A lion who would change our lives forever. #Mufasa: The Lion King, in theaters December 20.“Mufasa: The Lion King” enlists Rafiki to relay the legend of Mufa...
I have faith in some kind of course correction, if it becomes profitable in some way. Otherwise we’re watching the death of cinema in real time.
“We have no obligation to make art. We have no obligation to make history. We have no obligation to make a statement. But to make money, it is often important to make history, to make art, or to make some significant statement. We must always make entertaining movies, and, if we make entertaining movies, at times, we will reliably make history, art, a statement or all three. We cannot expect numerous hits, but if every film has an original and imaginative concept, then we can be confident that something will break through.”
-Michael Eisner
Then neither you, nor Michael Eisner are paying attention (though LMFAO at you bringing a former Disney exec, not even a creative but a business man, as representation of someone who gives a shit about cinema. That’s like quoting Musk on environmental issues. Hint: People like that absolutely have been paying attention, things are going great for them, they just can’t not lie to make themselves feel important, and to make their shareholders, and people like you, believe in some white/greenwashed fairy tale they spin for you while they continue exploiting people and destroying industries out of sheer greed for money and power).
Also, the idea that if the big corporate propaganda machines fail, cinema fails, just goes to prove how well said propaganda works.
I thought your argument was that the movie industry isn’t immune to enshittification? I was pointing out how you’re correct by using a quote from a film exec that proves your point. Films are a business, and if businesses want to make money then they have to appeal to audiences, so course correction is possible. I’m allowed to live in my duality.
I have faith in some kind of course correction, if it becomes profitable in some way. Otherwise we’re watching the death of cinema in real time.
“We have no obligation to make art. We have no obligation to make history. We have no obligation to make a statement. But to make money, it is often important to make history, to make art, or to make some significant statement. We must always make entertaining movies, and, if we make entertaining movies, at times, we will reliably make history, art, a statement or all three. We cannot expect numerous hits, but if every film has an original and imaginative concept, then we can be confident that something will break through.” -Michael Eisner
Then neither you, nor Michael Eisner are paying attention (though LMFAO at you bringing a former Disney exec, not even a creative but a business man, as representation of someone who gives a shit about cinema. That’s like quoting Musk on environmental issues. Hint: People like that absolutely have been paying attention, things are going great for them, they just can’t not lie to make themselves feel important, and to make their shareholders, and people like you, believe in some white/greenwashed fairy tale they spin for you while they continue exploiting people and destroying industries out of sheer greed for money and power).
Also, the idea that if the big corporate propaganda machines fail, cinema fails, just goes to prove how well said propaganda works.
I thought your argument was that the movie industry isn’t immune to enshittification? I was pointing out how you’re correct by using a quote from a film exec that proves your point. Films are a business, and if businesses want to make money then they have to appeal to audiences, so course correction is possible. I’m allowed to live in my duality.