“Creativity is something they put up with”: Brilliant line and an incisive, not too acerbic take on the industry. Very well written too. One of your best, Paul.
Retroblasting made a perfect video on the OP's comment. An absolute recommendation to anyone interested: ua-cam.com/video/FqhC5fMyU_I/v-deo.html. Enjoy.
I think you touched the base at the end of what most of us are complaining about. We understand political messaging was made by great film makers that we wouldn’t necessarily agree with, but, it’s the current talent and the way they do things today. There is no art in the way the message is delivered, there is 0 tact. Stories are being recirculated almost exactly except the parts that were good are exchanged for politically driven agenda that is then shoved in our faces. The old SJW still respected the process to build a story and win people to their side vs blatantly harping and demanding conformity.
without a doubt. and I concur with Chato that SJWs are terrible at movie making and incapable of self reflection. an example is the latest Sarah Silverman woke Xmas cartoon disaster with got a whopping 3% on Rotten Tomatoes. She claimed it was because she angered the "white supremacists" they will never own their failures, and all they have is failures.
@@WaywardPondering yeah because a lot of the great thought provoking ideas were accomplished and now there isn’t true oppression as there was in the 60’s in the first world at least.
Something my professors at school mentioned was that you can expect there to be something of a cycle when it comes to movies and entertainment. They described it loosely (with tablespoons of salt) as this: Youll have an era where you get good creative movie making. Stuff that is pretty unique, timeless, and/or pushes movies as a medium forward. Movie studios keep playing on these new themes and concepts over and over because it sells and its a safe bet. This results in studios getting comfortable and unwilling to try out new ideas or go in new directions because it is to much of a gamble. They will instead continue to reiterate the same ideas and concepts that made them money in the first place, distilling them down to such a scientific degree that the new and fresh becomes mundane, generic, and half baked. Quality declines, public interest slips, and the studios eventually hit rock bottom because their safe bets no longer pay out. Desperation is the father of innovation, and studios will now take gambles on creatives with new visions. They fund a few and eventually get one that redefines the medium, staring a new creative era. Rinse and repeat. You could say that right now were in a downward trend, where Hollywood is basically creatively bankrupt and are relying to heavily on sequels, prequels, reboots with different paint jobs, and movie universes of established IPs. But the upside is that public interest is again declining, so we may see some changes coming in the relative near future.
@@madmartigan8119 true. I got the feeling the last super creative and explorative era we've had both for art, cinema, music, and animation was the 80's, 4 whole centuries (edit : I mean decades, of course) after WW2, enough to recover from its wounds and start explore creativity (the beginning of creativity was probably even from the end of the 50's, actually). The 90's were a great echo of it, then came the 2000's and everything started to fall apart... (probably because peace lasted for so long people and trends started getting complacent)
Still, how the hugest pile of screen garbage ever labeled as Star Trek, commonly known as Star Trek Discovery, still airs and is even renewed, is an utter mystery to me. After fans loudly told "This is not Star Trek, please think again" for four progressively worser seasons, I just suspect that now the most common reaction is "Ok, I'm done. Frak off" and they just quit. I quitted for the first time since 1977.
Being a second-generation Trekkie, I am in a precarious position when it comes to both the Kelvin Timeline and -nutrek- ... In 2001, I was nineteen years old, but I was fully saturated in Trekdom when _Star Trek Enterprise_ debuted, and I rejected the show before the first season even ended. There were too many problems for me to bother putting up with, and I walked away. A family-friend used that magical, mystical newfangled device at the time called a "DVR" to record the show, and he sent me Season Four on home-made DVDs _after_ the show had ended. For many years, I claimed that _ENT_ was garbage _except for_ its fourth season. Jump ahead to fall 2019, and I accidentally binged the entirety of _ENT_ on Netflix, and was- in my late-30s- fully converted to a fan of the show, to the point of _deep regret_ of my foolish arrogance across 17 years [at that point]. Of all the shows and movies that have come out since _ENT_ was unceremoniously cancelled in 2005, the only one that I have wholeheartedly embraced is _Star Trek Beyond,_ despite knowing its box office was affected more by the previous dumpster fire than poor word-of-mouth at the time, and that was a risky prospect I took back in 2016- that I wouldn't get burned a _third_ time in a row. As I continue to silently boycott Secret Hideout's mad flailings-about on Paramount+ (my sole _financial_ exception: ua-cam.com/video/16_wSm_HW34/v-deo.html ) and laugh at Bad Robot as they scramble to stay relevant despite failure after failure to their name and the slow eroding of JarJar Abrams' reputation (too many Kelvin Timeline Eaglemoss unboxings to list here, check out my channel #ShamelessPlug ), I cannot help but remind myself of my significant mistake in regards to _Star Trek Enterprise._ Will I- at some point years down the line- ultimately come to _regret_ boycotting the supposed genius of nutrek which I despite and loathe so heavily right now??? And by boycotting, that means I have not seen it with my own eyes (save for only the pilot of -std- in 2017 and peer-pressured into "MST3K-ing" five episodes of -lower recks- ) any significant part of -nutrek,- so I can't even verify _by my own personal standards_ whether these shows are actually enjoyable or not! - If I'm right and they _are_ garbage, then I will have given Kurtzman and the w0ke mob the justification of a view count and corrupted my "pure" view of _Star Trek,_ and in the same instant betrayed the principles upon which Roddenberry & Co. founded it in 1966. - If I'm wrong and #TheFandomMenace was making mountains out of molehills since 2017, then I will have- once again- _arrogantly and blindly condemned_ a quality product worthy of the name "Star Trek", and killed it out of my foolishness.
If I want *good* Star Trek, there's hundreds of hours of older shows I can watch. If I want *NEW* Star Trek, I have only CBS shows to watch, whether it's good or not. And CBS knows this. They're making money off the new garbage, at least enough that they keep making new seasons of it. Someone is watching it and making them money, doesn't matter (to CBS) if the fans of older shows are part of that audience or not. Sadly.
A certain amount of loss is able to be written off as an expenditure. If I was at the IRS I'd be looking closely at the amount they are claiming. These sjws are burning through money.
Corman had it right years ago, as far as putting politics, or social issues into a movie. Its perfectly fine to do so, but it still has to be entertaining. Today, it seems that if they have a message, they are going to beat you over the head with it for two to three hours. If it's entertaining, that's just a bonus.
Movies used to use a lot more metaphors, or be subtle about politics. Along with being entertaining. They also used to not treat the viewer like an imbecile. Now it seems instead we get browbeaten with lectures, treating the audience as if they are to dumb to get any type of subtlety.
@@ryanpeck3377 It seems like they consider us morons until you examine Wokeism's messages and see that you have no choice but to "treat us like morons" to push it in a movie. You cant hide the dumb with ideological bafflegab when you use these "girl boss" characters who have exaggerated version of "toxic masculinity" traits and all that. Wokeism's silliness REQUIRES bafflegab and talking points to at least obscure how obviously just ideology and propaganda Wokeism is.
The comic book industry was, indeed, burnt to the ground. One would think that this travesty would lead to introspection and then change... but younger writers and executives just don't do that. Actually, youth has never been good at insight. In the past, there were actually adults who oversaw them who filled that need. As you have stated, in the movie industry (and in many other companies), the adults were moved out. Passion without wisdom leads to disorder. Thanks for your wonderful videos!
You forget that the comic book industry exists only to maintain the IP, lest there EVER be another Captain Marvel fiasco (Captain Marvel was almost as big as Superman, then paid to stop publishing. Another company created a “Captain Marvel” character as soon as they could, then DC bought the creating company of the old “Captain Marvel” only to discover some other little comic book company now had the rights to the name, and decided that the litigation wouldn’t be worth it, and so tried to recreate the Billy Batson Saga as “Shazam”). The point of that epic digresso is that it is cheaper to make comic books that don’t sell using “authors” that can be paid chicken feed, than to create new characters for every few movies (where the real money is).
Sadly I've spent decades in Hollywood. The biggest problem in both Hollywood and comics (almost synonymous since DC moved West) is a culture that actively hates and disrespects the past... just as greater culture sadly finds little use or respect for senior citizens. Without that respect for what came before, art becomes untethered from reality, history, and reflection... base, vacant, and childish. They're angry children with matches looking to burn down their homes. Problem is they don't understand how to build new homes once they've burned the old.
Actually Marvel Comics died at the moment that Stan Lee set foot on the airplane to move to the West Coast. Until then, people like Jim Shooter were kept under control. Once Stan was out of the way for good, the lesser talents were turned loose and the long (not very slow) decay took hold.
@@Thorn76 There's a lot of things wrong with the U.S. comics industry, but I think a lot of people forget the ACTUAL reason comics died - manga. That's right, Japanese manga - the best of them, at least - shit all over most of the U.S. comics in nearly every possible way. Better art, better stories, and they appeal to a broader range of readers. Is it any wonder? U.S. comics just about gave up on trying to make new characters, and there are only so many stories you can write about the same characters repeatedly! On top of that, manga are a HIGHLY competitive business, just to get your stories printed, whereas the system in U.S. comics has zero competition, or close to it, as to what stories are going to be published. I keep waiting for Marvel and DC to start doing something like Shonen Jump and the other big companies in Japan do, but all we keep getting is crap. What was the last time Marvel or DC got a spurt of new, interesting characters? The Rob Liefield era in the late 80s?
My biggest complaint has been the lack of professionalism... The "writing" in the vast majority of these "projects" would have - literally - caused me to fail my _High School_ creative writing class. I mean that, though... Producing something that blatantly incoherent and self-indulgent (Star Trek: Discovery/Picard) would have had serious consequences for me, *AS A MINOR.* The secondary stuff, where I believe everyone gets lost in - is that they could have done these self-indulgent projects with different IP, but were too lazy. They didn't _have_ to Re-Re Star Trek, in order to tell _that_ story. Ask Anas Abdin... >.> I think that's where it can seem personal, and people get offended and then everything becomes a conspiracy... "Never attribute to malice, that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
True, they always seem just dumb at first, then get a bit a venom on their tongue then it goes right back to them being stupid. They're so cowardly they cannot make their own stand on their own. It always a relience on other people's successes so when they do fail upwards they can blame the IP, fans, budget, etc. When it was their stupid vision where they refuse to commit 100%
I went to engineering school and I remember that our technical professors were so enraged by our lazy writing on the reports we made that they hire professional writers to encourage us to improve our style. What I'm trying to convey is that lame writing wasn't tolerated at an educational institute for a technical/professional career, I don't understand how "accomplished" and "professional writers" perform so poorly.
At this point, that saying needs to be reversed. They are doing this on purpose, not by accident, and they say that pretty openly now. This is NOT the result of stupidity; it is genuine malice, in their own words.
There is a difference between writing for 35 million people of all ages and genders and 3 million mostly older females. The youth have left network TV and every year the average age of the network viewers are getting older. What do older viewers want? Procedurals. A procedural is a show where each episode is identical except some actors have changed. An example of this is a guy gets accused of a crime. The lawyer does some investigation and finds out his or her client is not guilty. The last part of the episode is the lawyer getting the real criminal to confess in a courtroom. The difference between the episodes are the crime and the actors for the side characters. Most shows in TV history, including sitcoms, have been procedurals. Creative shows have often either failed or turned into procedurals.
Man, I have become a huge fan of your channel! I've worked in Hollywood off and on for 17 years, and it's great to see and hear a straight shooter go right at the heart of the business! The business side of TV and film is way more opaque and, (frankly) misunderstood because so much focus is on the performers... not the behind-the-scenes day to day grind where people only see the world in two colors: black and red. (Profit and loss.) Thank you for painting a picture of why Hollywood has so much influence and being honest about why the current political game can be a dumpster fire! I appreciate the no-nonsense take that doesn't pull punches, but also praises the parts of the industry that can be thankless.
Truly a pleasure to hear a refreshing and dispassionate view on the current status of entertainment. If I may add the outside view (I am from Europe) on the wokefest generally favoured in recent productions by the western entertainment industry (Hollywood, Disney, Amazon, Netflix, BBC), we feel an immense degree of cringe (and frustration), as the level of fakeness accompanied by preaching that is delivered through (many of) the products barfed-out by said industry is amply evident to us (and anyone with eyes and ears). Almost no movie/TV show produced in recent times seems to be devoid of characters that are equivalent to planks of wood, but filling some boxes in an imaginary endless spreadsheet of gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity and whatever else boxes, none of which sadly includes relatability, humanity, attractiveness. Further, every other product is a remake, where some pre-existing established characters are deconstructed in favour of above-said planks of wood. It is quite surprising that executives haven’t yet “diversified” away from this quite evident risk in their “stock portfolio”. Are they waiting for all of their stocks to crash and burn?
I've only recently found your channel and started to go through your videos - the Mac stuff is the Mac stuff but your insight into the Hollywood machine, just wow. Yours is an experienced and fearless voice of truth that is very very valuable and needed now. I think your wisdom could greatly benefit your channel as well as help build bridges between Hollywood players, critics, commentators, and fans alike. I would love to see you get involved with some of the people who are forming in and around Midnights Edge in particular Kameran Pasha, Chris Gore, Robert Myer Bernet (totally butchering all these names) and Andre. The live stream talking format may not jive with your scripted structured format and thus you may not enjoy it, but I think your voice would be incredibly beneficial to the conversations happening out of those people crossing paths. Perhaps a formal interview with Midnights Edge or a podcast like conversation with Burnett? If your take away from this is simply a compliment I would be satisfied, I think this content is awesome and I will keep sticking around as long as you are willing to share your insights.
As a former small business owner I'm curious how allowing directors, writers and actors insult customers on social media is factored into the profit equation by studio executives. Oh and dancing the merengue in a cage filled with bees would really boost Dancing with the Stars ratings.
Because I think there are people within this new generation that don't just want to ignore the past, they hate it with every fibre of their being. You must also understand that actors are egos wrapped in skin. And this isn't a criticism. It has to be this way to survive as an actor. I might just pitch the DWTS and bees.
@@CallMeChato I could see an entire suite of shows that would benefit from the addition of caged bees! Heck, change the "CW" to "CWB" (Caged with Bees) Network!
@@CallMeChato I have no desire to watch more Fear Factor. Nor do I desire to watch DWTS. However, Fear Factor crossed with DWTS would definitely get me to tune into episode one. As long as one of the stars didn't extol the virtues of underage sex.
I am of the opinion that social media and Twitter are the worst things that happened to creatives in the entertainment industry. Before social media there was a mystique about Hollywood and a kind of 'wall of mystery' that separated audiences from the artists. Prior to social media, audiences rarely knew the inner thoughts or political views of the actors they watched on screen or the thoughts of the creative talent behind the scenes. Social media showed audiences 'the man behind the curtain' like in the Wizard of Oz and audiences don't like it. Many of the people in entertainment are not nice people I would want me or my family spending time around in real life. Before social media, the public images of movie stars were carefully crafted 'brands' that were sold to the public. That brand control was destroyed by social media. I'm of the opinion that one of the things studios are going to have to do to 'right the ship' is contractually muzzle their artistic talent on social media. Forcing their actors and creative talent off of social media will have to become a requirement to restore 'brand control' and improve public relations. All official social media accounts for actors and other employees in entertainment must be managed by professional PR departments. The current norm of actors and creatives tweeting out their latest rant on social media will have to come to an end.
Mate you’re actually becoming one of my favourites on YT. Your playful, yet respectful sarcasm is a breath of fresh air amongst all the indignation and outrage. And to top it all off, I’m actually learning stuff ! Keep up the great content. Big thumbs up from Oz…
As always, well said. One of the problems today, as I see it, is the proliferation of so-called celebrities due to cable and the internet. Anyone can become famous and some for no other reason than being famous, e.g. Kartrashians. Like professional sports when they add teams and it waters down the product. Oh for the days of a few truly talented “stars” instead of this glut of wanna bees.
I am an adjunct professor. One of my students did a research dissertation about black independent films. I enjoyed reading the interviews that she did with these directors. They wanted to make great movies with great stories and great actors.
I think I hate Hollywood even more, now, that I have listened to this. I love movies.. so did my dear husband, but I always wondered if Hollywood would someday become so toxic and out of touch and absolutely insulting to our intelligence that we just quit.
One thing to keep in mind is the slide started around '65 when the blacklist finally ended. Directors like Pakula and Stone were part of a 50 year push that got us where we are. The Gramscian March was in Hollyweird, too.
I love how self aware you are for someone who was part of the industry. Your joke about "your star tweeted something about the joys of under-age sex" is a perfect example of this ability to recognise and poke fun at unfortunate realities.
Glad i discovered your channel, it's been very entertaining. Just one small issue, you say "SJW's" have been in Hollywood for a long time at least but this is not the right way to come at it. This "generation" of SJW's are not from the same evolutionary family as the old. This new type doesn't from a Marxist like model (and yes Marxists have been in Hollywood from the start, no biggie) no this model is a post modern model, meaning it wants to "deconstruct" everything, from our ability to do art to our ability to think what so ever. They're make impossible demands and contradict themselves at all times, making it impossible to please them enough to shut up. They've been very good at mimicking the old guard, completely hijacking the neo-liberal, old Marxist sympathizer's, as if they were some kind of parasite. Don't be fooled, this isn't just about race equity, it's about bringing on a nihilism, an aesthetic blindness and ending any sort of meritocracy. Due to their own contradictions they couldn't survive for an eternity but they will cause a great deal of damage until that point.
Your comment about comics is super important. The main reason comic failed is that they spent all their money on IP and very little of it on promotion of the writers. This makes sense as executive can't own writers but they can own IP but also means that the quality will drop so much that eventually the IP will be worthless. Lord of the Ring is good because Tolkien was brilliant. To do it justice we would need a brilliant writer to carry on the legacy but Amazon likely paid as little as they could to get words on a page. As with most things in life you get what you pay for.
Wow!! I really love your videos. As an ex-actor who started in NYC and washed up a failure in LA, it is interesting to learn about the business of show business now, an older and less passionate man. Actors believe that they can do anything if they are just given a chance and genuine support. It is hard for them to accept the limitations of reality when they are trying to achieve big dreams. Honestly, I really wish you would send these videos to acting schools and offer a workshop to students in Juilliard, NYU, or any acting studio who will have you. The problem is the message is negative to a performer, but how can young actors come up with a strategy to play the game if they don’t really know the rules. The business is always changing, but schools are not even attempting to teach the rules of show business to their graduates. To the administrators of the drama department real world business is considered too dirty, but that is a terrible disservice to would be actors. You could teach young actors so much - it’s a tough message to deliver, but you are funny and entertaining! How I wish I could have heard this at Juilliard back in the 90’s. The school taught me nothing about the business- nothing at all. Really, nothing. Perhaps they do teach it now, if so you would be a great addition! Thanks!
teach it yourself. The industry is not imploding so much as it is delocalizing from high cost coastal production centers to lower cost cities and states that offer incentives and other benefits. Those are the places they need good acting training, beyond community theaters which have their own corrupt groupthink because they are all nonprofits and care more about "social change" than entertaining an audience.
@@ktoth29 Relax a little; It’s not my fault they aren’t paying your quotes (even if you do have the credits that deserve them) Maybe the delocalization and rebates from states aren’t going into the actors pockets? Who knows? If you don’t think Chato has excellent advice for actors, who does he have good advice for? The suits? If he was one of them he never would be making these videos. Chato is a good teacher and I stand by what I say. I wish you continued success.
This does go a long way to explain the fairly recent emergence of superstar directors like JJ. Not particularly talented or creative per se, but bankable and reliable in the eyes of the decision makers.
JJ is a competent project manager. Probably why he hasn't directed anything but a couple of big projects in over a decade. His writing is lower than lazy, but why not get paid twice if you are the one in charge? The best thing I can say about JJ is that he was always meant to be a producer.
That's it exactly. The executives care about 1 thing: Butts in seats on opening weekend. JJ knows how to create a spectacle that the sheeple will show up for. That's pretty much all he knows, and why he is meant to be a Producer and not a dear-god-stop-kicking-it-its-already-dead-stop-jj-stop Director or Writer.
I'd say JJ has talent, but his talent comes from the perspective of a producer, who knows how to do money shots well. There also lies his failure, as a movie can't just be a string of money shots cobbled together. That's just an overly long trailer.
I've noted I can rewatch Ghostbusters, Big Trouble in Little China, The Princess Bride, The 5th Element, Matrix, etc time and time again. I've seen all those movies probably dozens of times since the original theater runs. But I can't think of a current movie I've seen in the last 5 years I care to see more than once. It's like movies made today have no soul. I just watched Ghostbusters Afterlife the other night and enjoyed it but have no desire to watch it again. I just made me want to watch the original again. Is it just me or do others feel that way too?
Yes, I have experienced and thought about this a lot. I tried to rewatch the Disney Star Wars movies and I stopped. Same with the Avengers and I recall enjoying them the first time. I’ve watched Wag the Dog at least a dozen times, The Rutles, Singing in the Rain, The Big Clock, Jacques Tati films, Matrix 1 but not much from the recent crop. Thanks for your comment.
If ever there was someone full of himself yet not unbearable it's you- mainly because you seem to know what your're talking about. Never dull. Thank you.
There is one upside we have today that we didn't have even 10 years ago: technology has globalized the distribution mechanism for even small-time content creators. if SJWs are destroying the stories you love, then leave. Plenty of other people are making good things that need our support and that cater to what we like.
And then they wonder why stuff like DC Comics or the CW network is basically on life support dispite having a bucket load of diversity and inclusion.... Yeah because NO ONE ACTUALLY BOUGHT THEIR STUFF. The way I see it, companies should really just ignore Twitter all together if they actually want to end up making some level of profit, which they are having a hard time doing when you have all this new generation directors/network executives who are more or less creatively bankrupt.... And thus you will get more low quality stuff like Star Trek Discovery.
you can not get a indie produced lord of the rings. if you enjoy dramas set in the modern world there are still good movies out there. if you are into fantasy and science fiction you are FUCKED.
@@fall190 : No. You forgot to add fantasy and science fiction... 'with existing IP's'. There is still some good new stuff being produced and written. Some by self-published authors. Crap, there's an entire alternative publishing industry at this point because the traditional gatekeepers have made it near impossible for white males or conservatives to have a platform to write fiction. The Martian by Weir is an example of something that started out as being self published on one's own blog, gained popularity, and eventually even broke into the regular bookworld and had a Hollywood movie made about it. While the 'wokesters' wouldn't make a movie about most stuff the alternative publishers write (not PC) there are tons of them making tons of money on Amazon, on Castellia House, to a limited extent on Baen (the one trad publisher that is only mostly, not totally 'converged'), on webtoons and of course on all sorts of crowdfunding platforms. Movies and etc are much more expensive, but some Non Traditional companies have seen opportunities and now "The Daily Wire" will be making films, just like UA-cam and Apple and Netflix did before they also surrendered to the SJW's. TDW doesn't seem to have the same risk. Hollywood's control of the distribution system would have totally slipped away by now if they hadn't focused on buying up so much internet competition and if the SJW's hadn't focused on getting so much of the streaming and internet based competition to self-censor.
@@remo27I can't even understand what you're saying man. I'm talking about movies . you can not make an indie epic fantasy movie. the lord of the rings trilogy was 300m $ in early 2000 money. It cant be done. theres no way that the daily wire is going to be making movies with a budget in the hundreds of millions.
Why did it take me this long to discover your channel? So nice to see someone for hollywood is not a wokescum and who discusses things objectively and with humor and easy way for us not in the industry to understand. Respect from this millennial, sir.
When they were promoting Star Trek: Discovery, the producers would highlight the characteristics of each cast member as if they were what made him or her an augmentation to the story. I'm a 42-year-old white male, and I've been a Star Trek fan for 35 years; my favorite character on The Next Generation was Tasha Yar; my favorite character on Deep Space Nine, and indeed my favorite character in the enter Star Trek franchise, was Ben Sisko.
Thank you for the insights. As a consumer ultimately the why of the matter isn't as important (although interesting to know) as the simple fact that crap is being produced and being advertised as gold. Entertainment from Hollywood is a luxury I can and will forego. I can watch the classics for years and never miss any of the current drivel that is being made now.
This mostly confirmed my suspicions on how media gets made. I have tried explaining to my folks that most of execs at these corporations are clueless, despite being the most informed people on the planet of their craft and not necessarily malevolent. They are trying to accomplish a nearly impossible task, one which they happen to be most qualified to do, and still floundering. Chaos is simply overwhelmingly powerful, and is the reason that central planning tends to fail more often than succeed. The best scenarios are “perfect” storms where highly talented and qualified people create the right product that is released at the right time. This is unlikely given the constraints of knowledge that everyone works with. If we could make better predictions we would have the ability to make better predictions. Unfortunately, the intrusive data science of Facebook and Twitter has yet been properly marshaled to do this very thing. Making media is hard, and a lot of the effort goes unnoticed and taken for granted. This sounds like a good example of Hanlon’s razor with the added acknowledgment that chaos makes fools of even the most competent people.
That last statement is gold. There may well be more really good stuff out there, available to the public, than ever before. But it is also more incumbent on the consumer to go look for it, than ever before as well.
Your stuff reminded me of my dad. He worked in the entertainment industry. He used to teach me about how things work in the industry. I appreciate you for educating people about things behind the camera. As for me, I just don't like how the Americans are taking their media to the direction they are taking right now.
I cannot believe you do not have more subs. I love your slightly sarcastic presentations, yet full of great info, and for me, great insights! ...THANK YOU! :)
They are very much doing it on purpose. Once they've ruined one franchise they move on to the next. The fact that they do not stop but keep doing it despite the massive backlash by the fans illuminates their agenda. They hate us. And they want us replaced by normie consoomers who get excited for next product.
“Those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future.” G.Orwell. The woke undestand it and wish to destroy what they could not build out of envy and spite.
I think it's not really the case of actual hate. They see these franchises as conduits to spread their message to this demographic they really don't understand. It doesn't matter that much if the franchise is a bit soiled after use as long as other ones still remain. It's a bit like a spacebug walking around in an Edgar-suit.
@@TimoRutanen I think it does come from a place of hate. They hate that they themselves cannot create, or at least cannot create anything worthy of real love and affection, and they hate that others have not only created, but created things that people love and adore. So, they set out to trample those beloved creations into dust, so that they are only remembered as being garbage.
Agreed, very blue pill take by Chato here. It was pretty hilarious to see him arguing that the key to controlling entertainment is controlling so-called prime time TV, which has become a backwater. the guy really wants to relive the old days as a network guy.
Computer games, not movies, are the most labour intensive product sold to the general public, by far. It takes a few years to create a new AAA game with a new engine, and even after its release it still needs to be developed.
Thanks for explaining this in very simple terms. I am sure that you have more things to share about Hollywood and "how the sausage is made". One thing that I am really curious about is why studios and by extension streaming services still insist on using antiquated distribution models in the age of the internet. As someone who lives outside of the US, being artificially gated out of streaming content is particularly annoying. I have money and I am more than willing to pay for content. But instead I am constantly hit with the "not available in your region" nonsense. While I can certainly get around this by using a VPN, it feels "slimy" and uncouth.
I'm sure there are better experts on the topic, but the super simplified answer is that Netflix (or replace with whichever service applies) needs to purchase streaming rights to stuff per region. If a series/film is available in another but not yours, then the branch of Netflix in your region has not opted to purchase the series/film. Factors that come with that: cost of licensing/distribution rights, estimates of viewership in the region, possible social/religious/political concerns (rare but its there, this actually ties in with viewership size), is the series even available (another local network or media group may have already acquired exclusive distribution rights), and some other things I dont know about.
The rights to content - film or TV - are usually sold territory by territory. No one would purchase the rights to distribute a film in, say, the USA if everyone in the USA had already seen it via the streaming service who had bought only the UK rights.
Thank you so much for breaking it all down in such an eloquently detailed manner. It makes sense and it doesn't. Hollywood is like a bullet: It never lies; but when it does, you're grateful. The most beautifully complex, challenging, upside down industry to work in. Nothing quite like it.
I think the larger issue with the comic book industry is the lack of money in it. This attracts writers, artist and editorial who are either new and inexperienced, extremely passionate or not good enough to make more money elsewhere. Even the extremely passionate and talented ones eventually leave for better paying positions out of necessity. A lack of oversight leads to social media shenanigans and production delays. Compounding things are a glacial move to digital and an over-reliance on a shrinking direct market.
@@CallMeChato Yeah, Manga is doing great and has an excellent digital presence. If they were smart, they would hire the people who make those sites and shamelessly copy it. Marvel has Marvel Unlimited, but the whole thing is clunky and hard to use.
@@CallMeChato they don't really have any IP or other advantage in that space. like saying Kodak should have just embraced digital photography, when they had no advantage over their competitors in that space.
Hollywood is a huge corporate endeaver for producing a bunch of crap. I never knew how bad movies were until I worked in a large San Francisco movie theater as a security guard and got to watch every movie that came out as I rotated between about 11 showrooms each with different movies. Virtually every movie, with maybe the exception of one or two in a two or three month period was not worth the entrance fees charged.
I am of the belief that an adaptation should be targeted towards the built-in audience...the normies will follow. The writers and executives really need to remain anonymous, i know their egos will not allow this unfortunately
I never thought of it that way - that the "woke" have always been there, but it is merely that the shorthand of gender/race/sexuality swapping demonstrates a drought of originality and talent. I'm not SJW but I love Altman, Lumet and Jewison for their mastery of the medium regardless of their personal politics.
Call me Chato, is perhaps one of the best channels. The mixture of common sense, wry humour and experience is just solid gold and deserve a hell of a lot more subscribers. I think the difference between the 'SJW' film-makers of old and the modern SJW film-makers is like two carpenters building a box. The first carpenter of old, takes his time to choose the right wood, then makes every joint, such as a dovetail, by hand, then sands and polishes the timber. Though you may not like the box, you can appreciate the quality craftsmanship and care. The second carpenter, modern and hip to what's happenin', uses some old MDF, then nail- guns the pieces together, a bit crooked, a dodgy paint job. Then has the audacity to say his box is as good if not better than the old carpenter's box. "Its been re-imagined" "Its subverting your expectations" And we are supposed to believe that dog turd.
I guess for me the frustration with Hollywood is down to that old Albert Einstein quote "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results". Hollywood keeps putting millions of dollars into woke programming and films which bomb or do not perform as expected, but they keep on doing it.
I just can't get past how clear this grand project in media is so evident, and so evidently tied to various ideological goals , deconstructionism and critical theory for example, it's like these are the new product and conventional notions of product for the consumer is of secondary or incidental concern. These ideals are not really about creating anything they are about destroying it and creating it anew without the problems perceived in the conventional , not that any new product can really meet these goals because they in turn must then be evaluated ,their problems exercised , and this churn and grind cycles. At the point the product is commercially destroyed and unsalvageable they move on like locusts to another. The commercial failures lead to the deconstruction of the industry, its eventual failure, another win for these ideologies. Reminds me of the apologue of the boiling frog.
Why do studios pay large fee's for rights to IPs that have a built in audience only to tell that audience that this isn't for them, call them names and then tell them not to watch?
Hollywood has been Hollywood since the early 20th century, but there has been a change of sort in the last 20 years. There is nothing wrong with Hollywood focusing on producing low risk, good return movies. Sometimes, by accident, something truly great is produced, but even if not they are generally all watchable. The issue is they are going out of the way to fail. When the 1st Star Wars came out, the opposition studios wanted to cash in on the success and came out with their own versions, such as Battle star Galactica and Buck Rogers in the 25th century, all of which were good. Today when something comes out which is successful, such as The Joker, Hollywood seemed to spend all its time attacking it instead of emulating it. When they decided to re-do popular franchises they spent all there time attacking the built-in fans instead of catering to their requirements. When Star trek the next generation came out back in the 1980's some fans did not like it, but Gene didn’t spend his time insulting those fans, he simply took some of the comments on board, tweaking the series and making it the success it eventually became. But even in this case the core theme of the series remained, so these disagreements were very minor compared with the seismic changes today. Today a new series comes out, which is produced by people who have little if any knowledge of the original and where every possible pointless change is implemented and when challenged, all the built-in fans are attacked. Its almost if this is some type of evil universe marketing plan at work. Hollywood has always pushed propaganda, look at “The White cliffs of Dover” or “Mrs. Miniver”, or even the original “The invasion of the body snatchers”. However all these movies, while pushing propaganda, are good nonetheless? There has been a dumbing down of Hollywood in the last 20 years which has never occurred at this scale in the past. I feel that unless they change, dramatically, they will suffer, although that is already occuring. Disney, to a small extent, and Discovery are good examples of the changes which are occuring now.
It's the insults that make no sense. Instead of trying to increase their audience share, they go out of their way to drive the fans, who would otherwise be an almost guaranteed audience/profit source, away with insults. Once you offend people, you have pretty much lost them forever. They will never pay a penny to buy anything you do ever again.
I just adore your videos - very informative and as a Tolkien fan now I can be unemotional toward "the lord of the things" project :D becouse now I can see it mostly as a plastic product of hollywood politics not as a honest - if not perfect - try in film artistry to show us the values and intricasies of one of the best fantasy universums ever written. That was Jackson's project for me. And btw "there is only one Lord of the Rings and he does not share power" :D
I like your stuff and this may be the best I've seen from you yet. Smart, clever, honest, funny, realistically cynical but not defeatist or demoralizing. I don't agree that this is all rooted merely in greed, fear & "the system" (or at least the "Hollywood system"), because there's too much messaging & ideological lockstep between the entertainment biz and corporate news/govt. talking points. Maybe it's more The Process than it is "the system," wink-wink nudge-nudge.
What this brand of zealots did the North American comics industry should've been a wakeup call to every corner of entertainment. They managed to turn an 80+ year old industry into a wasteland, WHILE even its D-list characters were getting million dollar marketing campaigns every quarter, from the movie and TV side of things.
Great stuff as always. I would love to hear your thoughts on the future of streaming services. I know somebody below mentioned that also. It's getting to the point where streaming is as expensive as cable had gotten, and now they are injecting commercials depending on how much you are paying. I know I'm at my breaking point, and I'm going to make my family choose between one or two, or we will go without.
I think we're in the middle of spending money spree to crush the competition. The services will consolidate. I have Netflix. That's it. I refuse to buy anything else.
@@CallMeChato I'll make more comments later on, but curious about your refusal to get more than NetFlix. Aside from keeping your digital finger on the pulse of "The Biz," Amazon Prime has some great content like "Bosch," "Reacher," "The Expanse"and others, as well as being a portal to several other services like the BBC library. Also, being a Biz guy, how on earth can you not have the Criterion Channel with its mind-bogglng selection of classic foreign and American films, as well as some Off-the-Wall collections such as Doris Wishman's Sixties nudies, Herschel Gordon Lewis' seminal gore films, and their fondness for Godzilla.
@@CallMeChato Ahhh, I get it - OPM. (Other People's Media...) You should still get the Criterion Channel. If nothing else, watching "Chimes at Midnight" or "The Children of Paradise" will remind you of just how soul-humbling great films can be.
Greetings Paul. It has come to the point where I just up-vote your videos 5 seconds in. I absolutely love your dry humor, and thoughtful insights about almost everything you bring up. One might say you're a hugely underrated master communicator. Keep it up. You make my day.
The big issue I think when it comes to why many properties are so obsessed with "diversity" and the overabundance of female led action properties that the audience seems to not want is that they have over emphasized social media. The biggest lie that marketers have told companies and "hollywood" is that getting likes and good comments on social media is all important. It really isn't, it is almost meaningless as the people commenting on most social media are not reflective of reality. People who comment on Twitter, for example, are WAY more progressive than the general public (by a huge factor). They think social media reactions are like neilson ratings, where likes or comments represent some greater whole, when they do not at all. One "like" or comment does not equal 100,000 people like neilson ratings do..but they were fooled into thinking it does. So when they see social media saying "yay, the force is female" for Star Wars, they think that means there is some huge audience that agrees..when it just reflects a very small slice of america. And social media now silences and censors anyone who disagrees. But since there are no huge conservative social media platforms, they cannot see this. It is the same reason why dictators think they are popular or the communist party thought the people loved them until a million people protesting them showed up..because they cannot see the other side. When you are getting censored rose colored data from only one side, it is always bad.
Picking the race/gender/etc.. for a charcter and not haveing the character make sense does seem to be common. There are times that changing an extant charcter works.. Example Nick Fury. and then there are the times it does not work. Exampe Anne Boleyn (the latter is I think far more common)
@@treyriver5676 Making Anne Boleyn black was truly bizarre. Anne Boleyn was the most privileged woman in England until Henry decided to get rid of her. If she could have given him that son & heir, she would have had it made.
@@treyriver5676 Well you can find examples that work or not, but my point is that they are doing so based on a fallacy that people "want" diversity and this kind of thing, when it is based on very skewed data from a very leftist subset of people
Providers of content are less and less controlled via gatekeepers. 1 You-tube channel can produce more content in a week than a network can in 1 month for a fraction of the cost. Heck, what was the cost per minute of this video Chato? $1.00? $2.00? A whole $10.00? Your ROI is through the roof and you're not even a big channel (yet). You know what you can make, if you properly manage a channel with a million subscribers? More than you made as a network exec. Joe Rogan has like, 3 employees, and his time is reportedly worth 1 million a minute. (Rumored commercial spot price on Spotify for his podcast). Think Hollywood can compete? No way. Most of these content providers won't allow themselves to be captured by a corporate system....so trapping talent and milking them is mostly off the table. These deep-captured content providers are already dead. The math doesn't work for them, and it's getting worse. Things like "work of the rings" will be quickly forgotten in the roaring firehose of custom designed, quality, content now being provided. The point of this is that content production is now dispersing and growing along with consumption. Consumption won't be gate-kept, even you-tube is facing more and more competition as a delivery platform. Only our demo even remembers "prime time". It doesn't exist to today's generation. Like you say in your video, smaller piece of pie...until there's not enough pie to support your endeavor. Nice analysis, just a bit dated IMHO.
I see your point and it's not something I'm unaware of but I think you might be shocked at how many people do not get their entertainment over the Internet. And by that I don't mean HBO over IP on a ROKU. There is still an argument that the power of traditional media is very strong. Broad notoriety comes when traditional media takes notice. Take Lilly Singh as an example. I think she has escaped back to her UA-cam channel after her talk show crashed and burned. She has a huge YT following but I will bet you anything she would trade it all to keep that shitty late night show going. Network TV still has a powerful draw. More people consider Colbert a celeb than Rogan even though Rogan's audience dwarfs Colbert's. Don't just discount trad media yet. Thanks for your thoughtful comment. A video about Internet fame vs traditional media fame would be interesting. I already did a video on the economy of nothing.
@@CallMeChatoThanks for replying! I think you're correct for current demo. But I have two teens. They have NEVER watched network TV and barely consume anything but free streaming. The kids at their schools seem to follow the same trend. Their idea of celebrity seems a lot different than what you and I would consider. The current millennial generation may be the last to have ever watched media (T.V.) the old way. It's fascinating watching the dramatic change in how media is consumed, especially in the last 5-10 years or so. Content creation will continue to match the fragmentation, it's just a bit behind. It's a dramatic shift and from my viewpoint (obviously not as knowledgeable in the field as yourself) one that's accelerating. That's why this woke junk looks just like cost-cutting / cost-shifting measures to me. Much like a failing restaurant starts to cut corners. These legacy content creators know there's no recovery from the cash-flow trap they are in. Hence the plethora of "+" subscription channels now (almost all of which are failing..even Disney's). Consolidation phase is quickly coming up. THAT is going to be interesting to watch. As content fragments it's shelf-life degrades and so does value. Prediction: As bandwidth availability and speed increases this trend will accelerate. I've been in I.T. since the mid-80's and can see this pattern everywhere in my profession. In any case...keep up with the insider perspectives. They're fascinating and entertaining to listen to. .
All of your points are well-taken and I can appreciate that studios may genuinely fear the wrath of the woke SJW brigade. What mystifies me is this: I haven't watched cable, or broadcast TV for over a decade now, so maybe I'm missing something, but I look at The CW and its roster of cheap DC superhero knock-off shows, and wonder, How can a network with its eye fixed on the Bottom Line, ie., ratings and ad dollars, release so many shows with such poor quality and bad ratings, and still keep its doors open? Even FX realized its "Y The Last Man" was an unmitigated disaster and pulled the plug. How does The CW manage to keep throwing more bad money on the fire?
I'm a member of a film club and it astonishes me how many badly written, appallingly directed, insanely and incoherently cliche fests fly right over the heads of viewers. They don't even recognise remakes of remakes, ludicrously praising blatant ripoffs as "fantastically original". I worked in advertising, which thrives on the hordes of hypocritical fickle idiots that make up consumerdom. Hollywood actors have to only stretch their acting abilities to the real Oscar award performances on their promotional tours, offering their handjobs to anyone who will be gullible enough to pay to view.
You mentioned Matrix Resurrections, would love down the road to hear your insight and opinion if that film's odd choices was a case of just bad brand management/production, or if the creatives involved actually tanked the franchise intentionally to prevent more sequels. There were so many baffling choices that there is a theory that the creatives intentionally burned the house down, would be curious to hear from your perspective if that holds any possible truth or was just a bad production. Thank you keep up the great videos!
@@StratumPress I'd imagine it's because they had a HIT once, and the execs keep hoping that they will again. Also, they have name recognition and some slight lingering kudos from the original Matrix.
@@CallMeChato to their defense, I believe the first Matrix was just a perfect self-contained one shot they crafted for years before releasing it, and Joel Silver and Warner Bros, seeing the massive success of it, just couldn't sit still and forced them to make a trilogy of it, which they were ruefully unprepared for. Their previous work were not bad at all, and the quality curve leading up to the Matrix was logical. Doing such a massive smash hit is at once both a blessing and a curse, coz everything you'll do down the line will always get compared to this on hit you did before, and the pressure is ON for the rest of your life ! Ask Georges Lucas about it, who never directed a single decent movie after the original Star Wars trilogy (heck, even after A new Hope, actually, the 2 other episodes being directed by other, better directors than him). Should the Wachowskis brothers (I'm only now realizing their acronym is also the WB, now wonder Warner Bros likes them so much ^^) had a bit more freedom and time to craft stories that were relevant to them, maybe their career would have been very different (although they did make some movies that they themselves wanted to work on, and never got the shining of the Matrix, like V for Vendetta, and Speedracers, although we could laud them for being pretty ballsy in believing in their outworldish vision. It's what got them their first smash hit in Matrix, after all).
I think the key thing people often forget is that Hollywood is 99% liberal. They remember when Hollywood is compared to the rest of the world, but when we look at Hollywood in a vacuum, suddenly people forget and like to think actors, directors, producers, etc. are as diverse as the rest of us. Of course, most of the focus is on actors, followed by directors. Recently Sam Elliott has come under fire for what is being perceived as "homophobic" remarks regarding the modern western "The Power of the Dog," which naturally prompts many conservatives to reinforce their stance as his being one of the true anti-liberal actors in the business, especially given his history playing rough and tumble cowboys and related figures. In turn, many liberals see him as an old conservative cowboy trying to keep "toxic masculinity" alive. But few consider that he, like all the other so-called "conservatives" in Tinseltown, would be laughed off the stage by actual conservatives. That these people were the "pretty ones" of the family who pursued that flimsy nonsense "acting" instead of pursuing a *real career.* Not only that, but many of those hailed by the conservatives outside of Hollywood wouldn't actually identify as conservative. Sam Elliott, if I'm not mistaken, is a registered Democrat. Now with the Wokening taking the west by storm, people once more forget that Hollywood is 99% liberal, meaning it was a given the newer generations would thereby be Woke, yet it still shocks people. Obviously it's shocking that Hollywood is investing so hard in obvious failures that trade on white shaming and man bashing, along with race swapping and reversing gender roles. But money takes time. Since we know Wokes, and Hollywood's other liberal demographics for most of its history, lack self awareness, they'll keep trading on that narrative so long as the monkeys behind the curtain want to keep pushing it. At least until the returns near a net negative. Then the impartial bean counters will fire the Wokes running the sets to find those who can appeal to the masses. Then Hollywood will have a new slew of ideas trying to make amends for all the Woke bigotry they've been backing, while potentially also weeding out any talent who backed Woke bigotry. Nothing galvanizes an aged system like the pretense of a clean slate.
I know The Rings of Power will be a critical disaster, but a bunch of people will watch it. Like a lot of people slop up gross McDonalds burgers, but most people admit they suck.
There's a few more reasons why studios are so obsequious to the woke. First of all, they sympathize with them. Their hearts go out to the downtrodden, the victims, and they feel their pain. Second, there is a very real history of the studios engaging in ethnic, racial and sexual discrimination. Harry Cohn of Columbia really did bend to Southern white supremacists and really did abuse women. Harvey Weinstein is nothing compared to Harry Cohn, who once almost had Sammy Davis Jr. killed by gangsters if he married a white actress. Studio execs may feel the need to make up for those past abuses. Third, shared politics. The majority of the wokesters are on the Far Left end of the Democratic Party, and overall the party has moved to the Left. Studio execs, actors, producers, screenwriters, and behind the scenes workers are almost entirely Democrats. So they not only share the same political beliefs, but the same values. It's why all the political jokes at the Oscars are only against Republicans and never Democrats, even when Republicans aren't in power, to shouts and clapping from an audience of mostly woke Democrats. Finally, government intervention. It's no secret that the military pays Hollywood studios to make them look good, but the CIA and other agencies also pay them. The EPA pays them. Congress inserts little subclauses to send money their way. Then there are regulations over banks, lenders, and credit agencies to promote their agenda, creating something akin to a social credit system that takes 1950s McCarthyism to new levels.
The Woke are NOT victims. They just play them on tv & movies. In real life, they're actually victimizers. They look in the mirror and virtue signal while adding fuel to the fire that causes the suffering of others. You're the world's biggest hypocrites.
Agree 100% with the closing thought. The overabundance of content is the real problem. There are only so many hours a day for someone to watch broadcast (or streaming) entertainment, and with so many tastes to cater for the studios are forced into a crazy scattershot approach to things that creates much more chaff than wheat.
I respect your views. To my understanding the old guard of "provocateur" filmmakers were good at their craft, while these modern SJW hacks only have one thing in mind and one thing only "subvert & destroy". The result is impoverishment of entertainment, with childish/repulsive products that no one likes.
They dont want you to keep watching a great movie or tv show or music over and over. They want you to consume and forget. Then buy the next greatest thing. I didnt take fellowship out of my dvd player for a year. They dont like that.
I appreciate your insight into consumer media. You're probably the only person who pushes back on a lot of the complaints we fanboys have...but you don't do it in a nasty cynical way! Seriously, yours is the only reasonable voice that seems to say, look, no, people aren't monsters for wanting things, nor are they monsters for creating things... Anyway, I'm so glad *THE ALGORITHM* suggested your channel. I will miss the Hackintosh vids tho.
First time watching you, and I'm very impressed. You are as funny as you are insightful. Love all of the references. As Number 6 would, say, Be Seeing You!
Well said. I spent 10 years in the broadcast industry in the technical part of things. A wise person said to me that in broadcasting (and film) the egos are incredibly big. Think what it takes to tell the board that a film like “Water World, “Heaven’s Gate,” or “Ishtar” will be a smash-and mean it. Such people, I was told, will occasionally make absolutely non-sensical decisions, costing millions of dollars, simply to remind themselves-and others around them-that they can! At the top of show business, the studios, networks, syndicators, etc., are hundreds of these off-kilter, non-linear, financially ignorant-remember, they spend their days spending other people’s money-almost unearthly people. They control what you can watch while munching on nachos at the Alamo Draft House Cinema.
This was pound for pound the most thought provoking thing I'm going to watch this week, probably this month. Wow. I guess the youtube algorithm HAS figured me out. Looking forward to your views on such things going forward.
When I lived there I saw more people crushed than ever.... HW is soulless and when my work got passed over I never took it personally, though consoling those who did, did get old. The one screenplay that did not get passed over, well, I turned down the offer to write the book(s) because, like my agent at the time said, "They offered too much!" When I went to parties where studio execs were at I never saw an unhappier group of people in my life. They were a miserable bunch. I also never pitched to them at those parties. They knew I was a writer and they were shocked that I never attempted to sell 'em on something I was working on... Those were not so good days!
“Creativity is something they put up with”: Brilliant line and an incisive, not too acerbic take on the industry. Very well written too. One of your best, Paul.
So true
Retroblasting made a perfect video on the OP's comment. An absolute recommendation to anyone interested:
ua-cam.com/video/FqhC5fMyU_I/v-deo.html. Enjoy.
I think you touched the base at the end of what most of us are complaining about. We understand political messaging was made by great film makers that we wouldn’t necessarily agree with, but, it’s the current talent and the way they do things today. There is no art in the way the message is delivered, there is 0 tact. Stories are being recirculated almost exactly except the parts that were good are exchanged for politically driven agenda that is then shoved in our faces. The old SJW still respected the process to build a story and win people to their side vs blatantly harping and demanding conformity.
Yep.
without a doubt. and I concur with Chato that SJWs are terrible at movie making and incapable
of self reflection. an example is the latest Sarah Silverman woke Xmas cartoon disaster with got a
whopping 3% on Rotten Tomatoes. She claimed it was because she angered the "white supremacists"
they will never own their failures, and all they have is failures.
The older liberals asked questions and created thought provoking stories. This is what’s missing in newer stuff.
@@WaywardPondering yeah because a lot of the great thought provoking ideas were accomplished and now there isn’t true oppression as there was in the 60’s in the first world at least.
@@FinanceMan are you sure there isn't true oppression going on in today's world? I would say there's an enormous amount of true oppression right now.
Something my professors at school mentioned was that you can expect there to be something of a cycle when it comes to movies and entertainment. They described it loosely (with tablespoons of salt) as this:
Youll have an era where you get good creative movie making. Stuff that is pretty unique, timeless, and/or pushes movies as a medium forward. Movie studios keep playing on these new themes and concepts over and over because it sells and its a safe bet. This results in studios getting comfortable and unwilling to try out new ideas or go in new directions because it is to much of a gamble. They will instead continue to reiterate the same ideas and concepts that made them money in the first place, distilling them down to such a scientific degree that the new and fresh becomes mundane, generic, and half baked. Quality declines, public interest slips, and the studios eventually hit rock bottom because their safe bets no longer pay out. Desperation is the father of innovation, and studios will now take gambles on creatives with new visions. They fund a few and eventually get one that redefines the medium, staring a new creative era. Rinse and repeat.
You could say that right now were in a downward trend, where Hollywood is basically creatively bankrupt and are relying to heavily on sequels, prequels, reboots with different paint jobs, and movie universes of established IPs. But the upside is that public interest is again declining, so we may see some changes coming in the relative near future.
I'll eat your tablespoon of salt. This observation still tastes good.
Yeah I think that applies to all forms of entertainment, music, books etc. Reflection of the human cycle itself maybe ?
@@madmartigan8119 true. I got the feeling the last super creative and explorative era we've had both for art, cinema, music, and animation was the 80's, 4 whole centuries (edit : I mean decades, of course) after WW2, enough to recover from its wounds and start explore creativity (the beginning of creativity was probably even from the end of the 50's, actually). The 90's were a great echo of it, then came the 2000's and everything started to fall apart... (probably because peace lasted for so long people and trends started getting complacent)
Yeah, I was trying to express the same idea, but your professors did it better.
it feels like they're doing dominance pissing to replace every story and every character with their own identity. It isn't about creating
Still, how the hugest pile of screen garbage ever labeled as Star Trek, commonly known as Star Trek Discovery, still airs and is even renewed, is an utter mystery to me. After fans loudly told "This is not Star Trek, please think again" for four progressively worser seasons, I just suspect that now the most common reaction is "Ok, I'm done. Frak off" and they just quit. I quitted for the first time since 1977.
Being a second-generation Trekkie, I am in a precarious position when it comes to both the Kelvin Timeline and -nutrek- ...
In 2001, I was nineteen years old, but I was fully saturated in Trekdom when _Star Trek Enterprise_ debuted, and I rejected the show before the first season even ended. There were too many problems for me to bother putting up with, and I walked away. A family-friend used that magical, mystical newfangled device at the time called a "DVR" to record the show, and he sent me Season Four on home-made DVDs _after_ the show had ended. For many years, I claimed that _ENT_ was garbage _except for_ its fourth season.
Jump ahead to fall 2019, and I accidentally binged the entirety of _ENT_ on Netflix, and was- in my late-30s- fully converted to a fan of the show, to the point of _deep regret_ of my foolish arrogance across 17 years [at that point].
Of all the shows and movies that have come out since _ENT_ was unceremoniously cancelled in 2005, the only one that I have wholeheartedly embraced is _Star Trek Beyond,_ despite knowing its box office was affected more by the previous dumpster fire than poor word-of-mouth at the time, and that was a risky prospect I took back in 2016- that I wouldn't get burned a _third_ time in a row.
As I continue to silently boycott Secret Hideout's mad flailings-about on Paramount+ (my sole _financial_ exception: ua-cam.com/video/16_wSm_HW34/v-deo.html ) and laugh at Bad Robot as they scramble to stay relevant despite failure after failure to their name and the slow eroding of JarJar Abrams' reputation (too many Kelvin Timeline Eaglemoss unboxings to list here, check out my channel #ShamelessPlug ), I cannot help but remind myself of my significant mistake in regards to _Star Trek Enterprise._ Will I- at some point years down the line- ultimately come to _regret_ boycotting the supposed genius of nutrek which I despite and loathe so heavily right now??? And by boycotting, that means I have not seen it with my own eyes (save for only the pilot of -std- in 2017 and peer-pressured into "MST3K-ing" five episodes of -lower recks- ) any significant part of -nutrek,- so I can't even verify _by my own personal standards_ whether these shows are actually enjoyable or not!
- If I'm right and they _are_ garbage, then I will have given Kurtzman and the w0ke mob the justification of a view count and corrupted my "pure" view of _Star Trek,_ and in the same instant betrayed the principles upon which Roddenberry & Co. founded it in 1966.
- If I'm wrong and #TheFandomMenace was making mountains out of molehills since 2017, then I will have- once again- _arrogantly and blindly condemned_ a quality product worthy of the name "Star Trek", and killed it out of my foolishness.
If I want *good* Star Trek, there's hundreds of hours of older shows I can watch. If I want *NEW* Star Trek, I have only CBS shows to watch, whether it's good or not. And CBS knows this. They're making money off the new garbage, at least enough that they keep making new seasons of it. Someone is watching it and making them money, doesn't matter (to CBS) if the fans of older shows are part of that audience or not. Sadly.
A certain amount of loss is able to be written off as an expenditure. If I was at the IRS I'd be looking closely at the amount they are claiming. These sjws are burning through money.
@@EVAUnit4A I shudder to think what awful writing singularity that could redeem STD in the future.
I've been watching star trek since reruns in the early 80s. I liked all the shows till STD and I just couldn't understand how this pos got made.
“Actors with ideas” that was brilliant Chato, gave me a good laugh. I can tell the experience
Corman had it right years ago, as far as putting politics, or social issues into a movie. Its perfectly fine to do so, but it still has to be entertaining. Today, it seems that if they have a message, they are going to beat you over the head with it for two to three hours. If it's entertaining, that's just a bonus.
Movies used to use a lot more metaphors, or be subtle about politics. Along with being entertaining. They also used to not treat the viewer like an imbecile. Now it seems instead we get browbeaten with lectures, treating the audience as if they are to dumb to get any type of subtlety.
@@ryanpeck3377 It seems like they consider us morons until you examine Wokeism's messages and see that you have no choice but to "treat us like morons" to push it in a movie.
You cant hide the dumb with ideological bafflegab when you use these "girl boss" characters who have exaggerated version of "toxic masculinity" traits and all that.
Wokeism's silliness REQUIRES bafflegab and talking points to at least obscure how obviously just ideology and propaganda Wokeism is.
The comic book industry was, indeed, burnt to the ground. One would think that this travesty would lead to introspection and then change... but younger writers and executives just don't do that. Actually, youth has never been good at insight. In the past, there were actually adults who oversaw them who filled that need. As you have stated, in the movie industry (and in many other companies), the adults were moved out. Passion without wisdom leads to disorder. Thanks for your wonderful videos!
You forget that the comic book industry exists only to maintain the IP, lest there EVER be another Captain Marvel fiasco (Captain Marvel was almost as big as Superman, then paid to stop publishing. Another company created a “Captain Marvel” character as soon as they could, then DC bought the creating company of the old “Captain Marvel” only to discover some other little comic book company now had the rights to the name, and decided that the litigation wouldn’t be worth it, and so tried to recreate the Billy Batson Saga as “Shazam”).
The point of that epic digresso is that it is cheaper to make comic books that don’t sell using “authors” that can be paid chicken feed, than to create new characters for every few movies (where the real money is).
Sadly I've spent decades in Hollywood. The biggest problem in both Hollywood and comics (almost synonymous since DC moved West) is a culture that actively hates and disrespects the past... just as greater culture sadly finds little use or respect for senior citizens. Without that respect for what came before, art becomes untethered from reality, history, and reflection... base, vacant, and childish. They're angry children with matches looking to burn down their homes. Problem is they don't understand how to build new homes once they've burned the old.
Actually Marvel Comics died at the moment that Stan Lee set foot on the airplane to move to the West Coast. Until then, people like Jim Shooter were kept under control. Once Stan was out of the way for good, the lesser talents were turned loose and the long (not very slow) decay took hold.
@@Thorn76 There's a lot of things wrong with the U.S. comics industry, but I think a lot of people forget the ACTUAL reason comics died - manga.
That's right, Japanese manga - the best of them, at least - shit all over most of the U.S. comics in nearly every possible way. Better art, better stories, and they appeal to a broader range of readers. Is it any wonder? U.S. comics just about gave up on trying to make new characters, and there are only so many stories you can write about the same characters repeatedly!
On top of that, manga are a HIGHLY competitive business, just to get your stories printed, whereas the system in U.S. comics has zero competition, or close to it, as to what stories are going to be published. I keep waiting for Marvel and DC to start doing something like Shonen Jump and the other big companies in Japan do, but all we keep getting is crap.
What was the last time Marvel or DC got a spurt of new, interesting characters? The Rob Liefield era in the late 80s?
My biggest complaint has been the lack of professionalism...
The "writing" in the vast majority of these "projects" would have - literally - caused me to fail my _High School_ creative writing class.
I mean that, though...
Producing something that blatantly incoherent and self-indulgent (Star Trek: Discovery/Picard) would have had serious consequences for me, *AS A MINOR.*
The secondary stuff, where I believe everyone gets lost in - is that they could have done these self-indulgent projects with different IP, but were too lazy.
They didn't _have_ to Re-Re Star Trek, in order to tell _that_ story. Ask Anas Abdin... >.>
I think that's where it can seem personal, and people get offended and then everything becomes a conspiracy...
"Never attribute to malice, that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
True, they always seem just dumb at first, then get a bit a venom on their tongue then it goes right back to them being stupid. They're so cowardly they cannot make their own stand on their own. It always a relience on other people's successes so when they do fail upwards they can blame the IP, fans, budget, etc. When it was their stupid vision where they refuse to commit 100%
I went to engineering school and I remember that our technical professors were so enraged by our lazy writing on the reports we made that they hire professional writers to encourage us to improve our style. What I'm trying to convey is that lame writing wasn't tolerated at an educational institute for a technical/professional career, I don't understand how "accomplished" and "professional writers" perform so poorly.
@@lordtanatos84kmkn59 Nepotism, wonder why when these people get stinkers they end up on a bigger project? Only to either quit or mess that up
At this point, that saying needs to be reversed. They are doing this on purpose, not by accident, and they say that pretty openly now. This is NOT the result of stupidity; it is genuine malice, in their own words.
There is a difference between writing for 35 million people of all ages and genders and 3 million mostly older females. The youth have left network TV and every year the average age of the network viewers are getting older. What do older viewers want? Procedurals. A procedural is a show where each episode is identical except some actors have changed. An example of this is a guy gets accused of a crime. The lawyer does some investigation and finds out his or her client is not guilty. The last part of the episode is the lawyer getting the real criminal to confess in a courtroom. The difference between the episodes are the crime and the actors for the side characters. Most shows in TV history, including sitcoms, have been procedurals. Creative shows have often either failed or turned into procedurals.
Man, I have become a huge fan of your channel! I've worked in Hollywood off and on for 17 years, and it's great to see and hear a straight shooter go right at the heart of the business! The business side of TV and film is way more opaque and, (frankly) misunderstood because so much focus is on the performers... not the behind-the-scenes day to day grind where people only see the world in two colors: black and red. (Profit and loss.) Thank you for painting a picture of why Hollywood has so much influence and being honest about why the current political game can be a dumpster fire! I appreciate the no-nonsense take that doesn't pull punches, but also praises the parts of the industry that can be thankless.
I’m a Newbie to your channel, and can’t get enough. Appreciate your insight.
Truly a pleasure to hear a refreshing and dispassionate view on the current status of entertainment. If I may add the outside view (I am from Europe) on the wokefest generally favoured in recent productions by the western entertainment industry (Hollywood, Disney, Amazon, Netflix, BBC), we feel an immense degree of cringe (and frustration), as the level of fakeness accompanied by preaching that is delivered through (many of) the products barfed-out by said industry is amply evident to us (and anyone with eyes and ears). Almost no movie/TV show produced in recent times seems to be devoid of characters that are equivalent to planks of wood, but filling some boxes in an imaginary endless spreadsheet of gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity and whatever else boxes, none of which sadly includes relatability, humanity, attractiveness. Further, every other product is a remake, where some pre-existing established characters are deconstructed in favour of above-said planks of wood. It is quite surprising that executives haven’t yet “diversified” away from this quite evident risk in their “stock portfolio”. Are they waiting for all of their stocks to crash and burn?
Okay, you've convinced me.
I'm going to have to watch The Producers.
A wise man once said- “everything woke turns to sh*t”.
I've only recently found your channel and started to go through your videos - the Mac stuff is the Mac stuff but your insight into the Hollywood machine, just wow. Yours is an experienced and fearless voice of truth that is very very valuable and needed now. I think your wisdom could greatly benefit your channel as well as help build bridges between Hollywood players, critics, commentators, and fans alike. I would love to see you get involved with some of the people who are forming in and around Midnights Edge in particular Kameran Pasha, Chris Gore, Robert Myer Bernet (totally butchering all these names) and Andre. The live stream talking format may not jive with your scripted structured format and thus you may not enjoy it, but I think your voice would be incredibly beneficial to the conversations happening out of those people crossing paths. Perhaps a formal interview with Midnights Edge or a podcast like conversation with Burnett? If your take away from this is simply a compliment I would be satisfied, I think this content is awesome and I will keep sticking around as long as you are willing to share your insights.
As a former small business owner I'm curious how allowing directors, writers and actors insult customers on social media is factored into the profit equation by studio executives.
Oh and dancing the merengue in a cage filled with bees would really boost Dancing with the Stars ratings.
Because I think there are people within this new generation that don't just want to ignore the past, they hate it with every fibre of their being. You must also understand that actors are egos wrapped in skin. And this isn't a criticism. It has to be this way to survive as an actor. I might just pitch the DWTS and bees.
@@CallMeChato I could see an entire suite of shows that would benefit from the addition of caged bees! Heck, change the "CW" to "CWB" (Caged with Bees) Network!
@@CallMeChato I have no desire to watch more Fear Factor. Nor do I desire to watch DWTS. However, Fear Factor crossed with DWTS would definitely get me to tune into episode one. As long as one of the stars didn't extol the virtues of underage sex.
@@CallMeChato Hosted by Nicolas Cage?
I am of the opinion that social media and Twitter are the worst things that happened to creatives in the entertainment industry. Before social media there was a mystique about Hollywood and a kind of 'wall of mystery' that separated audiences from the artists. Prior to social media, audiences rarely knew the inner thoughts or political views of the actors they watched on screen or the thoughts of the creative talent behind the scenes. Social media showed audiences 'the man behind the curtain' like in the Wizard of Oz and audiences don't like it. Many of the people in entertainment are not nice people I would want me or my family spending time around in real life.
Before social media, the public images of movie stars were carefully crafted 'brands' that were sold to the public. That brand control was destroyed by social media. I'm of the opinion that one of the things studios are going to have to do to 'right the ship' is contractually muzzle their artistic talent on social media. Forcing their actors and creative talent off of social media will have to become a requirement to restore 'brand control' and improve public relations. All official social media accounts for actors and other employees in entertainment must be managed by professional PR departments. The current norm of actors and creatives tweeting out their latest rant on social media will have to come to an end.
Mate you’re actually becoming one of my favourites on YT. Your playful, yet respectful sarcasm is a breath of fresh air amongst all the indignation and outrage. And to top it all off, I’m actually learning stuff ! Keep up the great content. Big thumbs up from Oz…
As always, well said. One of the problems today, as I see it, is the proliferation of so-called celebrities due to cable and the internet. Anyone can become famous and some for no other reason than being famous, e.g. Kartrashians. Like professional sports when they add teams and it waters down the product. Oh for the days of a few truly talented “stars” instead of this glut of wanna bees.
Or if you happen to check off the diversity victimization boxes....
Pretty true, famous for doing nothing with little to no talent. Our TIk Tok world and everyone has an opinion on everything.
I am an adjunct professor. One of my students did a research dissertation about black independent films. I enjoyed reading the interviews that she did with these directors. They wanted to make great movies with great stories and great actors.
I think I hate Hollywood even more, now, that I have listened to this. I love movies.. so did my dear husband, but I always wondered if Hollywood would someday become so toxic and out of touch and absolutely insulting to our intelligence that we just quit.
One thing to keep in mind is the slide started around '65 when the blacklist finally ended. Directors like Pakula and Stone were part of a 50 year push that got us where we are. The Gramscian March was in Hollyweird, too.
Nah. Today we have a dozen super hero and law and order types shows, but in the 1950s, it was full of westerns and law and order type shows.
I love how self aware you are for someone who was part of the industry. Your joke about "your star tweeted something about the joys of under-age sex" is a perfect example of this ability to recognise and poke fun at unfortunate realities.
I'm too self-aware for my own good.
@@CallMeChato Disagree. Your self-awareness is good. It got you out while you could still retain recognizable parts of yourself.
Glad i discovered your channel, it's been very entertaining. Just one small issue, you say "SJW's" have been in Hollywood for a long time at least but this is not the right way to come at it. This "generation" of SJW's are not from the same evolutionary family as the old. This new type doesn't from a Marxist like model (and yes Marxists have been in Hollywood from the start, no biggie) no this model is a post modern model, meaning it wants to "deconstruct" everything, from our ability to do art to our ability to think what so ever. They're make impossible demands and contradict themselves at all times, making it impossible to please them enough to shut up.
They've been very good at mimicking the old guard, completely hijacking the neo-liberal, old Marxist sympathizer's, as if they were some kind of parasite. Don't be fooled, this isn't just about race equity, it's about bringing on a nihilism, an aesthetic blindness and ending any sort of meritocracy. Due to their own contradictions they couldn't survive for an eternity but they will cause a great deal of damage until that point.
I'm doing a video on why do the SJWs hate Shatner's Captain Kirk. It encapsulates what you've posted.
@@CallMeChato looking forwards to it. shatners kirk was awesome
Speaking of contradictions, is the model you talk about "marxist", "post modern", wanting to "deconstruct"? Because it can't be all of those at once.
@@roulette3657 It can, when the proponents are wildly unstable and cognitively dissonant.
I've been saying for a long time that this SJW cult is an Ouroboros. It will eat itself eventually.
Your comment about comics is super important. The main reason comic failed is that they spent all their money on IP and very little of it on promotion of the writers. This makes sense as executive can't own writers but they can own IP but also means that the quality will drop so much that eventually the IP will be worthless. Lord of the Ring is good because Tolkien was brilliant. To do it justice we would need a brilliant writer to carry on the legacy but Amazon likely paid as little as they could to get words on a page. As with most things in life you get what you pay for.
Wow!! I really love your videos. As an ex-actor who started in NYC and washed up a failure in LA, it is interesting to learn about the business of show business now, an older and less passionate man. Actors believe that they can do anything if they are just given a chance and genuine support. It is hard for them to accept the limitations of reality when they are trying to achieve big dreams. Honestly, I really wish you would send these videos to acting schools and offer a workshop to students in Juilliard, NYU, or any acting studio who will have you. The problem is the message is negative to a performer, but how can young actors come up with a strategy to play the game if they don’t really know the rules. The business is always changing, but schools are not even attempting to teach the rules of show business to their graduates. To the administrators of the drama department real world business is considered too dirty, but that is a terrible disservice to would be actors. You could teach young actors so much - it’s a tough message to deliver, but you are funny and entertaining! How I wish I could have heard this at Juilliard back in the 90’s. The school taught me nothing about the business- nothing at all. Really, nothing. Perhaps they do teach it now, if so you would be a great addition! Thanks!
teach it yourself. The industry is not imploding so much as it is delocalizing from high cost coastal production centers to lower cost cities and states that offer incentives and other benefits. Those are the places they need good acting training, beyond community theaters which have their own corrupt groupthink because they are all nonprofits and care more about "social change" than entertaining an audience.
@@ktoth29 Relax a little; It’s not my fault they aren’t paying your quotes (even if you do have the credits that deserve them) Maybe the delocalization and rebates from states aren’t going into the actors pockets? Who knows? If you don’t think Chato has excellent advice for actors, who does he have good advice for? The suits? If he was one of them he never would be making these videos. Chato is a good teacher and I stand by what I say. I wish you continued success.
This does go a long way to explain the fairly recent emergence of superstar directors like JJ. Not particularly talented or creative per se, but bankable and reliable in the eyes of the decision makers.
JJ is a competent project manager.
Probably why he hasn't directed anything but a couple of big projects in over a decade. His writing is lower than lazy, but why not get paid twice if you are the one in charge?
The best thing I can say about JJ is that he was always meant to be a producer.
But JJ did a wonderful job at further wrecking Star Trek
That's it exactly. The executives care about 1 thing: Butts in seats on opening weekend. JJ knows how to create a spectacle that the sheeple will show up for. That's pretty much all he knows, and why he is meant to be a Producer and not a dear-god-stop-kicking-it-its-already-dead-stop-jj-stop Director or Writer.
You mean JarJar Abrams ? The guy who wrecked both Star Trek and Star Wars?
I'd say JJ has talent, but his talent comes from the perspective of a producer, who knows how to do money shots well. There also lies his failure, as a movie can't just be a string of money shots cobbled together. That's just an overly long trailer.
Brilliant analysis. A breath of fresh air in the mid of the mind-polluting mainstream Hollywood production
I've noted I can rewatch Ghostbusters, Big Trouble in Little China, The Princess Bride, The 5th Element, Matrix, etc time and time again. I've seen all those movies probably dozens of times since the original theater runs. But I can't think of a current movie I've seen in the last 5 years I care to see more than once. It's like movies made today have no soul. I just watched Ghostbusters Afterlife the other night and enjoyed it but have no desire to watch it again. I just made me want to watch the original again. Is it just me or do others feel that way too?
Yes, I have experienced and thought about this a lot. I tried to rewatch the Disney Star Wars movies and I stopped. Same with the Avengers and I recall enjoying them the first time. I’ve watched Wag the Dog at least a dozen times, The Rutles, Singing in the Rain, The Big Clock, Jacques Tati films, Matrix 1 but not much from the recent crop. Thanks for your comment.
If ever there was someone full of himself yet not unbearable it's you- mainly because you seem to know what your're talking about. Never dull. Thank you.
This guy can clearly express the jumbled and confused thoughts that I have been struggling with. Thank you
"Back to the future"! As I recall for 6 years no one would touch it.
There is one upside we have today that we didn't have even 10 years ago: technology has globalized the distribution mechanism for even small-time content creators. if SJWs are destroying the stories you love, then leave. Plenty of other people are making good things that need our support and that cater to what we like.
And then they wonder why stuff like DC Comics or the CW network is basically on life support dispite having a bucket load of diversity and inclusion.... Yeah because NO ONE ACTUALLY BOUGHT THEIR STUFF.
The way I see it, companies should really just ignore Twitter all together if they actually want to end up making some level of profit, which they are having a hard time doing when you have all this new generation directors/network executives who are more or less creatively bankrupt.... And thus you will get more low quality stuff like Star Trek Discovery.
True. My disgust with Hollywood led me to become a fan of Korean cinema and Indonesian action flicks.
you can not get a indie produced lord of the rings. if you enjoy dramas set in the modern world there are still good movies out there. if you are into fantasy and science fiction you are FUCKED.
@@fall190 : No. You forgot to add fantasy and science fiction... 'with existing IP's'. There is still some good new stuff being produced and written. Some by self-published authors. Crap, there's an entire alternative publishing industry at this point because the traditional gatekeepers have made it near impossible for white males or conservatives to have a platform to write fiction. The Martian by Weir is an example of something that started out as being self published on one's own blog, gained popularity, and eventually even broke into the regular bookworld and had a Hollywood movie made about it. While the 'wokesters' wouldn't make a movie about most stuff the alternative publishers write (not PC) there are tons of them making tons of money on Amazon, on Castellia House, to a limited extent on Baen (the one trad publisher that is only mostly, not totally 'converged'), on webtoons and of course on all sorts of crowdfunding platforms. Movies and etc are much more expensive, but some Non Traditional companies have seen opportunities and now "The Daily Wire" will be making films, just like UA-cam and Apple and Netflix did before they also surrendered to the SJW's. TDW doesn't seem to have the same risk. Hollywood's control of the distribution system would have totally slipped away by now if they hadn't focused on buying up so much internet competition and if the SJW's hadn't focused on getting so much of the streaming and internet based competition to self-censor.
@@remo27I can't even understand what you're saying man. I'm talking about movies . you can not make an indie epic fantasy movie. the lord of the rings trilogy was 300m $ in early 2000 money. It cant be done. theres no way that the daily wire is going to be making movies with a budget in the hundreds of millions.
Why did it take me this long to discover your channel? So nice to see someone for hollywood is not a wokescum and who discusses things objectively and with humor and easy way for us not in the industry to understand. Respect from this millennial, sir.
When they were promoting Star Trek: Discovery, the producers would highlight the characteristics of each cast member as if they were what made him or her an augmentation to the story. I'm a 42-year-old white male, and I've been a Star Trek fan for 35 years; my favorite character on The Next Generation was Tasha Yar; my favorite character on Deep Space Nine, and indeed my favorite character in the enter Star Trek franchise, was Ben Sisko.
/
Thank you for the insights. As a consumer ultimately the why of the matter isn't as important (although interesting to know) as the simple fact that crap is being produced and being advertised as gold. Entertainment from Hollywood is a luxury I can and will forego. I can watch the classics for years and never miss any of the current drivel that is being made now.
These are fantastic little presentations. Thanks for helping to demystify Tinseltown.
This mostly confirmed my suspicions on how media gets made. I have tried explaining to my folks that most of execs at these corporations are clueless, despite being the most informed people on the planet of their craft and not necessarily malevolent. They are trying to accomplish a nearly impossible task, one which they happen to be most qualified to do, and still floundering. Chaos is simply overwhelmingly powerful, and is the reason that central planning tends to fail more often than succeed. The best scenarios are “perfect” storms where highly talented and qualified people create the right product that is released at the right time. This is unlikely given the constraints of knowledge that everyone works with. If we could make better predictions we would have the ability to make better predictions. Unfortunately, the intrusive data science of Facebook and Twitter has yet been properly marshaled to do this very thing. Making media is hard, and a lot of the effort goes unnoticed and taken for granted. This sounds like a good example of Hanlon’s razor with the added acknowledgment that chaos makes fools of even the most competent people.
That last statement is gold. There may well be more really good stuff out there, available to the public, than ever before. But it is also more incumbent on the consumer to go look for it, than ever before as well.
Your stuff reminded me of my dad. He worked in the entertainment industry. He used to teach me about how things work in the industry. I appreciate you for educating people about things behind the camera.
As for me, I just don't like how the Americans are taking their media to the direction they are taking right now.
I cannot believe you do not have more subs. I love your slightly sarcastic presentations, yet full of great info, and for me, great insights! ...THANK YOU! :)
They are very much doing it on purpose. Once they've ruined one franchise they move on to the next. The fact that they do not stop but keep doing it despite the massive backlash by the fans illuminates their agenda. They hate us. And they want us replaced by normie consoomers who get excited for next product.
“Those who control the present, control the past and those who control the past control the future.”
G.Orwell. The woke undestand it and wish to destroy what they could not build out of envy and spite.
I think it's not really the case of actual hate. They see these franchises as conduits to spread their message to this demographic they really don't understand. It doesn't matter that much if the franchise is a bit soiled after use as long as other ones still remain.
It's a bit like a spacebug walking around in an Edgar-suit.
@@TimoRutanen I think it does come from a place of hate. They hate that they themselves cannot create, or at least cannot create anything worthy of real love and affection, and they hate that others have not only created, but created things that people love and adore. So, they set out to trample those beloved creations into dust, so that they are only remembered as being garbage.
Agreed, very blue pill take by Chato here. It was pretty hilarious to see him arguing that the key to controlling entertainment is controlling so-called prime time TV, which has become a backwater. the guy really wants to relive the old days as a network guy.
Computer games, not movies, are the most labour intensive product sold to the general public, by far. It takes a few years to create a new AAA game with a new engine, and even after its release it still needs to be developed.
Thanks for explaining this in very simple terms. I am sure that you have more things to share about Hollywood and "how the sausage is made". One thing that I am really curious about is why studios and by extension streaming services still insist on using antiquated distribution models in the age of the internet. As someone who lives outside of the US, being artificially gated out of streaming content is particularly annoying. I have money and I am more than willing to pay for content. But instead I am constantly hit with the "not available in your region" nonsense. While I can certainly get around this by using a VPN, it feels "slimy" and uncouth.
Wish I could help you.
I'm sure there are better experts on the topic, but the super simplified answer is that Netflix (or replace with whichever service applies) needs to purchase streaming rights to stuff per region. If a series/film is available in another but not yours, then the branch of Netflix in your region has not opted to purchase the series/film.
Factors that come with that: cost of licensing/distribution rights, estimates of viewership in the region, possible social/religious/political concerns (rare but its there, this actually ties in with viewership size), is the series even available (another local network or media group may have already acquired exclusive distribution rights), and some other things I dont know about.
The rights to content - film or TV - are usually sold territory by territory. No one would purchase the rights to distribute a film in, say, the USA if everyone in the USA had already seen it via the streaming service who had bought only the UK rights.
Plot twist; the studios are the ones making the VPN software!
A little side cash deal.
Thank you so much for breaking it all down in such an eloquently detailed manner. It makes sense and it doesn't. Hollywood is like a bullet: It never lies; but when it does, you're grateful. The most beautifully complex, challenging, upside down industry to work in. Nothing quite like it.
I think the larger issue with the comic book industry is the lack of money in it. This attracts writers, artist and editorial who are either new and inexperienced, extremely passionate or not good enough to make more money elsewhere. Even the extremely passionate and talented ones eventually leave for better paying positions out of necessity. A lack of oversight leads to social media shenanigans and production delays. Compounding things are a glacial move to digital and an over-reliance on a shrinking direct market.
True, but Manga is huge. I'm surprised the comic book industry hasn't ripped off that idea yet.
@@CallMeChato Yeah, Manga is doing great and has an excellent digital presence. If they were smart, they would hire the people who make those sites and shamelessly copy it. Marvel has Marvel Unlimited, but the whole thing is clunky and hard to use.
@@CallMeChato they don't really have any IP or other advantage in that space. like saying Kodak should have just embraced digital photography, when they had no advantage over their competitors in that space.
Hollywood is a huge corporate endeaver for producing a bunch of crap. I never knew how bad movies were until I worked in a large San Francisco movie theater as a security guard and got to watch every movie that came out as I rotated between about 11 showrooms each with different movies. Virtually every movie, with maybe the exception of one or two in a two or three month period was not worth the entrance fees charged.
I am of the belief that an adaptation should be targeted towards the built-in audience...the normies will follow. The writers and executives really need to remain anonymous, i know their egos will not allow this unfortunately
I never thought of it that way - that the "woke" have always been there, but it is merely that the shorthand of gender/race/sexuality swapping demonstrates a drought of originality and talent. I'm not SJW but I love Altman, Lumet and Jewison for their mastery of the medium regardless of their personal politics.
Call me Chato, is perhaps one of the best channels. The mixture of common sense, wry humour and experience is just solid gold and deserve a hell of a lot more subscribers.
I think the difference between the 'SJW' film-makers of old and the modern SJW film-makers is like two carpenters building a box.
The first carpenter of old, takes his time to choose the right wood, then makes every joint, such as a dovetail, by hand, then sands and polishes the timber. Though you may not like the box, you can appreciate the quality craftsmanship and care.
The second carpenter, modern and hip to what's happenin', uses some old MDF, then nail- guns the pieces together, a bit crooked, a dodgy paint job. Then has the audacity to say his box is as good if not better than the old carpenter's box. "Its been re-imagined" "Its subverting your expectations" And we are supposed to believe that dog turd.
I guess for me the frustration with Hollywood is down to that old Albert Einstein quote "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results". Hollywood keeps putting millions of dollars into woke programming and films which bomb or do not perform as expected, but they keep on doing it.
They want to brainwash, not entertain. Once you view things through that lens everything makes sense.
I just can't get past how clear this grand project in media is so evident, and so evidently tied to various ideological goals , deconstructionism and critical theory for example, it's like these are the new product and conventional notions of product for the consumer is of secondary or incidental concern. These ideals are not really about creating anything they are about destroying it and creating it anew without the problems perceived in the conventional , not that any new product can really meet these goals because they in turn must then be evaluated ,their problems exercised , and this churn and grind cycles. At the point the product is commercially destroyed and unsalvageable they move on like locusts to another.
The commercial failures lead to the deconstruction of the industry, its eventual failure, another win for these ideologies. Reminds me of the apologue of the boiling frog.
As always, It's refreshing to hear listen to someone who is a master at their craft. Please keep teaching.
Why do studios pay large fee's for rights to IPs that have a built in audience only to tell that audience that this isn't for them, call them names and then tell them not to watch?
I couldn't hit the subscribe button fast enough. Thank you
My solution is put Lloyd Kaufman in charge of everything. I can see that Tromatizing A LOT of people.
Plan B is John Waters.
“BILL! And Ted.” That was fun.
Can I just say how much I love you for choosing that specific image of Doctor Who?
Hollywood has been Hollywood since the early 20th century, but there has been a change of sort in the last 20 years. There is nothing wrong with Hollywood focusing on producing low risk, good return movies. Sometimes, by accident, something truly great is produced, but even if not they are generally all watchable. The issue is they are going out of the way to fail.
When the 1st Star Wars came out, the opposition studios wanted to cash in on the success and came out with their own versions, such as Battle star Galactica and Buck Rogers in the 25th century, all of which were good. Today when something comes out which is successful, such as The Joker, Hollywood seemed to spend all its time attacking it instead of emulating it.
When they decided to re-do popular franchises they spent all there time attacking the built-in fans instead of catering to their requirements. When Star trek the next generation came out back in the 1980's some fans did not like it, but Gene didn’t spend his time insulting those fans, he simply took some of the comments on board, tweaking the series and making it the success it eventually became. But even in this case the core theme of the series remained, so these disagreements were very minor compared with the seismic changes today.
Today a new series comes out, which is produced by people who have little if any knowledge of the original and where every possible pointless change is implemented and when challenged, all the built-in fans are attacked. Its almost if this is some type of evil universe marketing plan at work.
Hollywood has always pushed propaganda, look at “The White cliffs of Dover” or “Mrs. Miniver”, or even the original “The invasion of the body snatchers”. However all these movies, while pushing propaganda, are good nonetheless? There has been a dumbing down of Hollywood in the last 20 years which has never occurred at this scale in the past. I feel that unless they change, dramatically, they will suffer, although that is already occuring. Disney, to a small extent, and Discovery are good examples of the changes which are occuring now.
It's the insults that make no sense. Instead of trying to increase their audience share, they go out of their way to drive the fans, who would otherwise be an almost guaranteed audience/profit source, away with insults. Once you offend people, you have pretty much lost them forever. They will never pay a penny to buy anything you do ever again.
Wow! I’m shocked that Mad Men was slept on it’s one of the best shows ever made, ..It’s one of my top favorites.
I just adore your videos - very informative and as a Tolkien fan now I can be unemotional toward "the lord of the things" project :D becouse now I can see it mostly as a plastic product of hollywood politics not as a honest - if not perfect - try in film artistry to show us the values and intricasies of one of the best fantasy universums ever written. That was Jackson's project for me.
And btw "there is only one Lord of the Rings and he does not share power" :D
Hahahaha, this hits the nail on the head! I like to say “Every film is a miracle” some more than others hahaha
I like your stuff and this may be the best I've seen from you yet. Smart, clever, honest, funny, realistically cynical but not defeatist or demoralizing. I don't agree that this is all rooted merely in greed, fear & "the system" (or at least the "Hollywood system"), because there's too much messaging & ideological lockstep between the entertainment biz and corporate news/govt. talking points. Maybe it's more The Process than it is "the system," wink-wink nudge-nudge.
Thank you. I don't think I'll top this, sorry.
I love the balance and insight you provide with every video. You're awesome man, please never stop 😎👍
What this brand of zealots did the North American comics industry should've been a wakeup call to every corner of entertainment. They managed to turn an 80+ year old industry into a wasteland, WHILE even its D-list characters were getting million dollar marketing campaigns every quarter, from the movie and TV side of things.
And they were so proud of their accomplishments.
I recently found your channel. Amazing content, really intelligent and insightful. Love your videos, please keep up the good work, sir.
Great stuff as always. I would love to hear your thoughts on the future of streaming services. I know somebody below mentioned that also. It's getting to the point where streaming is as expensive as cable had gotten, and now they are injecting commercials depending on how much you are paying. I know I'm at my breaking point, and I'm going to make my family choose between one or two, or we will go without.
I think we're in the middle of spending money spree to crush the competition. The services will consolidate. I have Netflix. That's it. I refuse to buy anything else.
@@CallMeChato I'll make more comments later on, but curious about your refusal to get more than NetFlix. Aside from keeping your digital finger on the pulse of "The Biz," Amazon Prime has some great content like "Bosch," "Reacher," "The Expanse"and others, as well as being a portal to several other services like the BBC library. Also, being a Biz guy, how on earth can you not have the Criterion Channel with its mind-bogglng selection of classic foreign and American films, as well as some Off-the-Wall collections such as Doris Wishman's Sixties nudies, Herschel Gordon Lewis' seminal gore films, and their fondness for Godzilla.
Oh I see Amazon. I borrow my son's account. :-) I was just being truthful that ME only have Netflix.
@@CallMeChato Ahhh, I get it - OPM. (Other People's Media...) You should still get the Criterion Channel. If nothing else, watching "Chimes at Midnight" or "The Children of Paradise" will remind you of just how soul-humbling great films can be.
just get a vpn. yo ho ho and a bottle of rum
Greetings Paul.
It has come to the point where I just up-vote your videos 5 seconds in. I absolutely love your dry humor, and thoughtful insights about almost everything you bring up. One might say you're a hugely underrated master communicator. Keep it up. You make my day.
I’m blushing.
The big issue I think when it comes to why many properties are so obsessed with "diversity" and the overabundance of female led action properties that the audience seems to not want is that they have over emphasized social media. The biggest lie that marketers have told companies and "hollywood" is that getting likes and good comments on social media is all important. It really isn't, it is almost meaningless as the people commenting on most social media are not reflective of reality. People who comment on Twitter, for example, are WAY more progressive than the general public (by a huge factor).
They think social media reactions are like neilson ratings, where likes or comments represent some greater whole, when they do not at all. One "like" or comment does not equal 100,000 people like neilson ratings do..but they were fooled into thinking it does. So when they see social media saying "yay, the force is female" for Star Wars, they think that means there is some huge audience that agrees..when it just reflects a very small slice of america. And social media now silences and censors anyone who disagrees. But since there are no huge conservative social media platforms, they cannot see this.
It is the same reason why dictators think they are popular or the communist party thought the people loved them until a million people protesting them showed up..because they cannot see the other side. When you are getting censored rose colored data from only one side, it is always bad.
Picking the race/gender/etc.. for a charcter and not haveing the character make sense does seem to be common.
There are times that changing an extant charcter works.. Example Nick Fury. and then there are the times it does not work. Exampe Anne Boleyn (the latter is I think far more common)
@@treyriver5676 Making Anne Boleyn black was truly bizarre. Anne Boleyn was the most privileged woman in England until Henry decided to get rid of her. If she could have given him that son & heir, she would have had it made.
@@treyriver5676 Well you can find examples that work or not, but my point is that they are doing so based on a fallacy that people "want" diversity and this kind of thing, when it is based on very skewed data from a very leftist subset of people
this video was really insightful. the last 2-3 minutes especially were kind of eye opening.
Providers of content are less and less controlled via gatekeepers. 1 You-tube channel can produce more content in a week than a network can in 1 month for a fraction of the cost. Heck, what was the cost per minute of this video Chato? $1.00? $2.00? A whole $10.00? Your ROI is through the roof and you're not even a big channel (yet).
You know what you can make, if you properly manage a channel with a million subscribers? More than you made as a network exec.
Joe Rogan has like, 3 employees, and his time is reportedly worth 1 million a minute. (Rumored commercial spot price on Spotify for his podcast). Think Hollywood can compete? No way. Most of these content providers won't allow themselves to be captured by a corporate system....so trapping talent and milking them is mostly off the table.
These deep-captured content providers are already dead. The math doesn't work for them, and it's getting worse. Things like "work of the rings" will be quickly forgotten in the roaring firehose of custom designed, quality, content now being provided.
The point of this is that content production is now dispersing and growing along with consumption. Consumption won't be gate-kept, even you-tube is facing more and more competition as a delivery platform.
Only our demo even remembers "prime time". It doesn't exist to today's generation. Like you say in your video, smaller piece of pie...until there's not enough pie to support your endeavor.
Nice analysis, just a bit dated IMHO.
I see your point and it's not something I'm unaware of but I think you might be shocked at how many people do not get their entertainment over the Internet. And by that I don't mean HBO over IP on a ROKU. There is still an argument that the power of traditional media is very strong. Broad notoriety comes when traditional media takes notice. Take Lilly Singh as an example. I think she has escaped back to her UA-cam channel after her talk show crashed and burned. She has a huge YT following but I will bet you anything she would trade it all to keep that shitty late night show going. Network TV still has a powerful draw. More people consider Colbert a celeb than Rogan even though Rogan's audience dwarfs Colbert's. Don't just discount trad media yet. Thanks for your thoughtful comment. A video about Internet fame vs traditional media fame would be interesting. I already did a video on the economy of nothing.
@@CallMeChatoThanks for replying!
I think you're correct for current demo. But I have two teens. They have NEVER watched network TV and barely consume anything but free streaming. The kids at their schools seem to follow the same trend. Their idea of celebrity seems a lot different than what you and I would consider. The current millennial generation may be the last to have ever watched media (T.V.) the old way.
It's fascinating watching the dramatic change in how media is consumed, especially in the last 5-10 years or so. Content creation will continue to match the fragmentation, it's just a bit behind.
It's a dramatic shift and from my viewpoint (obviously not as knowledgeable in the field as yourself) one that's accelerating. That's why this woke junk looks just like cost-cutting / cost-shifting measures to me. Much like a failing restaurant starts to cut corners. These legacy content creators know there's no recovery from the cash-flow trap they are in. Hence the plethora of "+" subscription channels now (almost all of which are failing..even Disney's).
Consolidation phase is quickly coming up. THAT is going to be interesting to watch. As content fragments it's shelf-life degrades and so does value.
Prediction: As bandwidth availability and speed increases this trend will accelerate. I've been in I.T. since the mid-80's and can see this pattern everywhere in my profession.
In any case...keep up with the insider perspectives. They're fascinating and entertaining to listen to.
.
‘…and because they are completely incapable of self reflection’ I like this one.
All of your points are well-taken and I can appreciate that studios may genuinely fear the wrath of the woke SJW brigade. What mystifies me is this: I haven't watched cable, or broadcast TV for over a decade now, so maybe I'm missing something, but I look at The CW and its roster of cheap DC superhero knock-off shows, and wonder, How can a network with its eye fixed on the Bottom Line, ie., ratings and ad dollars, release so many shows with such poor quality and bad ratings, and still keep its doors open? Even FX realized its "Y The Last Man" was an unmitigated disaster and pulled the plug. How does The CW manage to keep throwing more bad money on the fire?
Rerun stripping. Have to have a minimum made to make it work. Long game.
The owners of CW is trying to sell CW while still makes more SJW series that no one sees. Their reruns aren’t selling well enough.
I'm a member of a film club and it astonishes me how many badly written, appallingly directed, insanely and incoherently cliche fests fly right over the heads of viewers. They don't even recognise remakes of remakes, ludicrously praising blatant ripoffs as "fantastically original".
I worked in advertising, which thrives on the hordes of hypocritical fickle idiots that make up consumerdom. Hollywood actors have to only stretch their acting abilities to the real Oscar award performances on their promotional tours, offering their handjobs to anyone who will be gullible enough to pay to view.
Great insights.. Thanks for the upload.
You mentioned Matrix Resurrections, would love down the road to hear your insight and opinion if that film's odd choices was a case of just bad brand management/production, or if the creatives involved actually tanked the franchise intentionally to prevent more sequels. There were so many baffling choices that there is a theory that the creatives intentionally burned the house down, would be curious to hear from your perspective if that holds any possible truth or was just a bad production. Thank you keep up the great videos!
This would be hard to comment on. I realized the Wachowski's were frauds after the two Matrix sequels.
@@CallMeChato Oh yes good point! Nevermind then keep up the great videos!
@@CallMeChato I wonder how many hundreds of millions of dollars they've wasted over the last twenty years. And they keep getting work?!
@@StratumPress I'd imagine it's because they had a HIT once, and the execs keep hoping that they will again. Also, they have name recognition and some slight lingering kudos from the original Matrix.
@@CallMeChato to their defense, I believe the first Matrix was just a perfect self-contained one shot they crafted for years before releasing it, and Joel Silver and Warner Bros, seeing the massive success of it, just couldn't sit still and forced them to make a trilogy of it, which they were ruefully unprepared for.
Their previous work were not bad at all, and the quality curve leading up to the Matrix was logical.
Doing such a massive smash hit is at once both a blessing and a curse, coz everything you'll do down the line will always get compared to this on hit you did before, and the pressure is ON for the rest of your life ! Ask Georges Lucas about it, who never directed a single decent movie after the original Star Wars trilogy (heck, even after A new Hope, actually, the 2 other episodes being directed by other, better directors than him).
Should the Wachowskis brothers (I'm only now realizing their acronym is also the WB, now wonder Warner Bros likes them so much ^^) had a bit more freedom and time to craft stories that were relevant to them, maybe their career would have been very different (although they did make some movies that they themselves wanted to work on, and never got the shining of the Matrix, like V for Vendetta, and Speedracers, although we could laud them for being pretty ballsy in believing in their outworldish vision. It's what got them their first smash hit in Matrix, after all).
Insightful commentary and hilarious delivery - what a package! 💙
Glad you enjoyed it!
I think the key thing people often forget is that Hollywood is 99% liberal. They remember when Hollywood is compared to the rest of the world, but when we look at Hollywood in a vacuum, suddenly people forget and like to think actors, directors, producers, etc. are as diverse as the rest of us. Of course, most of the focus is on actors, followed by directors.
Recently Sam Elliott has come under fire for what is being perceived as "homophobic" remarks regarding the modern western "The Power of the Dog," which naturally prompts many conservatives to reinforce their stance as his being one of the true anti-liberal actors in the business, especially given his history playing rough and tumble cowboys and related figures. In turn, many liberals see him as an old conservative cowboy trying to keep "toxic masculinity" alive. But few consider that he, like all the other so-called "conservatives" in Tinseltown, would be laughed off the stage by actual conservatives. That these people were the "pretty ones" of the family who pursued that flimsy nonsense "acting" instead of pursuing a *real career.* Not only that, but many of those hailed by the conservatives outside of Hollywood wouldn't actually identify as conservative. Sam Elliott, if I'm not mistaken, is a registered Democrat.
Now with the Wokening taking the west by storm, people once more forget that Hollywood is 99% liberal, meaning it was a given the newer generations would thereby be Woke, yet it still shocks people. Obviously it's shocking that Hollywood is investing so hard in obvious failures that trade on white shaming and man bashing, along with race swapping and reversing gender roles. But money takes time. Since we know Wokes, and Hollywood's other liberal demographics for most of its history, lack self awareness, they'll keep trading on that narrative so long as the monkeys behind the curtain want to keep pushing it. At least until the returns near a net negative. Then the impartial bean counters will fire the Wokes running the sets to find those who can appeal to the masses.
Then Hollywood will have a new slew of ideas trying to make amends for all the Woke bigotry they've been backing, while potentially also weeding out any talent who backed Woke bigotry. Nothing galvanizes an aged system like the pretense of a clean slate.
It was natural for Hollywood to embrace the Wokester. Hollywood just didn't expect them to be this uninterested in its history.
I know The Rings of Power will be a critical disaster, but a bunch of people will watch it. Like a lot of people slop up gross McDonalds burgers, but most people admit they suck.
There's a few more reasons why studios are so obsequious to the woke. First of all, they sympathize with them. Their hearts go out to the downtrodden, the victims, and they feel their pain. Second, there is a very real history of the studios engaging in ethnic, racial and sexual discrimination. Harry Cohn of Columbia really did bend to Southern white supremacists and really did abuse women. Harvey Weinstein is nothing compared to Harry Cohn, who once almost had Sammy Davis Jr. killed by gangsters if he married a white actress. Studio execs may feel the need to make up for those past abuses. Third, shared politics. The majority of the wokesters are on the Far Left end of the Democratic Party, and overall the party has moved to the Left. Studio execs, actors, producers, screenwriters, and behind the scenes workers are almost entirely Democrats. So they not only share the same political beliefs, but the same values. It's why all the political jokes at the Oscars are only against Republicans and never Democrats, even when Republicans aren't in power, to shouts and clapping from an audience of mostly woke Democrats. Finally, government intervention. It's no secret that the military pays Hollywood studios to make them look good, but the CIA and other agencies also pay them. The EPA pays them. Congress inserts little subclauses to send money their way. Then there are regulations over banks, lenders, and credit agencies to promote their agenda, creating something akin to a social credit system that takes 1950s McCarthyism to new levels.
The Woke are NOT victims. They just play them on tv & movies. In real life, they're actually victimizers. They look in the mirror and virtue signal while adding fuel to the fire that causes the suffering of others. You're the world's biggest hypocrites.
@@robinlillian9471 I didn't write that the woke are victims. I think you misunderstood what I wrote.
Thank you, Chato. Great as usual.
Agree 100% with the closing thought. The overabundance of content is the real problem. There are only so many hours a day for someone to watch broadcast (or streaming) entertainment, and with so many tastes to cater for the studios are forced into a crazy scattershot approach to things that creates much more chaff than wheat.
I really appreciate your insights on the industry. Witty and informative. good luck with the channel.
I respect your views. To my understanding the old guard of "provocateur" filmmakers were good at their craft, while these modern SJW hacks only have one thing in mind and one thing only "subvert & destroy". The result is impoverishment of entertainment, with childish/repulsive products that no one likes.
They dont want you to keep watching a great movie or tv show or music over and over. They want you to consume and forget. Then buy the next greatest thing. I didnt take fellowship out of my dvd player for a year. They dont like that.
I like your commentary on the economic realities behind the entertainment industry. Very enlightening.
Here’s my sensible and respectful comment: You rock Chato! I like this kind of random content. 👍
Thank you for talking to us as 6 year olds... the vast majority prob couldn't comprehend otherwise.
This is fast becoming my new favorite channel! Keep these videos coming!
Thanks! Will do!
I’ve been trying to get a TV show off the ground for a while and I find these videos quite insightful. Please make more
"Too much of it." Truer words were never spoken.
You are right they haven’t a clue about what will be a hit after 100 years of Hollywood.
I hope you keep making insightful videos about Hollywood. You are my new favorite youtuber.
More to come!
You gotta keep this sort of content coming!
Came across this one a year later and still as relevant as when I watched it the first time. Creative-less shills run the Hollywood asylum!
The Time Lords bit has me chuckling every time 😂
I appreciate your insight into consumer media. You're probably the only person who pushes back on a lot of the complaints we fanboys have...but you don't do it in a nasty cynical way! Seriously, yours is the only reasonable voice that seems to say, look, no, people aren't monsters for wanting things, nor are they monsters for creating things...
Anyway, I'm so glad *THE ALGORITHM* suggested your channel.
I will miss the Hackintosh vids tho.
All good things must come to an end.
First time watching you, and I'm very impressed. You are as funny as you are insightful. Love all of the references. As Number 6 would, say, Be Seeing You!
Thanks. Appreciate it.
7:16 - 7:21 - Needs to be a meme! I laughed SO HARD!!! "... cage filled with BEES!" 🤣
Well said. I spent 10 years in the broadcast industry in the technical part of things. A wise person said to me that in broadcasting (and film) the egos are incredibly big. Think what it takes to tell the board that a film like “Water World, “Heaven’s Gate,” or “Ishtar” will be a smash-and mean it. Such people, I was told, will occasionally make absolutely non-sensical decisions, costing millions of dollars, simply to remind themselves-and others around them-that they can! At the top of show business, the studios, networks, syndicators, etc., are hundreds of these off-kilter, non-linear, financially ignorant-remember, they spend their days spending other people’s money-almost unearthly people. They control what you can watch while munching on nachos at the Alamo Draft House Cinema.
This man stole 13 mins of my time. A time lord indeed.
This was pound for pound the most thought provoking thing I'm going to watch this week, probably this month. Wow. I guess the youtube algorithm HAS figured me out. Looking forward to your views on such things going forward.
Thanks for the kinds words.
When I lived there I saw more people crushed than ever.... HW is soulless and when my work got passed over I never took it personally, though consoling those who did, did get old. The one screenplay that did not get passed over, well, I turned down the offer to write the book(s) because, like my agent at the time said, "They offered too much!" When I went to parties where studio execs were at I never saw an unhappier group of people in my life. They were a miserable bunch. I also never pitched to them at those parties. They knew I was a writer and they were shocked that I never attempted to sell 'em on something I was working on... Those were not so good days!
The FNER (very catchy acronym btw) videos are the best, keep going Mr!
I might acronym it in the future. Thank you.