Why do Hollywood movies that criticize Hollywood itself or capitalism usually end up portraying it as awesome?

Submitted by MentalDespairing t3_zy52v9 in movies

Unless I am mistaken Babylon is about how people the sacrifice people make, destroying themselves to produce great art...but this is a terrible view. This glorifies the "suffering artist" stereotype.

Why does Hollywood movies that criticize Hollywood or capitalism always end up portraying it either partially awesome or significantly awesome? The average person watching this is not going to learn a damn thing and glorifies characters like Jordan Belfort just like people were inspired by Gordon Gecko!

Sorry for this rant. Do any of you know movies that criticize Hollywood that genuinely portrays the life of an actor or director as terrible? Like, not an actor that is tortured and abused but end up being this totally awesome musician or actors. It always seems to end up this way and I don't know why.

It's even more confusing because I thought was one of the complains about capitalism was that artists cannot realize their own true work...but many directors are realizing their works and they are still at the core self-worshiping art as the most important thing a human can do. As if the whole reason capitalism is bad is because it hurts art and the goal of defeating capitalism is just to become a self-fulfilled artists...rather than being against capitalism because of empathy, because it exploits people and causes suffering to people. Who gives a shit about how it affects art?

Will this kind of works still exist in a post-scarcity economy? Ugh.

0

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

DickieGreenleaf84 t1_j23rhre wrote

Is it the movie makers fault that there are enough people out there that will always choose the charismatic douchebag? We've got lots of evidence that they do so with real people too.

3

atomicitalian t1_j23s9yf wrote

Some people are always going to look at a cautionary tale and respond "wow, that looks like a good time!"

32

WinterWindWhip t1_j23u2uf wrote

I've seen a few people mention the post-scarcity economy lately. I don't know why its suddenly become a thing. We clearly are far from that.

I think the floppiness of Babylon can be explained by the fact that the public isn't nearly as interested in Hollywood as Hollywood is.

6

Lanky_Ad_9849 t1_j23wcxd wrote

To answer your first question, capitalism seems to work great for Hollywood—its more awesome for the so-called “suffering artists” than almost anyone else. These people are posers.

Can you imagine if HW produced a film about HW that showcased the wage discrepancy between the lead actors, directors, producers, and the costume/set crews? How about a follow-up sequel that shows the amount of energy they put into campaigning for awards, the amount of money they spend on designer clothes to attend said award shows, etc…

9

MasterTeacher123 t1_j240f6s wrote

What’s wrong with portraying “capitalism” as awesome lol

3

DONNIENARC0 t1_j240wh7 wrote

> Do any of you know movies that criticize Hollywood that genuinely portrays the life of an actor or director as terrible? Like, not an actor that is tortured and abused but end up being this totally awesome musician or actors. It always seems to end up this way and I don't know why.

Leaving Las Vegas was the first thing that came to mind.

It felt a lot like Birdman's "star struggles to accept his waning star power" thing to me, just in a different period. Robbie and Pitt both end up >!killing themselves because they can't make the transition away from silent pictures!<

1

Callecian_427 t1_j241t06 wrote

Just because characters are having a good time on screen does not mean the message is encouraging their behavior.

Gordon Gekko and Jordan Belfort were the villains of their own story. Greed is most certainly not good unless you’re a narcissistic asshole.

7

DoopSlayer t1_j246rq3 wrote

All of Damien Chazelle's movies are about the suffering artist, how to be a "real" artist you have to be willing to sacrifice everything. I'm kind of tired of his movies because of it

2

atomicsnarl t1_j2472l1 wrote

People enjoy watching train wrecks.

"Lord, that was horrible! Glad it wasn't me."

3

h2oman67 t1_j247m3b wrote

The master's tools will never dismantle his house.

3

ralanr t1_j248xu4 wrote

Replying to atomicitalian (#1,144,343)

I’m definitely one of those people who look at cyberpunk cityscapes and think, “That’s awesome.” Despite it being utter hell to live in and growing more angry with how car centric the USA is.

11

laterdude t1_j249512 wrote

Replying to Lanky_Ad_9849 (#1,145,236)

> Can you imagine if HW produced a film about HW that showcased the wage discrepancy between the lead actors, directors, producers, and the costume/set crews?

Watch the first season of Ricky Gervasis' Extras for that discrepancy. And in the second season when he becomes a star but is sadly reduced to a catch phrase.

5

dtfulsom t1_j24hrz4 wrote

>Sorry for this rant. Do any of you know movies that criticize Hollywood that genuinely portrays the life of an actor or director as terrible? Like, not an actor that is tortured and abused but end up being this totally awesome musician or actors.

In terms of musician (you sometimes say artist, sometimes actor, so using the former), Inside Llewyn Davis probably fits your bill.

In terms of films about directors, I can't think of any, but, to be fair, there aren't that many films about directors, except for semi-autobiographical works by directors who have already succeeded. (Maybe Synecdoche, New York, but I don't think that film is related to anticapitalism.)

In general, it seems like you're asking for a type of film that just isn't made that often—in which a character is beat down by life and then dies. I think, for reasons well beyond capitalism/anti-capitalism, that just isn't a film many people want to make or watch. (There are a few examples, though none that I can think of that involve actors/directors.)

There are some great anticapitlism films out there, though! I recommend Sorry to Bother You.

6

Glad_Calligrapher163 t1_j24imu8 wrote

You wouldn't need to caution anybody if there was nothing fun about it.

There's no addiction warning on coffee cause it's coffee.... cocaine on the other hand.....

2

atomicitalian t1_j24r8m3 wrote

Replying to ralanr (#1,147,677)

I think there's a difference between seeing a really fascinating setting and thinking "man I'd love to explore that" then like, looking at Henry Hill from Goodfellas or Tony from the Sopranos or Walter White and thinking "those guys are BADASS I want to be like them"

The former I think is a pretty natural reaction to the unknown and the mysterious, the latter is just not really understanding the characters as they're presented.

6

ralanr t1_j24rotr wrote

Replying to atomicitalian (#1,151,194)

The joy about stories is that audiences can disagree with the author’s original intent and find something different.

It can get annoying when the worst aspects are appraised. I remember reading the author of Fight Club hates it when people tell him Tyler is the character they appeal to the most.

1

zerg1980 t1_j2582zx wrote

A long time back I saw this movie The Definition of Insanity (2004) at a film festival. It is one of the bleaker portrayals I’ve seen of the life of a struggling actor. The main character played by writer/director/star Robert Margolis is shown to be totally miserable at the acting hustle, but he’s not really shown to be all that talented or accomplished, he’s just not quite good enough to be a successful actor and can’t accept it. It’s one example I can think of that shows the life of the suffering artist as not necessarily having a grand payoff.

1

Curse_ye_Winslow t1_j25tkws wrote

L.A. Confidential (subtlely )

Blonde

Mulholland Drive

to name a few...

1

rock0star t1_j25xk8x wrote

A lot of true things are terrifying

Cancer

An unfiltered picture of Kim Kardashian

Hollywood morals

1

ApocalypseSpokesman t1_j26hc3i wrote

Replying to atomicitalian (#1,151,194)

I think people want to be Walter White more for the broad field of knowledge, quick thinking, incisive decision-making, self-sacrifice, and ability to carry out a task to its completion, and less for the willingness to break several laws.

Likewise people idolize Tyler Durden for his bold vision, charisma, adulation from peers, exciting exploits, and ability to have lots of awesome sex, and less for his blowing up stuff.

People's lives lack drama and excitement, and they feel admiration for a protagonist who can act swiftly and competently in a pinch.

1

Coupe_on_Zs t1_j2777np wrote

Probably because if you’re on the winning end of capitalism it IS awesome. They wouldn’t have made a movie about Gordon Gecko if it wasn’t. The general public has romanticized villains since at least Robin Hood, on down through Billy the Kid and Machine Gun Kelly right up to Frank Abagnale and I bet Elizabeth Holmes and Sam Bankman-Fried will have awesome biopics that show their rise as something we all wish we had. It’s what makes the story interesting. In real life the Oceans 11 people would all be pieces of shit too, but it’s a good movie

2

Signal_Soldier t1_j27z8n5 wrote

Because in the end it is awesome. It is what you make of it.

1

No-Shock4099 t1_j28e6fv wrote

Because you have to show the reality of it. The reason capitalism is so heavily defended, it works for the very few who make false promises that if people work just that little bit harder, they might be able to join them. It’s a lie. It’s good from a narrative point of view to show that lie and then peel back the layers to expose it.

1

anothercynic2112 t1_j28mq5g wrote

I don't really understand this question other than fitting a lot of reddit buzzwords into one post. Hollywood is capitalism through and through. It's simply marketing "art" for consumption. There's no value system outside of earnings, there are some self serving efforts at recognition which also only exist to use the talent to make more money for other parties.

The fact that some artists are part of this machine and some movies are objectively amazing works of art is just accidental side effect of the Hollywood system. Occasionally this system will help highlight and address some social ills, but in almost every case it's an ill that Hollywood has helped perpetuate.

Civil rights? Decades after Malcom X and MLK, we have a tiny percentage of non white dominated characters and movies. Women continue to be paid substantially less and while me too took Harvey down, the hundreds of enablers and minions who helped him are going about their business.

Does anyone think the casting couch is closed? Do we have anything resembling actual representatoon of people beyond the traditional pretty folks? Are actors still told to lose 5 pounds or else?

Hollywood is 90% a self serving beast meant to make money for investors, inflate egos and get some producers laid There's no ethics or value system. And without capitalism it doesn't exist. So yeah, they'll always paint themselves with an awesome brush.

1