this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
242 points (100.0% liked)

movies

3119 readers
791 users here now

Matrix room: https://matrix.to/#/#fediversefilms:matrix.org

Warning: If the community is empty, make sure you have "English" selected in your languages in your account settings.

πŸ”Ž Find discussion threads

A community focused on discussions on movies. Besides usual movie news, the following threads are welcome

Related communities:

Show communities:

Discussion communities:

RULES

Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.

Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain [spoilers] in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title’s subject matter.

Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown.

2024 discussion threads

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] slaneesh_is_right@lemmy.org 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Sure, but they didn't pump out that many movies back then.

[–] niktemadur@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

Yes they did, indeedy!

Take MGM during the heyday of the old studio system, it had almost 30 soundstages on the lot, always active or under construction and would be cranking films out constantly, and that doesn't include location shooting around the wildly different environments near LA - deserts and chaparral, forests and mountains, etc.

Now add to that Warner, RKO (later renamed to Universal), Paramount, United Artists, etc.
Directors and stars were under contract for wages, would be in several films each and every year.

Now add to that all the lower budget studios cranking out cheap-o b-movies, mostly horror and noir.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Movies used to be a lot cheaper to make. Taxi Driver cost about $1.5 million back in 1976. Faster Pussycat Kill Kill was made for about $45,000.

Quick lesson. The old model was to open a major movie in a prestige theater [ie Radio City Music Hall] where it would run for as long as it was profitable. After that it would go to smaller houses, and eventually become a double bill. People waited on line for years to see 'The Exorcist' because it was only showing at a few places.

Jaws was the first summer blockbuster. The studio planned to open it up in a lot of theaters on the same day. The plan worked. About the same time, the VCR started becoming popular. Thise two things changed the way movies got distributed forever.

[–] niktemadur@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Now there's some food for thought... The Exorcist could have been the first modern blockbuster, it had all the ingredients, only it was one year too early, the immediate precursor before they tried what they did with Jaws.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It was rated "R" I think they'd have gone with something that people would bring kids to see.

Interesting thought though.

[–] niktemadur@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Crazy to think that Jaws was rated PG, but it's true.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 3 points 1 day ago

Look at "Thunderball," the Bondiest of the Bond movies. Bond assaults a nurse, kills a dozen guys with a spear gun, and that movie was considered fine for general audiences. They even sold Bond toys to little kids, including a fake knife.

It was a simpler, gentler time.