I do have an ongoing battle within myself between just wanting good movies that work and wanting something novel. More and more I'm looking at that latter inclination as a character flaw. It's the same tendency that has fashionistas always chasing the next thing, that has people uninterested in old movies, old music, Shakespeare, etc. I think it's the other side of the coin from those who just want the familiar. Always eat a burger or pizza when they travel to other countries. Still listening to the music they listened to in high school. Want to make America white again. Etc.
I think it's important to be open to what's original, new, or unfamiliar, but also the stuff that isn't, but is still well made and entertaining.
(I would say the bigger problem with movies like Green Book or Selma is just they weren't that good and the Academy was probably honoring them for something other than their filmmaking greatness.)
I'm not sure that, speaking for myself, what I'm chasing is "the next thing" -- I really don't care what will generate buzz, what will get everyone talking, etc. I do think I'm interested in *originality* but I think that's different from mere *novelty*. For something to be original, it has to genuinely expand your mind, your universe, whereas to be novel all something has to be is apparently different from what came before; it doesn't have to have any depth or staying power in and of itself. And can you really say your mind or your universe has been expanded if it doesn't? I don't think so.
Hollywood infamously falls into both traps, and has from the beginning: it wants something that is simultaneously extremely familiar and obviously novel, something we already know and love dressed up as something we've never seen. That's a pretty sound approach from a pure marketing perspective, but I don't think it has much to do with making art. Artists need to be impelled by something more than either novelty or familiarity; they have to want to be remembered, which is to say, to be original.
I don't disagree with you though that bad movies are definitely worse than good movies, of whatever type.
I do have an ongoing battle within myself between just wanting good movies that work and wanting something novel. More and more I'm looking at that latter inclination as a character flaw. It's the same tendency that has fashionistas always chasing the next thing, that has people uninterested in old movies, old music, Shakespeare, etc. I think it's the other side of the coin from those who just want the familiar. Always eat a burger or pizza when they travel to other countries. Still listening to the music they listened to in high school. Want to make America white again. Etc.
I think it's important to be open to what's original, new, or unfamiliar, but also the stuff that isn't, but is still well made and entertaining.
(I would say the bigger problem with movies like Green Book or Selma is just they weren't that good and the Academy was probably honoring them for something other than their filmmaking greatness.)
I'm not sure that, speaking for myself, what I'm chasing is "the next thing" -- I really don't care what will generate buzz, what will get everyone talking, etc. I do think I'm interested in *originality* but I think that's different from mere *novelty*. For something to be original, it has to genuinely expand your mind, your universe, whereas to be novel all something has to be is apparently different from what came before; it doesn't have to have any depth or staying power in and of itself. And can you really say your mind or your universe has been expanded if it doesn't? I don't think so.
Hollywood infamously falls into both traps, and has from the beginning: it wants something that is simultaneously extremely familiar and obviously novel, something we already know and love dressed up as something we've never seen. That's a pretty sound approach from a pure marketing perspective, but I don't think it has much to do with making art. Artists need to be impelled by something more than either novelty or familiarity; they have to want to be remembered, which is to say, to be original.
I don't disagree with you though that bad movies are definitely worse than good movies, of whatever type.