Poll shows foul language curbs movie revenue. Studio execs agree, but filmmakers insist on preserving their 'art'

[rangerrebew]

Poll shows foul language curbs movie revenue
Studio execs agree, but filmmakers insist on preserving their 'art'
Published: 8 hours ago


Hollywood

It seems clear that everyday conversation in America has become coarser in recent years, but it doesn’t mean that the typical Hollywood film laced with language your grandmother would have punished with soap reflects reality or even makes good economic sense, contends a prominent film critic.

In fact, a new Harris poll shows that filmmakers who use the f-word and take the name of Jesus Christ in vain risk losing some of their audience.



“One of the things that annoys audiences most is foul language, and one of the largest audiences is the 115 million to 145 million that go to church,” Baehr told WND.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/08/poll-shows-foul-language-curbs-movie-revenue/#IyvJF062mWtU7mm6.99

[goatprairie]

First off, I'm not a religious person. The wife and I recently finished watching "Dexter" which we enjoyed overall.  But one of the most irritating things I've ever had to sit through was listening to the constant use of the f word.
Especially irritating was hearing it from Dexter's sister who was in every episode. Almost every other word out of her mouth was the f word or variations. Other characters used in frequently as well.
Well let me tell you I've been around a lot of guys (friends, family members, co-workers) who were pretty free with that word. But I've never heard it used as much as in the Dexter series.
If not for the overall thrust of the series and the fact that I liked Michael C. Hall, I would not have watched it past the first few episodes because of the overuse of the f word.
The characters in the series used the f word far more than real people actually use, and they certainly don't talk that way in professional situations like they did in Dexter.

[Applewood]

I'm no prude.  I have to admit I've used my share of salty language too, particularly when I get mad about something.  It's a bad habit, and I'm working on controlling it. 

Anyway, the occasional use of the F bomb or sex scenes in movies doesn't bother me.  But it seems that the arts are using these things more and more to hide the fact that the movie or TV show is poorly done-- bad script, bad acting or whatever.   I've seen my share of these supposedly awesome shows and flicks, and frankly, I'm tired of them.  Guess that's why I would rather stay home, put on a DVD of an old show or movie, or watch on Netflix or some other service.  Casablanca or The Dick Van Dyke Show didn't need the F bomb or sex scenes to be entertaining.   

[roamer_1]

I'm no prude.  I have to admit I've used my share of salty language too, particularly when I get mad about something.  It's a bad habit, and I'm working on controlling it. 

Every guy I know swore like a muleskinner when not in pleasant company (women and children)... And that sort of language and every sort of debauchery was always available on the other side of the tracks.

It really is too bad that it didn't remain there.

[goatprairie]

I'm no prude.  I have to admit I've used my share of salty language too, particularly when I get mad about something.  It's a bad habit, and I'm working on controlling it. 

Anyway, the occasional use of the F bomb or sex scenes in movies doesn't bother me.  But it seems that the arts are using these things more and more to hide the fact that the movie or TV show is poorly done-- bad script, bad acting or whatever.   I've seen my share of these supposedly awesome shows and flicks, and frankly, I'm tired of them.  Guess that's why I would rather stay home, put on a DVD of an old show or movie, or watch on Netflix or some other service.  Casablanca or The Dick Van Dyke Show didn't need the F bomb or sex scenes to be entertaining.

Yes, I've seen the Sopranos, and I can understand those sorts of characters using pretty bad language.  But even in the Sopranos they didn't use the f word as promiscuously as in Dexter. 

[Cripplecreek]

 

Up to them.

[bigheadfred]

It is the constant onslaught I can't stand.

You have stories like this:

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,275076.0.html


9/11 display relocated due to 'triggering, harmful' messages

?

I don't watch new tv shows or movies anymore. Seems like the extreme violence and language is all it is. I watch documentaries on Youtube.

I swear like a sailor at times. Mostly at work.

I went grocery shopping yesterday with the wife. Here is this young female in her yoga pants, with kids, blocking aisle traffic. On her cell phone yelling at one of her kids to STFU can't you see I'm on the effing phone?

My forum participation is down because I can't take immersing myself in the constant crap.

It is weird to me these people need their safe places but in the same breath extol violence, immorality, abortion, etc.

I don't want anything to do with them or that.

[anubias]

We watched "Sausage Man" Saturday night.  If any movie is an example of "foul language", it would be that one. 

[Cripplecreek]

Every guy I know swore like a muleskinner when not in pleasant company (women and children)... And that sort of language and every sort of debauchery was always available on the other side of the tracks.

It really is too bad that it didn't remain there.

Frankly the whole American film industry is sub par and much of that is because the "talent" itself is sub par. The great modern actors are all British. As far as I can tell most American actors are incapable of the range commonly displayed by British actors.

There are some fine American actors who are spectacular if given the right role and script like Denzel Washington or John Malkovich but for the most part, American actors are simply components who play the same character. If you want an angry loud black man you snap Samuel L Jackson into place. If you want a younger angry loud black man you snap Ice T into the role. If you take British actor Gary Oldman into any role he will make it his own and excel from Zorg  in the 5th element to Winston Churchill in his most recent film.

There are some exceptions. Robin Williams was great because he could play the inane goofy Mork or the psychotic stalking serial killer. Bryan Cranston is another actor with range.

[NavyCanDo]

Dont mind a few very natural words written in to the script, but some movies because they throw the F-bomb into every sentence I will not watch. The latest being Fist Fight. Turned it off 30 min into it ànd called the Cable outfit to cancel the pay per view charge.

[Sanguine]

Frankly the whole American film industry is sub par and much of that is because the "talent" itself is sub par. The great modern actors are all British. As far as I can tell most American actors are incapable of the range commonly displayed by British actors.

There are some fine American actors who are spectacular if given the right role and script like Denzel Washington or John Malkovich but for the most part, American actors are simply components who play the same character. If you want an angry loud black man you snap Samuel L Jackson into place. If you want a younger angry loud black man you snap Ice T into the role. If you take British actor Gary Oldman into any role he will make it his own and excel from Zorg  in the 5th element to Winston Churchill in his most recent film.

There are some exceptions. Robin Williams was great because he could play the inane goofy Mork or the psychotic stalking serial killer. Bryan Cranston is another actor with range.

Yes, @sneakypete was talking about that the other day.  British actors look like real people, not Barbie and Ken dolls, and are able to act.  It's not about them - it's about the role. 

This story shows very clearly what absolute narcissists Hollywood churns out.  They know people don't like the cursing and don't want to pay for it, but they're going to do it anyway because it's all about them. 

[Cyber Liberty]

I have never been a big "movie-goer," but I completely stopped doing Theatres years ago when everything I'd care to watch became available in my own home, sans commercials which ruin the continuity of a good plot.  Besides, sticky floors gross me out and tix/concessions are too damned expensive.

I have seen movies that were gratuitous with the language, and didn't care for them because I see it as a cheap substitute for good writing.  Same for other passive entertainment.  Saw a guy who was famous for a "father role" in a family-type sitcom who was trying to do stand-up comedy, but his language was filthy, and I think he was doing it because he saw it as a way to break his old character, and it fell flat.

I once had the opportunity to drive Pat Paulsen around town, and we got to chat about this stuff.  I asked him about all the time he put into the Smothers Brothers, and he said it was the greatest gig he ever had because it was work.  The takeaway for me was, "If you can't do good humor with a G-rating, then you are in the wrong line of work because you're not any good at it."  Then I asked him if he had any suggestions for the new guys trying to get a break, he said "F*** 'em.  I paid the dues, so can they."  I decided I wasn't really any good at it.   

[roamer_1]

I have never been a big "movie-goer," but I completely stopped doing Theatres years ago when everything I'd care to watch became available in my own home, sans commercials which ruins the continuity of a good plot.  Besides, sticky floors gross me out and tix/concessions are too damned expensive.

Never was much for em either... Though I did burn a few bucks and signed up for Netflix... I dont think I will renew it... I haven't used it enough to justify the expense. I tend toward youtube, and watch channels there that suit my fancy. Real people doing real things, and without the Ken and Barbie hollywood thing.

I wouldn't go back to that for nothing. Last movie I actually went to was Avatar, and before that, I can;t even remember... Maybe Fast and Furious

[Cyber Liberty]

Never was much for em either... Though I did burn a few bucks and signed up for Netflix... I dont think I will renew it... I haven't used it enough to justify the expense. I tend toward youtube, and watch channels there that suit my fancy. Real people doing real things, and without the Ken and Barbie hollywood thing.

I wouldn't go back to that for nothing. Last movie I actually went to was Avatar, and before that, I can;t even remember... Maybe Fast and Furious

Yeah, I dumped Netfix, too.  They simply didn't carry the older stuff I liked.  I have Amazon, but really it's just an adjunct to my Prime account, which more than pays for itself with all the free shipping I get.  Plus, I kick a bit over to MikeRoweWorks with my Amazon Smile donations.  I like what he does to get kids into good, solid Vocational training.

[Applewood]

@Cripplecreek

One actor who recently surprised me was John Lithgow as Winston Churchill in the Netflix series, The Crown. The Crown is populated with British actors -- most I never heard of, but all very good.  When the character of Winston Churchill appeared for the first time, I thought, "I don't know this actor, but he almost looks like John Lithgow."  Well, he didn't almost look like him; it was him.  Lithgow's performance went beyond the jowls, the gruff voice, demeanor and mannerisms.  Lithgow WAS Churchill.  I was so accustomed to seeing Lithgow in comedies and lighter fare.  His performance in The Crown was a pleasant surprise.

[Cripplecreek]

@Cripplecreek

One actor who recently surprised me was John Lithgow as Winston Churchill in the Netflix series, The Crown. The Crown is populated with British actors -- most I never heard of, but all very good.  When the character of Winston Churchill appeared for the first time, I thought, "I don't know this actor, but he almost looks like John Lithgow."  Well, he didn't almost look like him; it was him.  Lithgow's performance went beyond the jowls, the gruff voice, demeanor and mannerisms.  Lithgow WAS Churchill.  I was so accustomed to seeing Lithgow in comedies and lighter fare.  His performance in The Crown was a pleasant surprise.

[Cyber Liberty]

@Cripplecreek

One actor who recently surprised me was John Lithgow as Winston Churchill in the Netflix series, The Crown. The Crown is populated with British actors -- most I never heard of, but all very good.  When the character of Winston Churchill appeared for the first time, I thought, "I don't know this actor, but he almost looks like John Lithgow."  Well, he didn't almost look like him; it was him.  Lithgow's performance went beyond the jowls, the gruff voice, demeanor and mannerisms.  Lithgow WAS Churchill.  I was so accustomed to seeing Lithgow in comedies and lighter fare.  His performance in The Crown was a pleasant surprise.

Lithgow was a highly underrated actor, IMHO.

[Cripplecreek]

Looks good BTW


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnnEH7JimwY

[goatprairie]

Looks good BTW


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnnEH7JimwY

This movie got slammed by a number of historians who heavily criticized the falsifying of Churchill's real statements and actions concerning D-Day and a number of other things related to the war.
For one thing, they have Churchill opposing the D-Day landings when in reality he was a huge proponent of it.  If they can't get simple facts right, I don't want to watch it.

[Cripplecreek]

This movie got slammed by a number of historians who heavily criticized the falsifying of Churchill's real statements and actions concerning D-Day and a number of other things related to the war.
For one thing, they have Churchill opposing the D-Day landings when in reality he was a huge proponent of it.  If they can't get simple facts right, I don't want to watch it.

I ignore critics.

[bigheadfred]

I ignore critics.

 

[Cyber Liberty]

I ignore critics.

Critics are like public-opinion polls.   

[Cripplecreek]

Critics are like public-opinion polls.   

Movie critics and political pundits are pretty much the same animal.

[Sanguine]

Yes, but if they got their facts wrong, it doesn't matter how good the acting was.

[Cyber Liberty]

Movie critics and political pundits are pretty much the same animal.

Yes they are.  Plenty of working the mouths without spending any actual time on the field of play.  Music critics are the same way.  Sports critics are not so bad, there are a lot of good ones who've spent a whole career out in the field before becoming critics.