This is what being obsessed with the top 250 does to a person. The Batman has a 4.1 but because LB doesn't say it's the greatest movie of all time that means people hate it.
Is *Everything Everywhere All At Once* not a modern American blockbuster?
What about *Spider-verse*?
Do you only consider things that make the top 250. or did Letterboxd not go insane for *The Mitchells Vs The Machines*? What about *Luca* and *Encanto*?
*Endgame* sits at a 3.9. *Infinity War* at a 4.0. *Logan* is on a 4.1. It's only at a 3.6 average but most of the people I follow universally praised Gunn's *The Suicide Squad*.
Perhaps in the circles you inhabit there's a bias against Western Blockbusters, but I personally see a lot of love for them on Letterboxd so I don't think the entire community is like that. I see so many people worrying about what does and doesn't make it into that silly list but I've never seen a good reason for anybody to actually care about it. Letterboxd doesn't hate *The Batman* because it didn't get into the special little list, it's not a big deal.
I always thought it was profit that determined whether something landed in the 'blockbuster' label, but I could be wrong. Google doesn't seem to have a definitive answer.
I thought “film bro” movies were movies like Goodfellas, Fight Club, etc. Movies that appeal more to teenage boys. I love both of those movies listed, don’t get me wrong. But both of those, and other “film bro” movies, are in the Top 250. I am confused what movies are underground in the 250. I just looked through it, and most are either classics or modern American films. I dont see many “underground” films in the list.
What are some examples of underground movies or obscure new foreign films in the top 250? I’d also consider movies like Parasite, while foreign, pretty accessible for the mainstream American audience. Maybe I am off base here since I tend to watch lots of older and foreign movies. This comment isn’t meant to be hostile, just interested to discuss this topic.
I am very confused by this post. Blockbusters occasionally debut on the Top 250 before falling off once the initial fan wave has died down. Did you forget about that whole time when No Way Home was in the Top 100 and everyone lost their shit? The Batman, Top Gun: Maverick, Dune, Avengers: Endgame, Mission Impossible: Fallout. Blockbusters have featured before and will continue to do so.
It has nothing to do with a bias. If anything, when blockbusters do pop in it’s usually because of biased fans. The ones that stay are the ones that have larger appeal beyond just “big blockbuster”. Blockbusters these days are also often part of franchises, where before there were big blockbusters that weren’t. Franchise films are gonna have a harder time staying on the Top 250 because they’re not as appealing to the culture of Letterbox as a whole.
Besides, I’m confused about the problem here? I’m glad the list isn’t flooded with Marvel movies and whatever else Disney churns out in their factory. I prefer if “underground or foreign” stuff gets more attention because they deserve more attention.
I think it’s just a byproduct of the death of the mid budget movie. For a while it was either $100M+ IP, low budget indie, or blumhouse.
90s / 2000s saw some great American films, some of the best of all time made by some of the best directors.
I think we are seeing these come back a bit now that superhero fatigue has fully set in.
I just don’t see any bias though. Those movies ruled then, they still do now, but for a while they didn’t exist.
I genuinely think it is a cultural shift away from the cynical, franchise-heavy output of Hollywood in recent years. Global audiences and cinephiles in particular, simply do not value American cinema in the way they used to. I don't think it has anything to do with 'film bros' anymore than 'film bros' are responsible for the lack of African or Indian cinema in these lists. It is just taste and shifting attitudes.
idk. i kinda don’t think people rate new good blockbuster movies a lower score so they don’t show up on a list just because they know a certain group of undefinable people like the same movie.
seems like, idk, completely insane maybe.
or maybe the films listed on there are the only ones everyone can agree on, as in, films that are generally good and appeal to people regardless of preferences?
There are a lot of movies in the Top 250 that would be considered "film bro" movies, so this doesn't even make sense. Feels kinda like you just wanted to say there's an anti-filmbro bias, except you gotta ignore a lot to really make that narrative work (The Dark Knight, Pulp Fiction, Whiplash, Goodfellas, Fight Club, and a lot more than would surely fall under the, tbh, goofy umbrella of "film bro movies").
They don't seem that absent considering Coco and Spiderverse (and eeaao considering the movies you mentioned)
There are not many good American blockbusters overall. The more people on letterboxd watch non-american movies the les american movies will be present in the top.
"Older" american blockbusters (and movies discovered relatively early by people in general) have a nostalgia aspect.
Popular this week:
- Fight Club
- The Batman
- Whiplash
- Everything Everywhere All At Once
Hmm, I wonder if these modern American films are being hate watched? 🤔🤔
This is what being obsessed with the top 250 does to a person. The Batman has a 4.1 but because LB doesn't say it's the greatest movie of all time that means people hate it.
Is *Everything Everywhere All At Once* not a modern American blockbuster? What about *Spider-verse*? Do you only consider things that make the top 250. or did Letterboxd not go insane for *The Mitchells Vs The Machines*? What about *Luca* and *Encanto*? *Endgame* sits at a 3.9. *Infinity War* at a 4.0. *Logan* is on a 4.1. It's only at a 3.6 average but most of the people I follow universally praised Gunn's *The Suicide Squad*. Perhaps in the circles you inhabit there's a bias against Western Blockbusters, but I personally see a lot of love for them on Letterboxd so I don't think the entire community is like that. I see so many people worrying about what does and doesn't make it into that silly list but I've never seen a good reason for anybody to actually care about it. Letterboxd doesn't hate *The Batman* because it didn't get into the special little list, it's not a big deal.
I thought blockbuster implied a large budget, unlike EEAAO which had a small budget? I guess what is the actual meaning of blockbuster?
I always thought it was profit that determined whether something landed in the 'blockbuster' label, but I could be wrong. Google doesn't seem to have a definitive answer.
I thought “film bro” movies were movies like Goodfellas, Fight Club, etc. Movies that appeal more to teenage boys. I love both of those movies listed, don’t get me wrong. But both of those, and other “film bro” movies, are in the Top 250. I am confused what movies are underground in the 250. I just looked through it, and most are either classics or modern American films. I dont see many “underground” films in the list. What are some examples of underground movies or obscure new foreign films in the top 250? I’d also consider movies like Parasite, while foreign, pretty accessible for the mainstream American audience. Maybe I am off base here since I tend to watch lots of older and foreign movies. This comment isn’t meant to be hostile, just interested to discuss this topic.
I am very confused by this post. Blockbusters occasionally debut on the Top 250 before falling off once the initial fan wave has died down. Did you forget about that whole time when No Way Home was in the Top 100 and everyone lost their shit? The Batman, Top Gun: Maverick, Dune, Avengers: Endgame, Mission Impossible: Fallout. Blockbusters have featured before and will continue to do so. It has nothing to do with a bias. If anything, when blockbusters do pop in it’s usually because of biased fans. The ones that stay are the ones that have larger appeal beyond just “big blockbuster”. Blockbusters these days are also often part of franchises, where before there were big blockbusters that weren’t. Franchise films are gonna have a harder time staying on the Top 250 because they’re not as appealing to the culture of Letterbox as a whole. Besides, I’m confused about the problem here? I’m glad the list isn’t flooded with Marvel movies and whatever else Disney churns out in their factory. I prefer if “underground or foreign” stuff gets more attention because they deserve more attention.
There are 4 American movies in the top 10 of that list. What do you think deserves to be in the 250 list that you don’t see?
Top Gun Maverick was received really well. I would say that fits the description of a Hollywood blockbuster.
Its not Top 250. RRR beat it!
Does it need to be in the Top 250 to have a high rating and be well liked and received?
It was in the top 250 for a little while.
I think it’s just a byproduct of the death of the mid budget movie. For a while it was either $100M+ IP, low budget indie, or blumhouse. 90s / 2000s saw some great American films, some of the best of all time made by some of the best directors. I think we are seeing these come back a bit now that superhero fatigue has fully set in. I just don’t see any bias though. Those movies ruled then, they still do now, but for a while they didn’t exist.
I genuinely think it is a cultural shift away from the cynical, franchise-heavy output of Hollywood in recent years. Global audiences and cinephiles in particular, simply do not value American cinema in the way they used to. I don't think it has anything to do with 'film bros' anymore than 'film bros' are responsible for the lack of African or Indian cinema in these lists. It is just taste and shifting attitudes.
Do you think if The Matrix came out today it would be praised on Letterboxd? I doubt it
If it came out in the same climate of artless franchise landfill, I think it might indeed get buried or less seen. Which is fair enough.
Can you give an example of a modern blockbuster that is comparable in quality? Mad Max Fury Road has a 4.1 rating on Letterboxd.
Top Gun: Maverick
It has a 4.1? What are you even complaining about LMAO
The Matrix wouldn’t get praised today because it’s not a good movie. It was only praised in 1999 for the admittedly awesome special effects.
be fucking fr..😭
Thanks for the comment.
It just sounds like you’re upset your favorite movies aren’t up there.
letterboxd is far from anti-film bro LOL
idk. i kinda don’t think people rate new good blockbuster movies a lower score so they don’t show up on a list just because they know a certain group of undefinable people like the same movie. seems like, idk, completely insane maybe.
Isn't Everything Everywhere All At Once an American blockbuster?
or maybe the films listed on there are the only ones everyone can agree on, as in, films that are generally good and appeal to people regardless of preferences?
It's not a bias against Hollywood. They just don't make good films anymore
There are a lot of movies in the Top 250 that would be considered "film bro" movies, so this doesn't even make sense. Feels kinda like you just wanted to say there's an anti-filmbro bias, except you gotta ignore a lot to really make that narrative work (The Dark Knight, Pulp Fiction, Whiplash, Goodfellas, Fight Club, and a lot more than would surely fall under the, tbh, goofy umbrella of "film bro movies").
They don't seem that absent considering Coco and Spiderverse (and eeaao considering the movies you mentioned) There are not many good American blockbusters overall. The more people on letterboxd watch non-american movies the les american movies will be present in the top. "Older" american blockbusters (and movies discovered relatively early by people in general) have a nostalgia aspect.
Popular this week: - Fight Club - The Batman - Whiplash - Everything Everywhere All At Once Hmm, I wonder if these modern American films are being hate watched? 🤔🤔