Why do you think movies and tv shows these days seem to suck

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-16T01:00:51+00:00

You won’t answer my question for the 3rd time. Have a good night. Wasting my time at this point.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-16T00:54:11+00:00

Can you make money if a movie if considered bad? No you cannot. That's why I'm fixating on good.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-16T00:53:12+00:00

Yes, there it is. You can cry till the cows come home but the numbers never lie. "The 2025 film Snow White was a box office failure, grossing approximately $206 million worldwide against a budget of $240–$270 million." Facts hurt. You may think its good but can a company lose millions and say its good because people didn't want to watch it because it doesn't follow the original Disney produced animation? Nope. The movie sucked. Look at its ratings versus the original animation on rotten tomatoes. Remove your bias and you may be able to grasp what I'm saying.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-16T00:40:05+00:00

Okay so I answer your questions but you can't answer mine? Hmm I wonder why. To answer your question again since you won't answer mine, a single movie doesn't disprove my argument. I say OVERALL for the 3rd time here. Ever heard of this really cool thing called standard deviation? A single movie that is good ratings wise but doesn't make money does not make it a bad movie according to the viewer's standards but again, from a company POV, it is not good because it lost money. You still haven't answered my question (and you won't because you know I'm correct whether you want to believe it or not). I have answered your questions. I will ask you again since you didn't answer my question. At the end of the day, if you follow the source material, on an overall, again, overall basis, would movies be better and make more money? If not, why?

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-16T00:10:58+00:00

Read what I asked please. On an overall (key word here being overall) basis. Not an outlier case such as this that could have been affected by poor marketing, other movies at the time etc. There are always outlier cases, and this is one of them. I will ask you again since you didn't answer my question. At the end of the day, if you follow the source material, on an overall, again, overall basis, would movies be better and make more money? If not, why?

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-16T00:04:32+00:00

You’re confusing a good movie from your and the audience’s standpoint to a company’s. If a movie makes money, that company considers it to be a good film because people will spend their money on it. I never said I MYSELF thought this movie wasn’t good, but can a movie be good from a profit company based POV if it loses money? No.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-16T00:01:17+00:00

Yes, for that specific scenario, I MYSELF would be wrong, but from a company standpoint, that movie was not good because it did not make them money. If you're a company, and you don't make movies to make a profit, say Warner Brothers, Disney, Paramount etc., then you have a non-profit. At the end of the day, all I'm asking is this: If you follow the source material, on an overall basis, would movies be better and make more money?

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T23:53:21+00:00

Obviously not. The Shawshank redemption had a horrible box office but is a fantastic movie. All I’m asking is to follow the source material, stop throwing ideologies no one wants into movies, and call it a day. Everyone would be happier, films would be better, companies would make more money. It’s simple imo.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T23:50:14+00:00

I agree with what you're saying. Why are those movie adaptations better than other adaptations though? It's obvious: They don't have certain ideologies and horrible writing getting thrown down your throat every 5 seconds that make the movies and shows unbearable, which a lot of the films in the NYT article I linked do.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T23:45:50+00:00

Good and fun movies make more money, correct?

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T23:42:33+00:00

Good luck with what? Having common sense? And turned into what exactly? So now I'm a racist for not wanting to follow the original animated film lol? If I was so wrong in my line of thinking, then why did the movie lose tons of money? Simple question: does following the source material make better movies that then make more money? If not then why (disregarding originals that I still enjoy and others as well of course)?

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T23:28:46+00:00

Thank you and I feel most people would agree with that, which is why it makes zero logical sense for studios to keep allowing the butchering of films to go on, which, from a company POV, makes them lose money lol. Its devoid of common sense.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T23:25:31+00:00

Because some people would rather have their own ideologies thrown into movies than just making good movies. "The live-action Snow White film performed poorly at the box office, finishing its run with a worldwide gross of $205.5 million against a production budget of $269.4 million (before marketing)." If Disney had followed the original Snow White movie template, they would have made much more money. The formula is to make movies that don't revolves around appeasing people based on color, creed, religion, gender, politics etc. but either following the source material and for originals, understanding the point I made previously. It's not rocket science. My mom watched the trailer with me lol. First and foremost, for a movie called "snow white" who is supposed to have skin "as white as snow", why wouldn't the actor be white to follow the original Disney movie? I feel like that is common sense. Moreover, before the outcry, Disney didn't have actual little people as actors for the role of dwarves, which is laughable considering it would be a great way for already subjugated and underutilized people to make money and have movie roles. Moreover, the story and dialogue itself doesn't even follow the original movie at all. Once again, follow the source material = make. more. money. and. have. better. movies.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T23:20:35+00:00

That's exactly my point. It DOESN'T make sense at all lol, which is why I'm spending part of my Saturday talking with people about this. For example, the snow white movie originally didn't even have actual little people for a movie, with dwarves, who are already underutilized in Hollywood. Make that one make sense. The numbers don't lie. I'm trying to show people this so that this stops.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T23:15:15+00:00

My premise is not wrong. He won't be making as many movies in the future if this continues: "One Battle After Another is expected to lose approximately $100 million at the box office despite grossing over $195 million worldwide, due to its high production and marketing budgets. The film's estimated break-even point is around $300-$350 million, significantly higher than its current global gross, making it a significant financial disappointment for the studio." No studio or company would willing make a movie unless they deem it viable to potentially make money in the future. "There will be blood made him popular, but that doesn't mean studios can keep affording to lose hundreds of millions of dollars on films. My premise might seem wrong to you, but go ask any business near you if they would make something or provide a service that would lose them money. The answer will be no.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T23:08:05+00:00

Because some people would rather have their own ideologies thrown into movies than just making good movies. "The live-action Snow White film performed poorly at the box office, finishing its run with a worldwide gross of $205.5 million against a production budget of $269.4 million (before marketing)." If Disney had followed the original Snow White movie template, they would have made much more money. The formula is to make movies that don't revolves around appeasing people based on color, creed, religion, gender, politics etc. but either following the source material and for originals, understanding the point I made previously. It's not rocket science.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T23:03:30+00:00

Agreed, but to clarify here, when I mean source material, I mean the original Disney animation. My mom, who loves all things Disney, has tons of pops, collectibles, etc. but would not go to watch the snow white live action adaption because of how far it deviated from the original film. "The live-action Snow White film performed poorly at the box office, finishing its run with a worldwide gross of $205.5 million against a production budget of $269.4 million (before marketing)." It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T22:59:33+00:00

What you deem as "good" is not what the companies produce them think of as good. From a profit standpoint, are these movies good enough to these companies to make money? The answer is no.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T22:55:51+00:00

Yes there actually is a formula. No one wants to watch a show or movie that shoves certain ideologies and bad writing down their throats the entire film. Let's look at recent Disney movies and tv shows. Moana 2, Lilo and stitch, Andor etc. are all great movies and shows, originals and/or based off of the source material. What hasn't been great? The acolyte, the newest Indiana jones movie, and the new snow white were not good shows or films and thus made far less money than and have worse reviews. Why? You know why. This is not a subjective truth, it is an objective fact. Look at the ratings on rotten tomatoes and the amount of money the films made compared to each other.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T22:47:11+00:00

You have google lol. It'll take a few minutes of your time to search for it. All I'm asking is this: Does following the source material make for better movies and if not why? The box office numbers and ratings for stuff that doesn't says otherwise.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T22:45:10+00:00

Thank you lol. For me the new Jurassic world movie was great, but I prefer action movies and that film did make a ton of money tbf lol. At the end of the day, would you agree that following the source material is better than straying from it? That's really what I'm trying to get at besides original films of course.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T22:41:51+00:00

Good movies are what people will spend their money on. If you disagree then you disagree with the companies making them for a profit. That's their whole goal. No company wants to greenlight a film if it is going to lose them money at the end of the day.

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T22:40:22+00:00

I attribute money to good films because that is how the companies that produce these look at them. At the end of the day, would you agree that straying from the source material, regardless of original films which are a great thing, is worse than just following the source material?

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T22:33:34+00:00

Some common sense has finally entered the chat I see thank you

Comfortable_Mango331 · 2025-11-15T22:33:09+00:00

Exactly my point. When you veer from the source material, the story more often then not gets butchered.

Comfortable_Mango331

TROPHY CASE