Why (most) modern movies suck

Movies: places of sanctuary away from the troubles of reality. Mercifully detached from everyday life, they inspire, entertain, and elate us…or at least they used to! These days decent movies are few and far between, mostly due to avaricious film companies, pushy political people, petulant character design, and the award shows nobody cares about. Try to think how long it takes you to find a good movie on Netflix these days. Takes longer than the actual movie, doesn’t it? Reduce, reuse, recycle. A great things to do with waste, not such a great policy with movies. In recent (and not so recent) years, due to corporate greed, we have seen many remakes of classic films, such as, Charlie’s Angels, Ghostbusters, The Shining, The Mummy, and many more. According to a study conducted by Rotten Tomatoes, only a measly 10% manage to critically outperform their originals [1], so why does Hollywood continue to churn them out like a mass production line? Simple: Money, (and a great lack of originality). In recent years Hollywood realised the flaws in their methods, hard reboots only work when the original movie is lacking and allows the audience to make direct comparisons, whereas a sequel requires the story to progress, something that requires imaginative thinking that the doltish screenwriters severely lack in Hollywood. The solution - ‘Soft Reboots. ’ Soft reboots take the best elements of a remake and a sequel and turn it into a mumbo jumbo of ‘nostalgia bombs’ accompanied by loose continuity while also allowing room for ‘sequel bait’, (basic yet effective tactics, designed to further milk the audience). A notable example of a soft reboot would be ‘Terminator: Dark Fate, ’, which in its first few minutes managed to accomplish something that no other in the series had done since the beginning of its existence: murdering John Connor, whose survival was crucial to the continuation of the series. Wow. Another problem with movies these days is female characters, and how desperate attempts to make them seem ‘strong’ cause more harm than good. In its early days, Hollywood portrayed women as weak, submissive, sexual creatures-think about thankfully, these days they took a complete 180° and decided to put a lot of effort into showing them as strong independent women, without any faults or weaknesses such as emotions, meaningful romantic relationships, or any flaws in their character. Does that seem familiar? But what is wrong with that you may ask; what is wrong with women who are always morally justified and omnipotent (especially against a man), who don't need a man (because all of them are selfish sexist scoundrels)? The answer is clear (but allow me to explain). it is painfully obvious that the writers go out of their way to completely deprive their strong female leads of any 'weak or feminine characteristics' and give males as much emotions as possible (which just adds colour and relatability to their character anyway). Regrettably, Hollywood is full of wretchedly writers who, with all their might, try to give us the worst possible product, and rapacious producers who would do anything for one more dime. Another reason modern movies are awful is that the writers (well most of them) are horrible these days. They lack originality and maturity, and a creator cannot bestow upon his creation what they do not possess. These days, instead of reacting to situations as reasonable adults such as we would, characters act like hormone-filled action-seeking frenzied teenagers in adult bodies. A good demonstration of this would the comparison of two Star-trek movies, one old and well-written, the other like a piece of garbage with glitter sprinkled on top. in an episode of star trek the next generation: the captain and the first officer of the enterprise are both absent; leaving the command of the ship to Data, and Worf as his second in command. For both men, it is a substantial change and Worf does not feel comfortable with this, brazenly questioning Data's choices in front of the crew. This elicits data to summon him for a private talk. they don't start shouting or get into a fistfight (like the movies of today would undoubtedly make them do) simply because they don't need to. Data adamantly explains that it was unacceptable to correct him in front of the crew. Worf tries to make his case, but Data refutes his argument. Worf admits to his faults and tries to reconcile with Data, and they soon return to their stations with their friendship stronger than ever. This, aside from being an excellent display of self-control and maturity, is an exquisite demonstration of subtle administration of authority combined with two best friends needing to adapt to an abrupt shift in power without throwing a tantrum or resorting to wicked actions. In comparison with this, let us evaluate how the pecking order functions on a show like star trek discovery. we hear phrases such as "now will you get off my ass so we can get back to work", "the sh** would hit the fan", "well it's f****ing amazing", " evolution's a fickle b**** am I right", "I'm going I'm going get off my ass sir get off my ass sir" tossed around like hotcakes regularly from the crew (that sure is a lot of swearing). Evidently the quotations speak for themselves. In contrast to the restrained and respectful environment next gen, discovery exhibits creatures of undisciplined nature, irascible teenagers filled with adrenaline who are in clear need of anger management lessons piloting a star ship that is crucial to the federation, seems incredibly wise, doesn’t it? The final reason modern movies are bad is that they are wrecking old heroes to forge cheap, plastic imitations that possess none of the characteristics that made the original character likeable. the latest Star Wars trilogy (as if two was not enough) has multiple impeccable examples of this. we first encounter Han Solo in Episode IV - A New Hope, there, he was a cynical, self-centred, smuggler who was only concerned about himself, but slowly for the duration of three movies turned into an intelligent, capable, and self-sacrificing man, a courageous hero prepared to die for his beloved. 3 decades later we are reunited with his empty husk, in colossal debt, forsaken his family, and hated by more than half the criminals in galaxy containing none of the positive characteristics he had. not to mention the only reason for our reunion with him is for him to glorify over competent female Jesus from a galaxy far, far away. A better, yet even more regrettable, example would be Luke Skywalker. a meek farm-boy turned galaxy saving champion; shouldering mountains of responsibility; overcoming substantial losses, countless challenges, and arduous adversities. ultimately facing against the principal evil in the galaxy, who happens to be his father, and his master, who happens have the power to spew lighting from his hands. now he is a dismal old man who likes guzzling on green alien juice. stripped of anything that made Luke Skywalker 'Luke Skywalker', he existed simply to build up, again, over competent female Jesus from a galaxy far, far away. no surprise there. it is obvious in both these examples the sole reason for the presence of these characters (aside from nostalgia bait) is for them to be destroyed. their legacy passed onto the next generation like the Olympic torch, every bit of personality erased, they are taken away from us for the final time just to promote a poorly written replica. As someone wise once said “it takes a sledgehammer and a few minutes to smash masterpiece” and that is exactly what is happening in current day Hollywood. I do occasionally encounter a great movie that was recently made, yet all it takes to disappoint me is to look at the mounds of subpar hogwash right beside it. Be honest, do you really want to live in a world where movies exist solely to make money, heck even the award ceremony for movies is just a “two-hour meat parade, a public display with contrived suspense for economic reasons. "[2], really? 1- https: //editorial. rottentomatoes. com/article/yes-remakes-do-suck-and-the-tomatometer-proves-it/ 2- George C. Scott Word count-1407 Note to Ms. Doran: hello miss, I would really like to apologise for being so late in giving you this, and would greatly appreciate your comments and suggestions.