pointing out why is way, way more dismissive than anything I said.Xsjadoblayde said:Hmm, a very "it's snowing today, so much for global warming" handwave of the initial post. And yes I know those two issues are completely different, before jumping down that pointless rabbit hole, it's just the deflection being brandished is rather similar. Am not hanging around to see this turn into another circular thread though. Just thought it best to point that was a rather weak form of dismissal.
I dislike the mindset that movie writers shouldn't tread certain topics so as to not disturb the masses (or rile up racial tension). Unless the movie is done in the same vein of 1915's Birth of a Nation, it's not causing anything that wasn't already happening.Ebola_chan said:The movie seemingly goes out of it's way to tear the wound of off racial tensions, but it's still somehow the machination of some unseen, super-white hand that controls the market.
Don't misinterpret, I absolutely love movies that tackle sensitive issues, provided they treat such topics with the proper respect and context. I believe movies that go against the grain to explore the dark side of humanity can be great, and many of my personal favorites do. Topics like drug use, violence, rape and racism shouldn't be off limits to talented directors. Django Unchained from 2012 is a great example of a director using tones of racism really competently.TheMigrantSoldier said:I was pleasantly surprised by it. The comedy was done just right the main character was well-written/acted. Even if you're not into horror, it's worth a watch.
I dislike the mindset that movie writers shouldn't tread certain topics so as to not disturb the masses (or rile up racial tension). Unless the movie is done in the same vein of 1915's Birth of a Nation, it's not causing anything that wasn't already happening.Ebola_chan said:The movie seemingly goes out of it's way to tear the wound of off racial tensions, but it's still somehow the machination of some unseen, super-white hand that controls the market.