People still want the TV and movie experience offered by traditional studios, but social platforms are becoming competitive for their entertainment time—and even more competitive for the business models that studios have relied on. Social video platforms offer a seemingly endless variety of free content, algorithmically optimized for engagement and advertising. They wield advanced ad tech and AI to match advertisers with global audiences, now drawing over half of US ad spending. As the largest among them move into the living room, will they be held to higher standards of quality?
At the same time, the streaming on-demand video (SVOD) revolution has fragmented pay TV audiences, imposed higher costs on studios now operating direct-to-consumer services, and delivered thinner margins for their efforts. It can be a tougher business, yet the premium video experience offered by streamers often sets the bar for quality storytelling, acting, and world-building. How can studios control costs, attract advertisers, and compete for attention? Are there stronger points of collaboration that can benefit both streamers looking to reach global audiences and social platforms that lack high-quality franchises?
This year’s Digital Media Trends lends data to the argument that video entertainment has been disrupted by social platforms, creators, user-generated content (UGC), and advanced modeling for content recommendations and advertising. Such platforms may be establishing the new center of gravity for media and entertainment, drawing more of the time people spend on entertainment and the money that brands spend to reach them.
Our survey of US consumers reveals that media and entertainment companies—including advertisers—are competing for an average of six hours of daily media and entertainment time per person (figure 1). And this number doesn’t seem to be growing.2 Not only is it unlikely that any one form of media will command all six hours, but each user likely has a different mix of SVOD, UGC, social, gaming, music, podcasts, and potentially other forms of digital media that make up these entertainment hours.
Is it our complete lack of originality and obsessive wholesale rehashing and incessant rebooting and remaking of already existing movies that’s to blame?
No, it’s the children who are out of touch.
Stop making junk, and start making good content, and we’ll watch it. But, as it stands, Creators with zero budget are making better content that the studios with nearly unlimited budget.
I can’t remember the last time a movie came out that made me want to go see in theatres. Tickets are so expensive that I only want to go to one or two movies a year. Then with TV I find every show these days has “netflix syndrome” with lazy writing, exposition dumps, dummed down dialogue, I’m just not interested in what they have to offer most of the time.
Careful about mentioning the “Netflix syndrome”, people here are touchy when you call out low effort writing in movies/games. Somehow studios/publishers have been extremely successful in having people establish para-social relationships with their characters and stories regardless of how poorly written they are. This results is very strong antibodies every time anyone calls out the utter lazyness in dialogue, set pieces and exposition.
I can’t remember the last time I wanted to go to a theater. My choices are:
-
Go $20/person to go to a theater and hope I get there early enough to not be in a terrible location, sit on hard-ass uncomfortable seats, pay out the nose for shitty popcorn and candy and hope the people around me aren’t dicks texting on their phones, scrolling IG, or just generally being a nuisance.
-
Pay $20-30 total for a 4k BluRay and sit at home with filet mignon and a nice scotch, lounge in my reclining sofa without distractions. Also I own that movie forever.
Sure the theater has a dope screen and sound engineering but it’s not worth it.
-
Dumbed* down (sorry ☹️)
no worries, nice catch!
I’m 54 so not that young but I find myself watching more very specific videos of subjects I’m interested in than more mainstream movies or tv shows. I mean occasionally I’ll watch a movie or show but probably 90% of the time I’m watching content creators on YouTube or the like.
Personally I find real people and everyday life more interesting than the bland reboots and sequels of movies from my youth.
I think it also makes me a more aware person to watch content from people whose lives are totally different than mine, in different countries, with different abilities.
The only good movies and shows I watch are based on sci fi books or computer games that already did the work of building a plot and characters. And there’s a few really comedic writers that do great work- mostly on Apple TV.
Same age and my wife and I tend to watch old movies or YouTube. When there are free channels for any well-produced fiction you care for like Omeleto, why bother with Hollywood?
Perhaps because Hollywood’s attempt at formulaic content to generate maximum revenue loses it’s charm after you’ve watched the same story over and over? Hmmm … Nah, let’s keep doing it.
The last Marvel offering I saw in a cinema was Avengers: Endgame.
Literally nothing since then has looked like it offered anything different or better, so at most I’ve watched a couple on D+, or torrented them. I just don’t give a shit about any of that stuff any more.
The last Marvel thing I watched was Agatha All Along, which I only finished for the sake of completion. The moment we learned the identity of the kid, I pretty much stopped giving a shit, because at that point it just dropped into being yet another MCU property being used as promotional material for whatever they’ve got coming next.
I really enjoyed S01 or Andor, but I can’t be sure I’ll bother with S02 because I don’t trust them to keep it self-contained, basically requiring me to watch 3 other series so I can have some idea of what’s going on. They pulled that shit with S03 of The Mandalorian, so I never finished it.
At the same time, a lot of the most famous YouTubers/etc are also deeply formulaic. They copy the same trends, use the same formats, and post the same kind of videos.
Gaming YouTubers flock to the same game at the same time or just play the ones that get big views like minecraft/etc, cooking youtubers are all doing “viral remakes” or “rate these 45 types of chicken nugget” or “eat the menu” videos/etc.
There are always solid people doing their own thing, but the social media zeitgeist is just recycled, low effort, high engagement garbage, just like netflix.
Although people are starting to get tired of that as well, we just don’t have an alternative lined up yet
There’s a ton of garbage everywhere. I hesitate before searching for something on YouTube because the results are usually just a pile of fishy mouthed or obviously AI thumbnails and so many of the videos themselves are just low effort. Don’t get me started on AI voiceovers.
Others have touched on this but this also feels downstream from the capitalist hellscape. Most people don’t have a lot of spending money. Movies are pricey and a bad money:time ratio.
I bet if wages were up, more people would go to the theater. I don’t want to spend $40 to watch a movie and eat popcorn, but I’d consider it for $3.
And if they actually produced and marketed original movies rather than generic superhero movie #69
I was going to say something similar to that too. Specifically, the consolidation of power means there’s less smaller companies taking risks. You’d think a big company with Disney money could afford to be weird and experimental, but that doesn’t seem to be the case.
I say this despite enjoying superhero movies
People are buying the tickets for the sequel slop. If no one bought them then they would have to be weird and experimental but that will only happen if enough of us said no more to these live action remakes and sequels.
That’s another result of people not having enough money to be experimental with their movie choice. If movies are too expensive for you to go regularly, of course most people would choose those that they know are gonna be safe for them to enjoy instead of giving unknown original movies a try.
That’s a bingo! I’m only taking the time and spending the money for a movie I know damned well I’ll enjoy. Guess I’m part of the problem.
Any plan that depends on “and then the common person develops discerning taste” is doomed to fail. Especially considering that even people who are usually picky might enjoy something basic from time to time
Honestly most recent movies and tv shows look like scenarios were generated by AI or some barbie sweet happy life generator so there is nothing entertaining. Creators on the other side, I feel like they do the stuff without script, just making their raw videos without asking if they can put something in the video, it’s entertaining because they make mistakes or have controversial opinions that you can’t see in modern tv.
I think people feel more connected because they feel something when watching person talking on the screen whatever they want to talk about instead of person reading from script.
Honestly most recent movies and tv shows look like scenarios were generated by AI or some barbie sweet happy life generator so there is nothing entertaining.
A lot of slop has wide appeal. And let’s not pretend soap operas and sitcoms and trope genre fiction don’t routinely have wide appeal. The theory that AI can seamlessly replicate pulp fiction / scripted reality TV seems to have held up for the most part, because so much of this content is a canned and formulaic to begin with.
What AIs lack, more than anything, is a face and personality that is distinct to the line of work. There is no real AI “House Style” that gets adhered to. I can pick up a dozen Brian Sanderson novels and get roughly the same experience. But if I ask a Chatbot to “write me a chapter of a Brian Sanderson novel”, what I’m really going to get is a generic jumble of Harry Potter, Star Wars, and Marvel with a few Brian Sanderson tropes thrown in.
I think people feel more connected because they feel something when watching person talking on the screen whatever they want to talk about instead of person reading from script.
So much of the “spontaneous” content is still heavily scripted and acted on delivery. What makes professional acting impressive is the range - a single person embodying a wide range of personalities and mannerisms. I don’t watch Gary Oldman or Daniel Day-Lewis because I’m looking for unpolished delivery.
But the Auteur experience is what draws people in and makes certain works rise above their peer materials. AI has no real artistry. All it does is cut, copy, and paste from a grab bag of established popular materials, hoping it’ll trigger enough nostalgia to be recognized as good.
As styles and tastes shift, I have to wonder what AI is going to look like, given how rooted it is in the moment of instantiation. The long tail will drag, while younger and historically unburdened artists will be out experimenting.
You’re right that good actor makes a difference in average movie. I just want to add that Gary Oldman and Daniel Day-Lewis are 67. So those old guys started in theaters where you need to improvise to make people imerse in the play. All they had was a text and their own imagination.
Maybe this lack of improvisation is killing movie industry as I think smaller creators need to improvise a lot and maybe young actors are just like puppets, don’t have this background where they need to put themselves in the role without all this technology around where you can look on everything how other people did it.
Number of technology stimulants these days are insane.
No one is pointing out that this was inevitable result of having more options.
When I was a kid, sure we had TV and video games, but they weren’t much. There was no big library, all the better graphics games were recent, and realistically you got a few games a year.
Me and my friends went to the movies cause there honestly wasn’t much better things to do. Having a home theatre meant having a tiny screen and a handful of movies you’ve seen many times if you happen to have a VCR. TV reruns were super old and had 5 mins of ads every 15 mins.
Did they really expect teenagers to be desperate to see a new flic when it’s no longer the only way to see new content?
Let’s not forget cost, either. Most movies back then, even in a theater, were dirt cheap. A summer job or allowance would be enough to pay for a movie, popcorn, drink, and you’d still have plenty leftover for arcades or the mall. Some tiny theaters in small towns would be a dollar or less for admission.
Now? You’re talking $20+ per person for the same experience. Why would anyone spend that kind of money, when that’s three or more hours of work at minimum wage?
I think that’s an issue with whatever State / jurisdiction you’re in.
When I was a teenager it was ~$12 to get a normal (non-VIP ticket) at the big multiplex and minimum wage was $9.50 / hr.
Nowadays it’s $20 to get a normal (non-VIP ticket) at the big multiplex and minimum wage is $17.50.
Literally almost identical, if anything it’s actually slightly more affordable now. I think what you’re describing is entirely an issue with your state government not making sure its citizens are paid fairly, not an issue with the movie theatre industry and their pricing.
When I was a teenager it was ~$12 to get a normal (non-VIP ticket) at the big multiplex and minimum wage was $9.50 / hr.
You young’n. 😉 I’m talking about when minimum wage was, like, $5 and movie prices were $2.50 or less.
But let’s take your example. I’m willing to accept the premise that movie prices have kept pace with wages (they haven’t, due to the varying pay standards you pointed out, but I’ll assume for the sake of argument). What stays relatively consistent are costs like food. Excepting the turmoil of the current US economy, those $20 would go further towards food and other necessities.
So theaters are no longer vying for discretionary income at a few dollars here or there, they’re directly competing against necessary expenses. They’ve priced themselves into a different market, and the idea that they’ve kept pace with wages is too simplified, the way I see it.
As a side note, I would love to see an economist study this. It seems really interesting.
But let’s take your example. I’m willing to accept the premise that movie prices have kept pace with wages (they haven’t, due to the varying pay standards you pointed out, but I’ll assume for the sake of argument).
Yes, but the point is that movies are primarily made in California, so if California raises its minimum wages, then the cost of making movies goes up, and so the cost the consumer would experience at the end is increased. If you live in California and your government increased minimum wage that’s not a big deal, but the issue is arising because some states haven’t raised minimum wage to keep up with inflation, so consumers there see a real cost increase that California consumers don’t.
But at a fundamental level, the problem there is not with California raising their minimum wage to try and keep up with inflation / cost of living, but with the other states for not raising theirs. Those states are effectively artificially lowering labour costs, which makes their consumers pay effectively more for imported goods, so that businesses in the state can be more profitable.
If a state does that to support home grown businesses that keep profits in the hands of workers, that can be a path for establishing an industry that will sustain itself and enrich the state, but in most US states, the companies that benefit are big corporations that funnel the profits to the executives and investors (often out of state) rather than average people, so the average worker is just poorer for no reason and sees inflated costs everywhere.
But yes, overall I generally agree with you that the increased costs people are complaining about are real, just that those costs aren’t the result of the movie industry being greedy, so much as they’re the result of the state level governments and corporations that campaign against minimum wage increases.
I like the way you think
Same can’t be said for the snacks though. Highway robbery, I tell ya.
I don’t have historical pricing on movies theatre snacks available off hand, but I would be willing to bet money their pricing is 100% consistent with what it was 15-20 years ago as well.
Movie theatre popcorn and drinks have always been over priced (at least in my lifetime) and have always been where theatres recoup a ton of costs.
If anything, these days theatres shouldn’t have to charge quite as much for popcorn now that they can make money selling alcohol and food and such as well (at least where I’m at, you can now buy beers and cocktails at the theatres).
Because this isn’t research, its Deloitte selling itself. Obviously, as newer forms of media eclipse the current access means of film and television, the newer generation is going to find itself interested.
I’ve said it before: there’s good and then there’s good enough. Content that’s “good enough” but easier to access will overshadow content that’s maybe light-years better but harder to acquire. That and attention spans are getting shorter. My kid has the entire Disney library at his fingertips but he’d rather flip between YouTube channels.
What’s crazy to me is that there are hundreds, if not thousands, of great old movies that are mostly forgotten.
Look up a movie called “Sorcerer.” Incredible action, fantastic acting, impeccable script.
Full movie.
Can’t show you the old stuff, if we show you the old stuff you wont watch the new stuff
There’s a lemmy sub ‘free movies on Youtube’ or something similar.
Enjoy.
See if you can find the original ‘The Day Of the Jackal’ with Edward Fox. Still the best assassin movie ever made.
Lots of free movies on Tubi. I watched a few old movies that I missed there. I just don’t watch movies much anymore.
Let’s go fediverse!
I can testify on that.
In the last two years, I’ve discovered VTubers and streamers in general.
I’ve discovered Geega’s tech talks, Deme’s videogame playthroughs, Michi Mochievee’s amazing (and shocking) IRL lore, VShojo group gaming sessions, Dokibird’s third wheel viral video, Ironmouse’s gremlin moments with Connor, Melody getting raided at the most inopportune times, Henya’s Minecraft trolling exploits, Vedal and Camila’s hopecore video, Neuro-sama’s singing and otherwise general roasting comments on human VTubers, and wholesome gaming streamers like Beacon of Nick.
Not to mention a number of woodworking youtubers teaching about, or otherwise making mistakes when building or restoring furniture.
There’s content for everyone, and traditional TV doesn’t even come close.
It’s like stepping out of a boring office into Alice’s Wonderland.
The creativity is out there and it’s a joy to see what can be without corporate meddling.
The problem with corporate meddling is that they’re increasingly larger and larger percentage of the total wealth in society and the average person doesn’t really have the money to directly pay any of these people so they’re dependence on the women’s Corporation because they’re the only ones who have any money
I feel like creator content isn’t about quality, but form. People watch the same TV shows from decades ago because they are familiar. Creator content is kinda like that, it’s cozy. It’s something you can just put on and zone out to. It’s interesting and entertaining, but it’s not very intense. Its usually people sharing their passions, so it feels very human and relatable too.
But also there’s probably something to be said about how much it cost to get started on YouTube vs how much it cost to produce a TV show or movie.
HEY IT’S FREEEEED!!!
Guys. Remember that? Remember Fred? That’s how we’re going to look back on todays social media content. It will be cringeworthy embarrassments. Meanwhile go watch Fraiser. Go watch Friends. Go watch The Office. Hindsight is 20/20, but those shows hold up decades later. Do you think “Dance hype craze” video 574 is going to be something we remember fondly in 2040?
Holy shit. 2040. I’m going to be so old. My knees are going to hurt.
I would argue that Friends does not hold up so well. It still has funny bits, but it’s also quite sexist and is homophobic and transphobic (while also being one of the few big shows to even talk about gay and trans topics at the time).
The outdated social stuff comes up occasionally but like maybe there’s an issue once a season or so, it’s not going to be distracting episode to episode.
The bigger problem with Friends imho, is the laugh track. It’s just weird watching a show with a laugh track these days, especially when modern comedies have learned to use that time to cram in way more jokes. It just makes friends feel somewhat archaic and out of time, even compared to Seinfeld which objectively looks much older from a cinematography standpoint.
We must see things wildly differently. I remember Ross having a lesbian wife, and she had a lesbian partner, and they were always written as strong characters. The closest thing to homophobic is they’d make little jokes among the men about how they appear to others. And then they’d say something like “Oh, don’t do it THAT way!” And then the 3 guys would go “HEY! WHOA! OK!” as if to say that the way they were doing it looked gay, and they didn’t want to appear gay.
Which I don’t find homophobic so much as it is insecure, which was the whole joke. Their insecurities in themself is the joke. Not a hatred of gay people.
I don’t remember any mentions at all about trans on the show. I’m not even sure the word “trans” existed at the time.
The only sexism I remember is the football thanksgiving episode, and the poker episode. But the sexism itself was the joke. And I think they played both sides fairly.
Chandler’s “dad” was trans, but they didn’t use that word. I don’t remember if they ever put a hard label on that character, but his dad wasn’t just a drag queen. Chandler’s growing acceptance over the course of the show was a positive, but the jokes made were not.
Not sure why you used airquotes on dad, but yeah. I totally forgot about that character. I see your point now.
Do you think “Dance hype craze” video 574 is going to be something we remember fondly in 2040?
Well, I know I remember the Hamster dance website fondly, does that count as a dance hype craze?
I also remember many Youtube videos from many years ago with some amount of nostalgia, e.g. Chocolate Rain or Mocha in “His First Broccoli” or the Yogscast series Shadow of Israphel.
I know some old shows and movies hold up well but others are pretty bad too. And the newer ones have an even worse ratio there.
As far as cringe goes, I think some of the series you mentioned, like Friends, has a good percentage of that too.
I have fond memories of Weebl and Bob and Charlie the Unicorn…
Ooooh that’s dirty
Do ya think so?
No but GMM had been producing content for over 10 years and they are still looked at fondly.
If you don’t like that example I won’t say they are the greatest works ever made but their are so many indie animators that are making whole shows and uploading them for free on YouTube that many people will remember fondly.
Go look at James Lee’s channel. He would never be given the freedom to do the weird style he has on tv.
Dropout, New Smosh and even most of the video essay YouTubers that are on Nebula would like to have a word with you
“Badger, Mushroom, Snaaaaake” on the other hand ages like fine whiskey.
Yay, my 50 something butt is a younger people.
No it isn’t … 😂 (I’m in the same boat by the way).
If you can injure yourself sleeping, you are NOT younger… 🤣
Sleeping? You should see me get out of bed, stumbling around hunched over for 10 minutes until all my parts agree that, no, it’s not that painful, and, yes, we’ll all start playing nicely soon enough.
I can totally relate to this.
