does it seem like people are easily amused nowadays?

[datasuspect]

-anthropomorphic animal cartoon movies?


i've met several adults who readily watch and enjoy these movies.


all pretty much the same plot, i think robin williams is in each of them, and the animals are rendered with such easily identifiable "attitude" (spikey haircuts, the ability to disco dance to music, etc. . . .

i could probably think of more examples, but due to the popularity of these "iconic cultural artifacts" many people get offended if you offer a criticism of hollywood entertainment factory amusement byproducts.

[asthmaticeog]

1. Have things really changed, though?

The whole Funny Animals thing is as old as the hills, and while it'd be easy to make an argument that the output of Warner Bros. cartoon studios was qualitatively superior, the essentials haven't changed - Bugs Bunny's 'tude predated spiked hair, but wasn't hard to catch on to. As for samey plots: Road Runner, Sylvester and Tweety, Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd. Etc.

Not saying "Surf's Up" et al are anywhere near as good as that stuff, just puttin' that out there for discussion.

[datasuspect]

2. i dunno, i think there was a more evident demarcation between "grown up" stuff

and "kids" stuff even 30 years ago.

when you see people in their 30s carrying quirky lunchboxes from the 70s, the lines get fuzzy.

yes, the flintstones were primetime television in the 60s, but then NBC would show opera and classical music performances during primetime. i'm not claiming that those art forms are the pinnacle of culture or indicative of anything, except for maybe more discerment in taste.

as a child, the desire to read was instilled in me very early. no one in my family had ever gone to college or was an intellectual, but there were books everywhere and the adults would discuss politics, science, the moon landing, etc. there wasn't a default setting to acquire the latest and greatest consumer item or to placate the kids by purchasing us every latest and greatest toy or impulse item.

but when i survey the cultural output i am being offered through mainstream content delivery channels, i am left with a feeling of disgust. there isn't any pretense of irony in the programming, it's being delivered as moron-level entertainment, it's marketed as such, and is tied in so absolutely with merchandising and advertising that it spreads like a virus.

naturally, there are people who talk about it, are aware of the scam, but they are dismissed as elitists.

insofar as bugs and tweety were concerned, at least when these shows were first produced and marketed, they were at least entertaining. they didn't attempt to manipulate this strange desire to fully embrace suburban culture or try to give you lifestyle instructions or include cultural references related to coca cola, nike, what have you.

yes, they did promote the acme company, but the result was comedic: it didn't make you feel insecure about your social standing because you didn't have the right acme products.

[asthmaticeog]

4. Good point - manipulating status anxiety seems to be the only text of culture anymore.

[Left Is Write]

13. ....

yes, they did promote the acme company, but the result was comedic: it didn't make you feel insecure about your social standing because you didn't have the right acme products.

But I daresay many a suburban housewife felt insecure and inadequate in the face of characters like June Cleaver and Laura Petrie.

[datasuspect]

15. june cleaver as an icon and cultural barometer

is interesting in the context of the time in which the show was broadcasted.

we all know the 50s were not some magical, halcyon glory era of american greatness, but in terms of the emerging cultural shift from the urban to suburban, i wonder how many women could have identified with her at the time.

but yes, that's a good catch, an ethnic woman living in a tenement in the inner city might not have understood or identified with the set of cultural assumptions implicit in that show and might have felt inadequate.

[Left Is Write]

16. Even women living in a suburban environment such as the Cleavers did...

might have felt inadequate compared to her. Her home was impossibly neat, she was always well-groomed and gracious. She never had a bad day. She never had a hair out of place, even raising two boys.

Donna Stone (Donna Reed) did everything. She ran a beautiful home, chaired committees, ran the PTA, cared for her doctor husband and two children, and she did it all looking fresh and gorgeous also.

One need not have been an inner city tenement woman to be cowed by THOSE icons of perfection.

Anyway, I realize this has nothing to do with the arrested development of entertainment you referred to in the OP; just wanted to point out that "lifestyle instructions" aren't necessarily a new thing in the entertainment media.

[idgiehkt]

23. the shift was

actually from rural to suburban, moreso than urban to suburban.

[mitchum]

24. That is an excellent post, datasuspect

I agree with your analysis (particularly in the areas of banality and merchandising)
I am also annoyed by what I call the "but of course!" factor. This is when the media assumes that "but of course, you are going to participate in THIS latest frenzy of marketed consumption"
The implication being that if you're not,obviously something must be wrong with you. Something like not normal.

[Matsubara]

3. They are getting ridiculous.

How many penguin films now? A dancing penguin, then a surfing one? Two different movies about assortments of animals getting out of the zoo? Then there were two different movies about forest animals trying to get a piece of the suburban action...

There was a time when Daffy Duck, Porky Pig and Bugs Bunny were the antrhopomorphic animals, but they were actually witty, told jokes for adults, while the slapstick appealed to the kids - but those were shorts - not stretched out to 90 minutes.

Not only am I sick of the computer-animated crap, my kids are sick of it too.

[datasuspect]

5. i'm in a position where i can watch a lot of television now

i notice a pattern in many movies: an unquestioned assumption of a suburban-level of lifestyle; an unquestioned assumption that it is normal or desirable to work in a major corporation either as a cube rat or as a mid-level manager; the assumption that male/female marriage is desirable, the only normal thing to do, and magical.

i watched "you, me, and dupree" last night.

although i am certain that many people can identity with the assumed cultural themes in the movie, it is not representative of most constituencies. in fact, the movie reads more like propaganda for that lifestyle (as the action and characters seem like adornment to the environment). the lifestyle and atmosphere are the real stars in that movie and many like it.

[raccoon]

6. I've noticed something like that in the movies and TV generally, starting in the '80's,

"an unquestioned assumption of a suburban-level of lifestyle;"

Except I'd go a little further and say usually there's an assumption of an upper-middle class lifestyle. Or wealth.

[datasuspect]

8. steven spielberg was one of the first to introduce this "suburban scenery as protagonist" vision

look at close encounters or ET.

[Matsubara]

9. DEFINITELY.

I'm not familiar with the movie you mentioned, but you're so right, but it has been that way a long time.

They always seem to be trying to pass off UPPER middle class families as "average", too.

Product placement is done now with an ironic wink, but the products are still placed, aren't they?



The ones that get me are the ones about some super-rich perfect white guy, whose perfect white kid gets kidnapped by some swarthy/dirty/ethnic "other", then the heroic dad turns the world upside down to find them. The one that pops into mind is "Ransom". We're supposed to identify with the rich f*ck, but I never do. I guess I want the kid to be okay, but I can't help but hope that the underdongd, the little guys, the kidnappers manage to get away with the ransom, but without hurting the kid. I guess that means my values are screwed up, but why am I supposed to care that the rich f*ck gets to keep his whole wad of money? I just don't. I know it wouldn't make for good entertainment, but if it was me, I'd just give them the money and get my kid back, not bellow dramatic speeches into the phone!

[datasuspect]

14. fifty years from now

cultural references will be mostly in terms of product recognition.

people will be nostalgic about manufactured products from their childhood.

advertising will become the content of most cultural programming.









oops, that's happening now.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

17. "The assumption that male/female marriage is desirable"

This has been a dramatic standard for a loooooong time. Pre-dating Shakespeare, even. In fact, that's the main difference between his comedies and his tragedies; the tragedies end with multiple deaths, the comedies always end with a marriage. It's the standard "happy ending" as it promotes and ensures the propagtion of the species. (Had essentially an entire class on this in college.)

[bicentennial_baby]

7. Well, I do want to see Ratatouille, but that's mainly b/c

a) it's about cooking
b) the voices are being done by some of the top chefs in international cuisine, like Ferran Adria
c) hopefully, we'll be able to take Sniffa's nieces and nephew

:)

[Richardo]

10. Plus: All Pixar movies are hilarious

At least in my experience.

[bicentennial_baby]

11. I haven't seen many of them

But I am looking forward to this one :D

[Richardo]

12. I started with Monsters Inc and went from there.

I love the trailer on TV where the guy with the baguettes runs his bike into the car. Makes me laugh every time.

[asthmaticeog]

19. d) PATTON FUCKING OSWALT.

:headbang:

[bicentennial_baby]

22. Oooh really?

:bounce:

[Gen. Jack D. Ripper]

18. Hollywood in general is full of cliches and tired, power-book hackery

Very little, if anything, original (in any significant way) comes out of the major Hollywood studios. This is especially true of the "family" features. Though 3D, computer generated models have replaced old pen and paper drawings, the gags and characters, even if at one time original, are now very, very old. Perhaps it's not so much a matter of audiences, namely adult audiences, being so easily amused, as it is that these audiences have a very short memory. As if, they forget that they have seen these same scenes played out for them many, many times before, making each experience some how new. I suppose you would have to posses some memory restraints to find all of this recycled Hollywood trash entertaining. To smile, wide-eyed and chuckle childishly at the same zany, in-your-face animated creature dancing wildly over the screen in his or her current animal iteration, embarking on adventures that seem oddly familiar while learning moral lessons that are as played as the cleverly adult-without being offensive-but witless (and often racial or homophobic) humor.

[barb162]

20. Yeah, really dumb things get big laughs

Not much sophistication, etc.

[montanto]

21. Well, I'm here ain't I?

Oh, this is about something else.

[mzteris]

25. wha? I'm sorry. What'dyou say?

I wasn't listening.

I was busy picking lint out of my belly button. It's so fun!! :D

[windy252]

26. Maybe, but the reason I usually watch things like this

or other movies is for a distraction from craziness of the world.