Why are modern movies still good but modern pop music not?

Tools    





Registered User
Personal opinion is that modern movies and TV are still of high quality (Breaking Bad for example), but that modern pop music has become very bland and commerical compared to how it was pre-90s.

Any idea why this is? Think it's because it still requires less effort to make a music video in your basement and get Youtube hits from it than to become an actor or director?



well all I can say .. is that after the 90's movement in music and alternative rock faded out... My music taste moved to Europe... and so did my film taste....



Registered User
I'm too bored with the 'modern music sucks' stuff once again.
It's not a cliche statement.

Fact of the matter is according to a lot of seasoned musicians (Slash, Rob Zombie, Gene Simmons etc) it's harder for a musician to make it big based on talent alone these days than it was in the past.

Basically record labels are more likely to favor individuals or groups with strong Youtube or Twitter followings, since this lessens the risk on the part of the record label. In the past this wasn't a venue.

This means there's less incentive for a band or individual to actually learn an instrument (unless they really are just in it 100% for the art).

In the same vein that it's cheaper to use CGI than "real special effects".



Setsuko Hara is my co-pilot
It's not a cliche statement.
It is. Either way, a false one.
it's harder for a musician to make it big based on talent alone these days than it was in the past
What does it have to do with the alleged absence of good music today?
This means there's less incentive for a band or individual to actually learn an instrument (unless they really are just in it 100% for the art)
There's still a great number of bands and talented instrumentalists. Still doesn't have anything to do with thread's title.
In the same vein that it's cheaper to use CGI than "real special effects"
But there are still films without CGI and they are great, old or new. It seems to me you're only talking about the mainstream. And I mean, like, the most mainstream stuff you can think of. There's so many good recordings being released every year, it's unbelievable.



Registered User
It is. Either way, a false one.
You're talking about artists which 90% of people haven't heard of - which is a no-brainer and not even worth mentioning, since it's essentially the same as saying "cows go moo" and attempting to look profound.

What does it have to do with the alleged absence of good music today?
There's still a great number of bands and talented instrumentalists. Still doesn't have anything to do with thread's title.
Better question is what does underground music have to do with the music industry as a whole?

It's obviously not having a significant impact of the current state of the industry.
But there are still films without CGI and they are great, old or new. It seems to me you're only talking about the mainstream.
Wow you can read a title! Congrats.

Why are modern movies still good but modern pop music not?

And I mean, like, the most mainstream stuff you can think of. There's so many good recordings being released every year, it's unbelievable.
The fact that "good artists" are being relegated to the underground will have an effect on the overall scope of music, since like it or not, even talented artists will have less practical incentive and opportunity to explore their full potential if they aren't rewarded for it.

Do you really think the Beatles for example would have recorded all that they did if they had never had an opportunity to make it big, and had been relegated to playing at nightclubs?



In the good old days, they had PROPER instruments. Damn those Swedish House Mafia charlatans!!
I mean, come on, this is a little too close to having to go and poo in a hole in your back gardens because in your day, there was no inside toilets. There have always been elements of pop music that are, well, a bit bubblegum. That's not particular to this generation.

Please don't let us get into an altercation over the merits and worth of streaming music instead of buying it in a shop. If Taylor Beyonce/Prince/ACDC et al wasn't making money out of it, then they wouldn't do it. Go and have a look at the 'artists' that were at the launch of Tidal and tell me that all of those creative types are putting their weight behind it for the love of the music or the buckets of cash they could make if they had better overall control over a release media they already know works.

The argument that musicians (however they choose to make it) have less avenues to express their creativity is simply not true, frankly. I have been in and out of several generations of the music industry and purely on merit, this period is more ripe for musical discovery, due to the many varied formats of receiving it. I know for a fact that I have discovered at least a dozen artists in the past month that I would never have come across using conventional methods on the good old days and they benefit from that too.



Since it's essentially the same as saying "cows go moo" and attempting to look profound.
You straw manned Mr Minio, and then psychologically projected the very thing that you were doing.

It's not at all, you're simply talking about artists which 90% of people haven't heard of... Better question is what does underground music have to do with the music industry as a whole?
It seems to me you're only talking about the mainstream. And I mean, like, the most mainstream stuff you can think of. There's so many good recordings being released every year, it's unbelievable.
The fact that "good artists" are being relegated to the underground will have an effect on the overall scope of music, since like it or not, even talented artists will have less practical incentive and opportunity to explore their full potential if they aren't rewarded for it.

Do you really think the Beatles for example would have recorded all that they did if they had never had an opportunity to make it big, and had been relegated to playing at nightclubs?
Music that 90% of people haven't heard of is still mainstream, lol. 10% of 7 billion is 700 million, that's a lot. You just proved Mr Minio's point by talking about The Beatles. And you clearly do not know one single thing about underground music. For one thing underground music has more of an effect on the overall scope of music than mainstream music, because mainstream music is just superficial rip offs of underground music, like Screamo, Emo, and Metal. You have these whiny kid's with black blow dried hair screaming into a mic thinking they're all three genres at the same time when they're really just Metalcore.

Top 40 has gone downhill, because they are motivated by shallow greed and popularity, and mass media/marketing/consumerism doesn't care about "quality," only what sells. But there is so much more to "mainstream" music than that, and underground music is thriving thanks to the internet.

You know 90'sAce, it's really nothing new. You still have no idea what you're talking about.



Setsuko Hara is my co-pilot
You're talking about artists which 90% of people haven't heard of - which is a no-brainer and not even worth mentioning, since it's essentially the same as saying "cows go moo" and attempting to look profound.
You're being inconsistent here. The title clearly claims it is the modern pop music that is no longer good. All of it, mainstream or obscure. That's what the sentence says. And you also compare all genres of modern filmmaking to only one specified genre of music and even then cut it down only to contemporary releases. It's almost as if you wrote: Why are modern TV shows good, but modern literature written by Coelho not? But let me read the other part of your post before you accuse me of nit-picking.

Better question is what does underground music have to do with the music industry as a whole?
An even better question is what do music industries have to do with the quality of music nowadays? It seems to me you are only complaining about the MAINSTREAM contemporary music that sucks. Yeah, a big chunk of it blows.

It's obviously not having a significant impact of the current state of the industry.
And it never had. Underground artists were either obscure, relatively known only to the cult followers, or worked their way to the mainstream. Same thing nowadays.

Wow you can read a title! Congrats.
Thanks, bro. I appreciate that.

Why are modern movies still good but modern pop music not?
Pop music has long lost it's meaning as 'popular'. Not every popular music is pop music and there's a bunch of pop-oriented artists that are pretty obscure.

Do you really think the Beatles for example would have recorded all that they did if they had never had an opportunity to make it big, and had been relegated to playing at nightclubs?
Who knows. Anyway, once again, this has very little to do with the title of this topic. You are more interested in degradation of music industry and how it promotes talentless, but money-making artists rather than really talented musicians that are not so certain money-farmers, than the actual quality of nowadays music regardless its popularity.



If you think modern music is bad, that's because you're OLD.

Every old person ever has complained about new fangled music their kids are listening to.
Look at history, Learn from it. Introspect.

But it is interesting how this "old people" effect doesn't seem to apply to films. Perhaps thats because we are only just now in the age of convincing CGI and have the capability to produce all these special effects.



Registered User
You straw manned Mr Minio, and then psychologically projected the very thing that you were doing.
That's incorrect, "pop" specifically refers to music which tops the charts - not "popular" music as an entire genre.

Music that 90% of people haven't heard of is still mainstream, lol. 10% of 7 billion is 700 million, that's a lot.
Not compared to 7 billion. "Lot" is releative

You just proved Mr Minio's point by talking about The Beatles. And you clearly do not know one single thing about underground music.
I know enough to know that "underground" music isn't a genre.

For one thing underground music has more of an effect on the overall scope of music than mainstream music, because mainstream music is just superficial rip offs of underground music,
That's not how it's always been. The Beatles, Aerosmith, etc were a popular bands and were critically acclaimed as innovative - like you're saying yourself there are less popular bands and artists today who are innovators, but rather just recyclers.

like Screamo, Emo, and Metal. You have these whiny kid's with black blow dried hair screaming into a mic thinking they're all three genres at the same time when they're really just Metalcore.
Comparing "metal" to emo is the worst thing I've heard so far in this thread - that shows a huge lack of understanding of the genres.

Top 40 has gone downhill, because they are motivated by shallow greed and popularity, and mass media/marketing/consumerism doesn't care about "quality," only what sells. But there is so much more to "mainstream" music than that, and underground music is thriving thanks to the internet.
I'm not talking about "top 40" exclusively - I'm talking about music which is prevalent in the industry as a whole, including record labels.

You know 90'sAce, it's really nothing new. You still have no idea what you're talking about.
I know what I'm talking about much more than you do.



Setsuko Hara is my co-pilot
Look at history, Learn from it. Introspect.
Bach's music was often believed to be confusing, Mozart's too complicated and chaotic, Many composers now considered geniuses have been criticized in their times. Figures, there's a little bit of truth in what you're saying.
"Sell this on ebay and ill kick yo narrow ass!"



Registered User
If you think modern music is bad, that's because you're OLD.
9 years younger than you.

But your idea of "good" is Lady Gaga right? So... yeah.

Every old person ever has complained about new fangled music their kids are listening to.
Some have been more right than others. Industrialization and capitalism tend to have negating effects on quality when quantity becomes excessive, and we have had this occur in unprecedented degrees in the post WWII era.

What's your opinion on the effect of industrialization on the industry - and how the industrial boom of the post WWII baby boomer era has affected capitalism and consumerism as a whole.

Look at history, Learn from it. Introspect.
Bro I was studying history, philosophy, back in the 90s when you were listening to the Offspring and cutting your wrist over your rejections, lol.

I do more introspection in 10 minutes than you will if you live 10 lifetimes - and that's no exaggeration.

But it is interesting how this "old people" effect doesn't seem to apply to films. Perhaps thats because we are only just now in the age of convincing CGI and have the capability to produce all these special effects.
What's interesting is that young 32 year old punks who's taste in music doesn't go beyond Lady Gaga - when I knew who 14 year olds in HS who knew more about music, the industry, capitalism's effect on the industry, etc than you do, junior - JK



Why are modern movies still good but modern pop music not?

I think this is an entirely personal view. It can't be objectively measured.


On the other hand there is Sturgeon's law that states that 90% of everything is crud. I'm sure there was plenty of crappy music way back when, it's just that over time we have forgotten about it.
__________________
“The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you.”
― Neil deGrasse Tyson



Registered User
What, I can't be both?