Why is the quality so low?

Two things came together at the same time. First was this, via Chuckles, on Hollywood’s box office failures:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/hollywoods-box-office-failures-go-beyond-rotten-tomatoes-ratings-2017-10-18

… and I’ll come back to that. Second was about films I’ve never seen except for bits of Game of Thrones:

Comments were instructive on the latter, quite a few disagreed, people defended Emilia Clarke but some made the comment that they appreciated someone had finally called her out. Thing is, her reputation seems to be based on taking her clothes off and having sex onscreen, not unlike Meghan Markle. Certainly not acting.

The clip was about miscasting but it strayed into inability to act but because they’ve been in a known series, it was felt the new show would succeed on the back of the reputation, even if the genre was different.

Leaving that and looking at the article about Rotten Tomatoes:

Strong Rotten Tomatoes ratings have not helped a slew of recent films like ‘Blade Runner 2049’ at the box office

Further:

Studios blamed the dismal box office performance of a number of big-budget blockbuster films this summer on negative reviews from critics and Rotten Tomatoes … But if well-reviewed films are also struggling commercially, can Rotten Tomatoes really be to blame?

I’d like to move from that to Rotten Tomatoes itself and the nature of their approval ratings. Many pundits expressed surprise at the Skyfall ratings and the issue was not so much the critics, as many are paid to give good reviews or at least a pass mark but the surprise was the audience rating.

This has been mentioned before, as has public taste now, as has the nature of society now and what it considers good and bad. Be all of that above as it may, it still doesn’t fully explain why the quality of films and acting is so low.

Sean Young made comment yesterday about the new Blade Runner, she mentioned ‘darkness’ and indeed it’s got that way in films of late, giving ultra-realistic, explicit depictions [is this now public taste], whereas the originals at least showed some subtlety.

I was just looking at a Patrick Formaldehyde Inspector Alleyn mystery called Scales of Justice and the thing which struck was the quality of the acting from virtually everyone, Frances Barber excepted.

Denis Lill, Elizabeth Spriggs, John Franklyn-Robbins, Frederick Treves – not household names but they can sure act. There just seem none of this quality around today – they made a big deal of Judy Dench and Helen Mirren but am I alone in being unimpressed by those two? David Suchet is of course good.

2 comments for “Why is the quality so low?

  1. woodsy42
    October 21, 2017 at 23:27

    Because the production companies have lost the art of telling a coherent story and the characters seem to have neither emotion or empathy. Added to the cast’s poor acting ability and lack of stage presence, frequently inaudible dialogue and filming in the dark for effect it’s unwatchable. They try and compensate for the loss by using anger and distrust (cos it’s dramatic) and ever more ludicrous effects and ‘action sequences’. Not only a waste of time to watch it but in many cases actively unpleasant.

    • October 22, 2017 at 03:31

      Actively unpleasant it is. Those on that side of things are full of social justice and us not hurting their feelings – but our own nausea at what they’re doing isn’t considered for a moment. And it can’t be escaped from.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *