Support NeoGAF

[pramod]

I just noticed this recently. We seem to be getting only certain "types" of movies these days, and certain genres seem to have almost disappeared completely.

By historical I mean movies that try to realistically depict the past. They could be fictional epics like 300 or Troy or Gladiator. Or even Westerns can fall into this category.

The only type of "historical" movie that still seems to be made regularly, are war movies, especially those about fighting Nazis or Germans.
But other types?....I can't really think of the last big historical epic movie. Maybe Kingdom of Heaven? But that was way back in 2005.

I wonder why have they become so rare? As if Hollywood is reluctant to show what the past is really like? As if true history might be...offensive to some?

 

[triplestation]

i want to see thomas jefferson fight godzilla

 

[Mistershine.]

Because they're harder to shoehorn POC into?

 

[Porcile]

Can you imagine the generation who grew up on Marvel movies, Pokemon and Disney sitting down and watching Ben-Hur? No I don't think so.

 

[Ballthyrm]

Because they're harder to shoehorn POC into?

You could do the haitian revolution. Slave killing the white oppressor and founding their own country.

 

[GreyHorace]

Because history is filthy white supremacy garbage, according to the book of Woke.

Everything must be erased and rewritten at the altar of Identity Politics.

 

[BigBooper]

Because the studios mostly do cgi now, period movies would require a lot of special effects, and cgi looks like poop mostly, maybe.

I guess it's mostly due to the sjw trend. Also, Mel Gipson and Ridley Scott are old.

BTW, there are still some of them being made. Tom Hanks has a new western this year, and he did a ww2 last year.

 

[mcjmetroid]

Can't shove shitty SJW shit into historical movies.

Seriously though I think it will come around again but I think modern society has shown us especially over the past year or so that people aren't interested in learning from history or even learning to be entertained by history.

They haven't really tried the epic style of movie since hmm I can remember films like Troy flopping, that's the last big budget one I can remember.
Also Ben Hurr remake did poorly etc.

 

[Woo-Fu]

How many movies glorifying the predominantly white patriarchy do you really need? The trend is to erase history, not remember it, so we can do it all over again.

 

[Peggies]

You just have to wait for a bit.

When Jodie Turner-Smith is done with Anne Boleyn, she'll do Oscar Schindler next .

 

[YCoCg]

By historical I mean movies that try to realistically depict the past.

300

That sentence followed by that first example

 

[INC]

To worried about offending people i expect

 

[thefool]

They tend to be very expensive.

 

[kraspkibble]

it will anger and offend people.

 

[watatatow]

They tend to be very expensive.

Pretty much, and they're not really guaranteed moneymakers. At the $100+ million they tend to cost, you're really better off financing capeshit or a dozen crappy horror movies. At least as far as the studios are concerned.

 

[CZY]

Considering this question my brain takes me down the rabbit hole of whether movies are even going to be a thing much longer. Like it's hitting me as a really boomer-tier hobby all of a sudden. "Who goes to the movies and who gives af what Hollywood is spending $500m puking out?" is a real question I can hear a lot of people asking, including myself apparently.

 

[Imotekh]

I don't think the more recent attempts did very well critically or commercially compared to the years of Troy/Kingfom of Heaven/300 etc.

Besides that there is a climate of political tension around representations of history and the apparent glorification of evil white people, or the insufficient flattery of non whites, or worse, casting someone insufficiently colourful to play a non white role.

 

[Hudo]

Because that would require somewhat competent directors, big budgets and an audience that is willing to not completely turn off their brains when sitting in the theater. And why would you, as a movie producer, subject yourself to that when you can make bank with mindless capeshit movies like Avengers, which has broken records.

 

[BigBooper]

You just have to wait for a bit.

When Jodie Turner-Smith is done with Anne Boleyn, she'll do Oscar Schindler next .

Yea, and Helena Bonham Carter can play the little girl in the red coat.

 

[Sakura]

I just noticed this recently. We seem to be getting only certain "types" of movies these days, and certain genres seem to have almost disappeared completely.

By historical I mean movies that try to realistically depict the past. They could be fictional epics like 300 or Troy or Gladiator. Or even Westerns can fall into this category.

The only type of "historical" movie that still seems to be made regularly, are war movies, especially those about fighting Nazis or Germans.
But other types?....I can't really think of the last big historical epic movie. Maybe Kingdom of Heaven? But that was way back in 2005.

I wonder why have they become so rare? As if Hollywood is reluctant to show what the past is really like? As if true history might be...offensive to some?

Most of those movies don't actually do a very good job of showing what the past was really like, or telling true history though.
That being said I would like to see more historical movies providing they are historically accurate. There are many, many interesting periods in history that would make for good movies.

 

[Drake]

The last ones I watched were both on Netflix: The King and Outlaw King which were both pretty solid. I love medieval period pieces. They definitely don't make a lot of them though.

 

[VulcanRaven]

They are making a Cleopatra movie with Gal Gadot.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Not sure if it's related, but one of the major reasons why he once had a lot of "historical movies" in the 50s, 60s, and 70s were because of war-patriotism and avoidance of "communist" topics. That's also why we had a lot of biblical and religious-adjunct Hollywood movies like Ten Commandments, Ben Hur, etc. Also there was a strong push for using film as a medium to educate the public and not just an entertainment medium (a venture that was more or less successful).

So maybe it's not so much that studios are avoiding them. Big war movies and slice-of-historical-life movies seem to get made every year. A lot of history is covered in documentaries. The docs we have nowadays are amazing compared to History Channel mid-00s sort of documentaries. Higher-quality documentaries might take the wind out of the sails of a historical movie (maybe not, just spitballing)

 

[poppabk]

A bunch of them bombed and drew controversy. Exodus: God's and Kings, Ben Hur, Noah all came out around the same time and were failures.
TV took up the slack, there are tons of 'historical' TV shows.

 

[funkygunther]

A bunch of them bombed and drew controversy. Exodus: God's and Kings, Ben Hur, Noah all came out around the same time and were failures.
TV took up the slack, there are tons of 'historical' TV shows.

Gods and Kings is fantastic, highly recommend to OP if 300 is a contender.

 

[OmegaSupreme]

Vikings is dope. Slighty historical.

 

[V4skunk]

Because real history is "problematic" for the left.

 

[HotPocket69]

Yea, and Helena Bonham Carter can play the little girl in the red coat.

Or the “Goodbye Jews” girl

 

[nkarafo]

"Historical" movies are almost always about some conflict/war. 99.999% of the people who participated in them or made any impact were men. And even someone like Joan of Arc, Bouboulina or Manto Mavrogenous are still white. It's not as easy to shoehorn a "strong black woman" in such scenarios.

Also, nobody is going to use practical effects, real crew and stunts to depict such battles. They always use CGI now, which always looks like shit in such scenes. WW1/WW2 are a bit easier in the effects derpartment because these were long range weapon battles. They don't have to animate real people swinging swords on each other. Explosions and bullet impacts ar far easier to animate.

And of course, as everyone knows, history is racist.

 

[Tremmy]

How else will we rewrite history? We can't have things depicting stuff we find problematic.

 

[VulcanRaven]

They made a new Ben-Hur movie in 2016 but I heard it wasn't very good.

 

[LisaMariaMartin]

Because pasty ass data scientists queried databases, calculated rows of data and told their bosses there is no money in it

 

[poppabk]

Gods and Kings is fantastic, highly recommend to OP if 300 is a contender.

Yeah I thought Exodus and Noah were good. Can't say I've gotten up the courage to watch the Ben Hur remake though.

 

[Elektro Demon]

You can't shove PC culture in them.

 

[GeorgPrime]

I just noticed this recently. We seem to be getting only certain "types" of movies these days, and certain genres seem to have almost disappeared completely.

By historical I mean movies that try to realistically depict the past. They could be fictional epics like 300 or Troy or Gladiator. Or even Westerns can fall into this category.

The only type of "historical" movie that still seems to be made regularly, are war movies, especially those about fighting Nazis or Germans.
But other types?....I can't really think of the last big historical epic movie. Maybe Kingdom of Heaven? But that was way back in 2005.

I wonder why have they become so rare? As if Hollywood is reluctant to show what the past is really like? As if true history might be...offensive to some?

They made a movie about woke culture but due to too much critic it got canceled

 

[T8SC]

You can't shove a comic book character into them.

 

[SirKicksalot]

Ridley's The Last Duel is scheduled for October.

 

[Reptars Revenge]

Hmmm first man, on the basis of sex, tesla, the favorite, collette, outlaw king, hidden figures, trial of Chicago 7, Togo, Ford vs Ferrari

 

[dr_octagon]

I will wait for Disney to educate me on history by watching their future films: Wanda and Petro Chemical Chronicles, Dr Drone Strike and Multiverse Genocide and CCPolice Academy 21.

 

[Goro Majima]

I’m sure the pitfalls of handling historical events delicately don’t help but I mostly agree with those saying it’s money more than anything. You can’t build a franchise and sell merchandise by making expensive swords and sandals type movies. Plus you lose some part of the globe whenever you focus on one particular region’s history (basically that Chinese money) so you aren’t making a billion selling another Greek or Roman period piece.

The good news is that TV has almost entirely picked up the slack with a vast array of quality historical fiction period pieces.

 

[Shadowplay1979]

Considering this question my brain takes me down the rabbit hole of whether movies are even going to be a thing much longer. Like it's hitting me as a really boomer-tier hobby all of a sudden. "Who goes to the movies and who gives af what Hollywood is spending $500m puking out?" is a real question I can hear a lot of people asking, including myself apparently.

Younger generations have already replaced movies with the instant gratification of youtube just like interesting musicians have been mostly replaced with obnoxious streamers who indulge in their own vanity to cover for their mental and emotional instability instead of expressing through art and growing.

Besides a tenant of a bolshevik is throwing history away...no one wants to learn or understand actual history anymore unless its fake or sterilized to modern discretions.

The era of big film in general is coming to a close....tomorrows films will be youtube videos of people watching old films.

 

[Redneckerz]

They have to be made first before they can be called historic.

That's where the catchphrase ''History in the making'' comes from.

 

[Cravis]

The Woke are trying to erase history from existence. The woke run Hollywood.

 

[Julius Ibidus]

The era of big film in general is coming to a close....tomorrows films will be youtube videos of people watching old films.

probably true, and depressing to think about...

 

[Boss Mog]

Can't do historical movies until they're done rewriting History obviously.

 

[AJUMP23]

Alexander from Stone ruined it for everyone.

 

[MaestroMike]

the king on netflix that came out in 2019 was pretty good

 

[DragoonKain]

Expensive, there are already ones out there that covered what many would consider interesting time periods, and I think the feeling in Hollywood is the genre is kind of stale to movie watchers. Kind of in the same way you don’t see a lot of Italian mafia stuff anymore. That kinda died out, although you still get some from time to time. And you still get historical epic movies, just less frequently.

I still stand by The Last Samurai being the best of the bunch from that late 90s to mid 2000s stretch where they were the big things in movies.

 

[Draef the Badger]

There's only so many times that the same battle or incident in Western history can be done. There's probably money in making movies covering lesser-known periods from other countries.