Films and target audiences - General Discussion Discussion

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

I read that films are written for audience expectations. When films do poorly it can sometimes be a problem of setting up expectations in the audience that your film fails to meet. So that probably explains (at least in part) why films tend to follow the pattern of a specific genre rather than mixing genres or creating new ones.

I know what you mean about, eg, romantic comedies being "for women" though I think that is partly because of the differences in how much men and women will tolerate narrative tools that aren't their preferred ones. You often hear that girls will watch shows with a boy hero but boys won't watch shows with a girl hero. I'll watch an action movie with my husband but if we try a romantic comedy he just wanders off. It's not stigma, it's just his unwillingness to tolerate a nonpreferred genre.

I do wonder if movies could be a LITTLE bit more cross-genre. Not that every romantic comedy has to have car chases in it (that would be pretty funny though). Didn't Iron Man have the subplot of the romance with Gwyneth Paltrow's character? I found it pretty watchable. But a movie that is pure action, I can't tolerate that any more. eg The Fast and the Furious. I just found it unwatchable.

reply

[–] ShogunofYonkers (73687) 4 years ago

I agree with you, the gender thing is generally true and not intended as dismissiveness

The other night my wife and I watched Djanjo Unchained and we really enjoyed it
Had she started Eat, Pray, Love I would have been out in the garage within minutes

reply

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

Oh my word, I couldn't be paid to watch Eat, Pray, Love and I'm a woman!

My husband and I tried Dead to Me (Christina Applegate and Linda Cardellini) and we made it through season 1. I quite liked it. Both main characters are female but it's not a sappy romcom at all, it's more dark comedy. So you would think a guy would be able to handle that. But in Season 2 he just couldn't be bothered with it after the first episode. At first I was offended, since I've sat through plenty of marginal action movies with him, but then thinking about it, I could see his point. Dead to Me has a lot of jokes that, I don't know how to say this, but only women would really get. I think these extremely woman-focused interactions are actually the female equivalent of "male action hero looks off into the sunset while contemplating his manly heroic quest." That doesn't mean these shows shouldn't be made or aren't interesting. But I don't think it's an insult if guys don't enjoy them.

I will say the violence in some of the modern action shows has passed my threshold of tolerance. I walk away.

reply

[–] ShogunofYonkers (73687) 4 years ago

Well said, your husband is a lucky guy to have an understanding wife!

My wife and I always try to have a few shows we can binge together
Right now it's For All Mankind on Apple TV, it's very good

reply

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

Thanks. I'll have to check that one out!

reply

[–] Mrmojo4700 (20767) 4 years ago

Both of you two are lucky. My wife used to have a great movie style but now she’s switched to full reality tv mode. 😫

reply

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

Hahahaha!! I watched The Bachelor for a while but the bad behavior of the participants made me depressed. I think people get into the idea that these are real people. Maybe it feels like the stakes are higher, or something? Some viewers maybe are better able to separate out the fun of it being real people from the fact that sometimes these real people are behaving badly for your entertainment.

There is a very funny (fiction) show out there called Unreal, and it's about two women (mainly) who produce/run a reality show, and all the terrible things they have to do in order to goad the participants into doing "interesting" things onscreen. It's dark humor, but if your wife enjoys reality shows then this might be something you could watch with her.

reply

[–] Sarmoviefan26 (1368) 4 years ago

That show looks interesting it’s like the Truman show right ? Or am I getting the wrong vibes here

A film which talks about reality tv and tell us how big part of it is planned and how it sells to shock audiences, I will look for it.

I liked Truman show a lot with Jim Carrey and this series looks a lot like it.

reply

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

I guess it's a bit like the Truman show but from the point of view of the people running the show, not so much from Jim Carrey's point of view. They are running a reality show and all the contestants know that they are on a reality show.
I think you would like it and it would be fun to talk about, but I've only seen season 1 and half of season 2. If you decide to watch it then maybe I'll pick it back up since it's more fun when you can talk about it.

reply

[–] Sarmoviefan26 (1368) 4 years ago

I will definitely check this out. And it’s gonna be interesting to see the other perspective.

In Truman show it with Jim Carrey’s character perspective the guy in from of the camera now we will get the focus behind the scenes the producers POV

reply

[–] snepts (11123) 4 years ago

Law & Order SVU did an episode where the creators of a reality show were scrutinized for what they expected from the contestants and how they manipulated the situation. Wendie Malick and Michael Gross were the couple behind the show, and it was fun to see them being the bad guys for a change.

reply

[–] snepts (11123) 4 years ago

Law & Order SVU did an episode where the creators of a reality show were scrutinized for what they expected from the contestants and how they manipulated the situation. Wendie Malick and Michael Gross were the couple behind the show, and it was fun to see them being the bad guys for a change.

reply

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

Sounds interesting, though I never watched much SVU

reply

[–] snepts (11123) 4 years ago

Not a big deal, but the recognizable guest stars and the plausibility of producers' wanting contestants to act poorly and get emotional in all these reality shows made it a fun ep.

reply

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

It would be interesting to compare it with Unreal (which is more in a comedy tone whereas SVU is much more serious in my mind).

reply

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

Dark comedy! by the way. Some very dark things happen on Unreal.

reply

[–] AnubisRaydeen (7897) 4 years ago

I really enjoyed Dead to Me. My wife liked it less than I did. My only complaint is that, in retrospect, it is more of a downer than funny.

The show Barry is about an assassin that discovers he loves and prefers acting when infiltrating a small acting studio for a hit. My wife loves it.

Targeting an audience doesn't bother me so much an having hooks for lots of people within is great. Baiting and switching on the other hand is the problem.

reply

[–] 102000 (6163) 4 years ago

I like Tarantino movies but missed this one. My son watched it for the first time last week and told me I would like it.

reply

[–] ShogunofYonkers (73687) 4 years ago

Oh, it's very good, fine principal cast and a lot of entertaining big name cameos

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

I like some films which would be called "Chick flicks". My Best Friends wedding is a fave of mine, I just find it really funny and it even has a car chase scene (of sorts) in it. I like a few others as well, I guess if the plot is good and not just about women dying of something or being miserable than I can enjoy films which aren't necessarily targeted at men.

Likewise, I don't get into pure action films too much either. I like there to be some reason and some interesting characters.

I think now with the internet and Youtube etc if I want to see explosions etc I can get online and look up anything I want. I don't need to watch a film to get that fix.

reply

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

Oh yes, My Best Friends Wedding is a good one. And it's a bit of a twist on a romantic comedy, almost like an inverted form or something. I forgot it had a car chase! I like another wedding one which is, I think 27 Dresses or something like that? A woman who was a bridesmaid 27 times? I liked that the male star was James Marsden, he was funny. But sometimes the romcoms are just too sickly sweet. eg Sleepless in Seattle or You've Got Mail. They were just too much.

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

"Leap Year" is good, "PS I Love You" I liked, "Under the Tuscan Sun" is good even though Sandra Oh uglies the film up. They have decent story lines and try and do something a little different. I vaguely recall 27 Dresses I think it was alright too.

Sleepless and You've got mail are just movie by numbers in my opinion, nothing creative or different there.

reply

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

I haven't seen the first two. I will put them on my list! Good point about movies by numbers. The whole thing of trying to get the internet into movies in "You've Got Mail" was just dumb. Nothing less exciting than looking at a bunch of messages being exchanged on-screen.

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

I think they were jumping on the internet thing with You've Got Mail at the time it was made the internet was still relatively new.

That said I just looked up the film and am surprised to see it is a remake of "The Shop Around the Corner" (1940) which is about two people who don't like each other but fall in love by being pen pals. Now I really want to see that film! https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0033045/

reply

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

Oh that's kind of interesting. I should see that too. I wonder if it's available to stream.

reply

[–] Sarmoviefan26 (1368) 4 years ago

My best friends wedding it’s one of the best Rom Coms ever made. They did a great job with making the protagonist so flawed and a little bitchy but for understandable motives.

It’s totally wrong what she did most of the times but we audiences understand why.

I think that’s a rom com everyone can enjoy even though it’s about a wedding it’s a movie guys and girls can enjoy equally.

Actually here is where my complain of my main post comes from. How the majority of Rom Coms are seen as girly when there are so many guys can enjoy too.

The same goes with other genres and sub genres. Especially action many women did enjoy very much the First Taken movie with Liam Nesson and that’s mostly action.

And like I said before many superhero films have appealing stuff to women to they aren’t exclusive things for guys.

Another example are kids movies: the Disney animated classics Can be enjoyed by everyone, the same with frozen all my girls loved that movie.

I’m sad how those targets seem exclusive to one type of audience.

How most people think Disney movies are just for kids, action it’s just for the boys and romance it’s only for women or films where kids are protagonists it’s a film just for them just like many pointed out with Harry Potter the kids are the protagonists but still that is a film enjoyable for all audiences.

Sleepless in Seattle might be a little too girly but I feel like my best friends wedding is Not and another Rom com perfectly enjoyable for men and women are the Thomas Crown affair( the remake) and Only You.

The original Thomas Crown affair is very good too but that is more of a drama. Anyway I was shocked when I found out the director of only you is the same as the one who did the original Thomas Crown.

They are completely different movies both are romances but totally different.

Thomas crown is a very cynical take on love and has a depressive ending however Only you is totally optimistic and funny with your typical happy ending.

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

Been a while since I have seen Thomas Crown but I did enjoy I didn't even consider it to be a romance or chick flick. I also like Love Actually and Serendipity.

Maybe that is the thing, if you want to maximize your audience potential you firstly have to make sure you don't alienate or piss off a bulk of them as well as writing interesting stories and characters that will appeal to a cross section instead of special interest groups.

I mostly watch older films from the 30's through to early 60's and I never feel pissed off or alienated by them, even if I don't like the film, I never feel like I am not supposed to be watching them.

reply

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

i think superhero movies are for young people in general.

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

I have noticed targeting a film at "Woke" audiences can be a mistake as it seems a lot of these films flop so it suggests to me that Woke people aren't big on films like Terminator and Charlies Angels etc.

Seems to me that especially in the case of established franchises it just alienates the people who might have seen the film but were turned off by the Wokeness without attracting the Woke crowd to make up for it.

reply

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

Absolutely. Diversity is fine and can bring us new actors and new characters and perhaps even new stories. Wokeness, to me, is something different. In my opinion, wokeness in narratives is the idea that the identity group of interest must always be shown in a positive light. That can only lead to boring and predictable narratives, and boring and predictable characters.

Do you remember Kat, on the Battlestar Galactica reboot? I'm going to try not to spoil this for the five crazy people who haven't yet watched the reboot, but just in case... In my opinion, she had one of the most interesting and poignant arcs on the entire show. It was a highlight of the show, for me. But the fan commentary after the episode was negative because they did not like that outcome for someone in that identity group. I thought that was a real misreading of the significant of Kat.

reply

[–] Sarmoviefan26 (1368) 4 years ago

Definitely agree with you.

There is diversity naturally brought up or wokeness which is something forced upon us just to make a film politically correct.

reply

[–] moviechatterer (14170) 4 years ago

wokeness is never 'forced' on you , you just came a across a minority taking their place in a film role for fucks sake.
As diversity increases and racism and sexism decrease you are naturally going to see more of 'those people ' on the screen right? other wise nothing is changing and we are stuck in the 60s with the blacks at the back of the bus.

Its no good saying "Yeah Diversity is fine , as long as i never actually see it"
When you see i white guy in a film you dont get all outraged and say "oh look why is that guy white? the script didnt need him to be white , its not a white specific role , blather blather etc"

reply

[–] AnubisRaydeen (7897) 4 years ago

You made some pretty big assumptions about what you read. You have a bone to pick so you see it where it isn't.

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

It was the same with Sicario (2015) there is a young female agent who is selected by her corrupt bosses because she is so new and they will she will be easily manipulated. At the time on IMDb there was an uproar from the SJW's because it was sexist to show her in such a light! Oh my!

And again the same in Victoria the tv series about the young Queen Victoria. It's all about how this young Queen is being manipulated by all these male politicians, and they don't think a young King would get the same treatment?

Last point in the latest Twilight Zone remade in Woke fashion. There is an ep where a woman has a remote control that can rewind time a little. She is black and keeps getting pulled over by a white cop because her son is black getting the picture? Now here is where they miss such a great Twilight Zone twist, she keeps rewinding time, at one point she even offers to buy the cop some pie. He becomes suspicious because she becomes more and more anxious everytime she does this.

In the end it ends up as a BLM rant. The twist should have been how her own paranoia made things worse. Nope, can't do that.

reply

[–] Sarmoviefan26 (1368) 4 years ago

It’s so silly how people will complain about he Queen Victoria issue.

All people in kings and Queens courts were always manipulative and looking to have their own agendas. A king or queen who had someone really loyal towards them was considered extremely lucky like Elizabeth I with Wallsinham ( who was portrayed by Geoffrey Rush in the cate Blanchett movie Elizabeth).

Even Henry VIII who had a big temper his people were looking for ways to manipulate him. Either Cardinal Wolsey or Thomas or anyone T. His court.

Kings and queen were manipulated

reply

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

Agree. Good point about Henry VIII.

reply

[–] Sarmoviefan26 (1368) 4 years ago

Yes, royals being manipulated wasn’t exclusive to women. The men in court looked to save their Own asses and would do anything to save their way.

Actually with Henry they tried to manipulate him even more because if they didn’t find their way they could be killed.

Catholics wanted England to stay that way so manipulated Henry to stay with Catherine and Protestants wanted Anne Boleyn and persuaded Henry in her favor.

By the way the reason Women didn’t manipulate it’s because at that time they weren’t able to be part of the court and work directly with the king But otherwise I’m sure they would have been equally manipulative.

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12890) 4 years ago

I hate it worse how the young idiots of this generation judge historical films based on 2010s points of view, never once asking about why things were like that. They never do their homework, and refuse to accept that the world was a different place before 2010. It makes me even more pissed when Hollyweird twists and manipulates historical events (as well as the personalities of the historical figures in question) so that it appeals to this crowd, and the dumbass audience has no idea that half that stuff shown is anachronistic fiction!

It's especially bad when they randomly stick a non-white person into a role where there were no people like that, or put a spotlight on the one gay person in the entire story, when they were barely mentioned in the actual historical accounts (depending on which king or queen was being portrayed on-screen). The worst way to appeal to modern audiences, is to do a hideous mixture of period and 2010s fashions into the story.

reply

[–] Sarmoviefan26 (1368) 4 years ago

Just like now with The Spanish princess or the tv series Reign.
That is something I always loved about the tv series the Tudors while not completely accurate they were faithful to the people behaved at those times

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12890) 4 years ago

They were accurate about a few things with the French Court or Henry VIII's court. Henry did love to party and have fun when he was young, and he really did write, direct, produce, and star in his own shows at different parties. And he slept around a lot during his reign.

They were accurate in "Reign" in the idea that the French Court was very rich and lavish, there was friction between Queen Mary and Queen Catherine, and that Mary had 4 ladies-in-waiting that had grown up with her and were her closest friends.

But that's all they got right.

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

They love re-writing history to suit themselves. They did that in Victoria as well, had a story line about homosexuals as well as one about an open marriage. It could be quite an interesting show but they throw in so many modern day "issues" that it loses it. We had a show down here that was similar, set in 1950's but was a non stop political agenda show.

The other thing they do will show non whites in wholesome, family settings, strong father, studious children, homemaker mother. As if to contrast the more decadent white people. It's like White people were never like that but were corrupted a while back by the Leftard politics!

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12890) 4 years ago

I heard complaints about how childish they had Victoria behave. They often had her acting and doing things just like a modern-day teenager. Historical records show that she was feisty in her youth, but due to her upbringing, she was much more mature than other young women her age. So it doesn't make much sense to have her behave on tv in a way she never did in real life.

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

Yeah it doesn't make sense. The real Victoria was also very prudish and yet in the show they have her fascinated by the open marriage of a friend. in a lot of ways the show is like a Princess Diaries fish out of water type theme. This is a woman who from a young age would have been groomed to be a leader.

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12890) 4 years ago

Weren't open marriages frowned upon in the that time period? I mean, the Victorian Era in general was extremely traditional and prudish when it came to marriage and sexual relationships.

reply

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

I thought the entire concept of "victorian morality" was based on the idea that she was extremely prudish. It seems unlikely she would have been interested in anyone's open marriage. I prefer historical fiction if it really tries to put you in the mindset of what people were thinking at the time. When they try to inject modern mores, the lives of those people just don't make sense. Open marriages are only just now becoming something that is accepted (a huge mistake, IMO, not that anyone cares what I think), so the idea that anyone in authority would have been even slightly interested in them over 100 years ago is deeply silly.

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12890) 4 years ago

They would have seen it for the destructive lifestyle it was, and discouraged other people from practicing it.

reply

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

"judge historical films based on 2010s points of view, never once asking about why things were like that. They never do their homework, and refuse to accept that the world was a different place before 2010."
---
It's so true, and I think film and tv do a real disservice when they fail to look at things from the reality they are pretending to portray. They have the tools to do it! I think it pushes a very narrow-minded view of life on the kids. They can't imagine why people might have managed life differently when they didn't know that germs were microscopic organisms or when antibiotics hadn't been discovered yet.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

Hollywood is a helicopter parent.

reply

[–] Iffy762 (1331) 4 years ago

heh heh

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12890) 4 years ago

Not to mention that people's views on children and teenagers were very different before the 20th century. In fact, before the 1950s, the concept of being a "teen" was unknown. You were either a child, or an adult, nothing in between. Often people had to start their careers in adulthood as young as 16, when they either finished high school, or went to college.

Any time before the 1890s, there simply was no time for someone to have an artificially-elongated childhood that extended into their teens. Growing up was a matter of life and death in the past, and the sooner you got to taking on your adult duties, the better. It made people grow up much faster than what would be seen as possible today, and in the old days, kids were severely disciplined if they stepped out of line, something seen far too rare in this day and age. You couldn't afford to whine and stamp your foot if you were trying to earn money to put food on the table, or learn to run an estate/duchy/country.

Far too few people today understand that.

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12890) 4 years ago

You're wiser than the idiots in Hollywood. They are so blind to what the public wants, they only see what they and their community in that bubble of L.A. wants, and just can't understand why their movies are failing so badly.

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

I sometimes wonder if it is seen as collateral damage. Their films might fail but perhaps they see it as reaching a few minds at a time, a slow moving war? They make enough blockbusters (at the moment anyway) to cover the cost of the failures and their blockbuster superhero films are also SJW laden.

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12890) 4 years ago

Based on the information I've been hearing around the web, Hollywood is bleeding money, partially due to the pandemic shutting down theaters, partially due to American viewers becoming disgusted and going to the theaters less and less. Tinseltown has gotten so desperate that they're catering to China and totally ignoring American audiences when it comes to actually putting quality into their films. They figure they can make up the money they lose to their original target audience in America by having a billion bored Chinese (who will pretty much watch anything in the theaters, even if it's bad) to see their crappy movies.

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

I think they have been bleeding money even before CoVid, pirating of films and people in general having far more entertainment options than in the past. Yes they are hoping to sell out to China but China has now become even more hostile to the West. I am calling it karma personally.

reply

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12890) 4 years ago

Three symptoms of the divide between what Hollywood wants and what the people want can be seen with this:

- cutting the cord movement
- watching older stuff on streaming and ignoring the new stuff
- running off to Hallmark Channel at Christmastime instead of watching what mainstream tv has

The worst part is, they're just totally not getting it.

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

I feel like Hollywood and SJW's are so invested in this ideology now that they can't start to back peddle now. It would be like a hardcore Christian admitting the idea of a virgin birth or a man walking on water being a little too much to believe.

And a lot of the Hollywood SJW elite are super wealthy De Niro, Sarandon to name two. It will be the younger ones that start doing their own thing eventually and buck the system. In the end it will be $$$$ that decides.

Cutting the cord is a huge thing and says a lot. Look at a network like CW filled with SJW fare they have pretty low ratings for most of their shows. Interesting you mentioned Hallmark not a lot of SJW in their movies, they understand their audience which is what this thread is about.

I know I mostly watch older films.

reply

[–] actionkamen (23176) 4 years ago

I don't think that is so. Because at the same time they're pandering to China and included Chinese actors and China's values only to gain the lucrative market of China. That's incompatible with pushing SJW agenda because China is obviously un-woke and pushing SJW stuffs would alienate the Chinese market that they are desperately want into.

I think there are a few different forces here at play inside Hollywood. Not everyone is woke but they simply can't be seen as. So many have adopted the appearance of wokeness to avoid being ostracized but at the same time finding their own holes to dig for their own profits.

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

They are but it is a matter of perspective. Is degrading your own culture a form of entertainment and amusement (even propaganda?) for people who oppose it?

"Oh look at corrupt Americans, their women have children without men, their men have sex with each other because their women are so loud and overbearing! Their children do drugs and commit crime!"

It is just as easy to take all the SJW stuff and use it as a cautionary tale.

reply

[–] Artisan (3464) 4 years ago

I recently watched One Tree Hill for the first time despite it stating in 2003. Despite it being aimed at teens and centering around a young cast I thought it was quite well done and went beyond the usual "teen drama" which I was expecting. There were lots of twists and unexpected happenings. I think it is a good example of a show that although on the surface appears to be aimed at a certain demographic goes beyond that with good writing (mostly) and plots.

reply

[–] moviechatterer (14170) 4 years ago

"The same with superhero films for women.
The films themselves feel okay for all audiences but it’s how it’s in people’s conscience that superheroes are for the boys."

They are for boys . You can test this by going into any comic book store and check for girls.

Which are the superhero films for women? surely you dont just mean the ones with a woman in the lead role?

reply

[–] Sarmoviefan26 (1368) 4 years ago

I think Iron Man is very friendly towards the female audience due to the romance of Tony and Pepper Pots and there is also the bad boy gaining a conscience.

Every woman loves a changed bad boy. Tony Stark is a reformed bad boy which all women swoon over.

reply

[–] AnubisRaydeen (7897) 4 years ago

You obviously haven't been in a comic book shop ever. I'd say 1 in 5 are female. Even higher since the popularization of Harley Quinn.

reply

[–] BillHicksFan (10249) 4 years ago

It would be nice if someone could make a good movie for adults. Something not mentioned is the money part. They know a seven-year-old can't watch a movie by himself, and that his parents will have to pay admission, which could double and sometimes triple the gross.

reply

[–] blue1981 (6974) 4 years ago

I wish Hollywood made movies for Men again. It's a minor miracle we got movies like the John Wick series. They embody the idea of movies made by men for men and no one but men.

reply