Two of the three examples you start with were made without the support of Hollywood money. In the 1980s and 1990s, commercial cinema often began with genuinely independent films that were picked up by distributors such as Miramax or Fox Searchlight. But beginning in the mid-2000s, these distributors began to lose interest in such films (and the parent studios closed many of them), presumably because, despite their return on investment, their absolute profits were insufficient. This change is a big part of why dramas have become scarce.
The pace of life has much to do with what draws audiences, I think. There’s a trope about French movies being too “French” i.e., tortuously slow, and I find that many dramas today are similarly tortuously slow, which Netflix often labels as “slow burn”. It seems like writers want to present something complex and slow paced so that they get their art bonafides in, rather than just tell an entertaining story.
Great piece! I love the term Little Sads. (I once wrote a short story called "Sad Little Indie Film" about a day in a woman's life in which nothing much happens but she goes through some big-time feels.)
A major reason I like watching dramas at home is that I can connect with the emotions they provoke with fewer distractions. Watching a film in the theater is not only pricey but full of things that take me out of the moment (ironic, since the theater is theoretically a more immersive experience). If I'm trying to have a nice ugly cry at The Banshees of Inisherin (and if that movie only made you a *little* sad then you are made of sterner stuff than I am!), I want to do it at home, without people munching popcorn in the row behind me or getting up to go to the bathroom and walking between me and the screen. I agree that horror and some comedies are more enjoyable in a communal experience, but I can't think of a single drama I wish I'd seen on the big screen.
This was great! I really love this newsletter. It’s my favorite on substack!
Two of the three examples you start with were made without the support of Hollywood money. In the 1980s and 1990s, commercial cinema often began with genuinely independent films that were picked up by distributors such as Miramax or Fox Searchlight. But beginning in the mid-2000s, these distributors began to lose interest in such films (and the parent studios closed many of them), presumably because, despite their return on investment, their absolute profits were insufficient. This change is a big part of why dramas have become scarce.
The pace of life has much to do with what draws audiences, I think. There’s a trope about French movies being too “French” i.e., tortuously slow, and I find that many dramas today are similarly tortuously slow, which Netflix often labels as “slow burn”. It seems like writers want to present something complex and slow paced so that they get their art bonafides in, rather than just tell an entertaining story.
Great piece! I love the term Little Sads. (I once wrote a short story called "Sad Little Indie Film" about a day in a woman's life in which nothing much happens but she goes through some big-time feels.)
A major reason I like watching dramas at home is that I can connect with the emotions they provoke with fewer distractions. Watching a film in the theater is not only pricey but full of things that take me out of the moment (ironic, since the theater is theoretically a more immersive experience). If I'm trying to have a nice ugly cry at The Banshees of Inisherin (and if that movie only made you a *little* sad then you are made of sterner stuff than I am!), I want to do it at home, without people munching popcorn in the row behind me or getting up to go to the bathroom and walking between me and the screen. I agree that horror and some comedies are more enjoyable in a communal experience, but I can't think of a single drama I wish I'd seen on the big screen.