No movies are not worse now then they used to be.

People have always somewhat felt like the present quality of Cinema is the worst it's ever been, exactly how prominent that discourse is does have it's spikes and we seem to be in one right now.  "Justified" by how financially poorly the film industry did in 2023.  People are going to theaters less because of the lingering impact of the pandemic and normalization of streaming, I don't think it'll be permanent, I think it's gonna go up and down, but it definitely does not speak to the quality of 2023 films.

I even saw the title of a YouTube video I didn't watch explicitly saying "No you aren't just nostalgia blinded", I refused to even dignify such a claim with views.  I guarantee you in 20 years people will be Nostalgic for Phase 4 MCU and DCEU films and Live Action Disney remakes.

The current Golden Age people look back on is the 90s and early 2000s, but I unlike most my age don't just remember the movies from that time, I also remember the internet discourse around them, and it was essentially no different then now, only the details of the theories on why things got worse might have changed.

To an extent what percentage of movies are considered to be good or bad isn't actually viewed as being any different.  It's just that the "forgettable" movies of the past are forgotten and the old "bad" movies still considered bad people talk about in ways that emphasize their charm, how they're a product of their time made in ways you won't see today, or from a respected director who's fanboys refuse to see no value in even their "worst" films.  While everything today is just "soulless" focus tested corporate mandated garbage. 

And people who insist on maintaining that the reevaluated films shouldn't be reevaluated blame it on Meme Culture, on people watching bad movies ironically and Memeing themselves into liking them.  And that issue may tie into a potentially entirely different thesis, I may write something about the concept of "So Bad it's good".  With movies like the Star Wars Prequels it is well documented that the people who like them always existed, the GenX haters just lost their control of internet discourse.

However an interesting case study here is The Mummy film from 1999, the people hyping it up as an unironically great example of the kind of 90s/early 2000s film they don't make them like anymore seemingly don't even know there ever was an Internet Echo chamber that considered it a very bad movie and an example of how 90s and early 2000s attempts to "rip off" Indiana Jones pale in comparison to the real thing.  My memory of the era is that people who liked the movies existed but GenXers who hated it for not being a pure Horror Movie also largely dominated Internet Group think.

There are plenty of films, even Hollywood Genre films in 2023 that are not all that controversial to consider good, the Super Mario Bros movie, Across The Spiderverse, Dungeons and Dragons Honor Among Thieves, each considered perfectly fun movies that at the very least succeeded at what they were going for.

Now as far as the movies that I liked just fine but that enough Internet Group think makes them be perceived as failures, no thesis about why current movies are so bad fits.  Peter Coffin's "Wookieepeditis" thesis doesn't explain The Flash which made Canon more flexible then ever.  And culture war stuff influencing both films and internet discourse about them isn't new either, it's just the exact terminology that has changed.  

On the subject of Indiana Jones anyone who thinks Kingdom of The Crystal Skull is worth redeeming but not Dial of Destiny has no consistent logic, both are exactly parallel in how much they either follow or break from the formulae of the 80s Indiana Jones movies.

I'm also going to just assume Anime films aren't being considered in this Normie discourse since it's technically a completely different Industry.  But at any rate we got the best Detective Conan film in a decade, Maboroshi which I was not expecting but was awesome, a new Psycho-Pass movie that was great though I had issues with it's message which stem from those I always had even of the original show.  And a new Miyazaki film which I haven't seen and probably won't but most people seem to think lived up to the expectations.  I will see the Sailor Moon Cosmos films when they are Dubbed and I'm fairly confident they will be great.

There is a common claim some people make that children will enjoy everything they see and thus potentially be Nostalgic for it as Adults so the existence of very young people who liked something can never be a vindication.  Well I hated Willy Wonka and The Chocolate Factory as a kid, I have Anti-Nostalgia for that movie.  And it's not just that, even at my youngest there is plenty of stuff meant for my age demographic I saw and didn't enjoy.

My firm position is that if anyone liked something no matter how much I don't like it that vindicates it as being Good in some way, even children, especially children if they were even partially the target audience.  

The problem with Nostalgia, the thing that can make it Toxic, isn't the positive feelings it provides you for your happy memories of the past, that is objectively what's good about it.  It's when it causes you to irrationally hate the present by seeing every difference as only for the worse.  So what bugs me now is people ironically using their critiques of Nostalgia to justify saying movies are worse now because Hollywood can't make anything that isn't pandering to some generation's Nostalgia.

New IPs are being created for future generations to be nostalgic for, it just may less often be movies and Triple A Video Games.  And the truth is I think these people are massively underestimating how much of what they're Nostalgic for was also in part made to appeal to the Nostalgia of their Parents or Grandparents or even older siblings.  Millennials have Nostalgia for Tiny Toons and Muppet Babies and Adult Swim Cartoons which were made by GenXers to parody cartoons they were Nostalgic for, and Degrassi's reboot which seems to have overshadowed the original.  Hell I have a lot of Nostalgia for watching Nick at Night reruns of Happy Days.

Raiders of The Lost Ark as a religious movie

It can be easy to write off all the Indiana Jones movies as films where the sacred relic of the film is just a magical McGuffin and not at all about the religion the relic is supposed to be sacred to.

But when comparing Raiders to the others, it is apparent how the Jewish director of these films has far more actual reverence for the Ark's God then any others.  And this may be a factor in why this movie is still considered the best of the series.

Spielberg is also a fan of Cecil B Demille's The Ten Commandments, I've seen him refer to the parting of the Red Sea as the greatest special effect in film history.  Before it had it's own sequels I think Raiders was meant to kind of work as in continuity with that movie, it's approach to depicting the presence of YHWH is kind of similar.

What's also interesting is how our protagonist is the only character in the film who has no belief in the supernatural (this becomes a continuity issue later with Temple of Doom being supposedly a Prequel).  Even the villains believe in it in some capacity, the Nazis have no respect for the actual religion the Ark represents but still expect it to be a super-weapon for them.

This makes Raiders oddly similar to a lot of Evangelical Christian films, like the turn of the century End Times movies I've seen way too many of.  They tend to be movies where the main protagonist is a non believer for  most of the narrative, but still nominally a good guy even in this Fundamentalist universe because they don't approve of the totalitarian dictatorship.

The difference is Indiana Jones at the end does not say the sinner's prayer or repent of any sins or dedicate his life to YHWH, he doesn't even really show any actual Faith, he still doesn't believe until he actually sees stuff happening.  He and Marion are spared the Wrath of YWHW because they're not guilty of the sins of the Nazis.

My soterology is no longer the same as most American Evangelicals.  I believe Salvation is ultimately universal, and what Judgments God does carry out are not something you can get out of simply by believing in Him, in fact in many cases His Judgment will be harshest on Believers.

So Raiders of The Lost Ark manages to be quite unintentionally what these Evangelical non-believer finds God narratives should be.

My personal favorite Indiana Jones movie is Kingdom of The Crystal Skull

Saying my "personal favorite" is not the same as saying the best.  The best is probably still Raiders of The Lost Ark.

It being my favorite may just be because it's closer to being made for my generation, same year as my absolute favorite movie The Dark Knight.  And I'm also a well known Star Wars Prequel fan.

But a major factor is that in general it feels like the only Indy film that actually researched it's subject matter.  It's fringe history research mainstream historians and archeologists don't take seriously, but the 80s Indy films didn't even really do that.

Maybe it's simply because in 2008 with the Internet it was harder to get away with slacking on the research.  But the fact is if you were looking into real theories about the Crystal Skulls and related topics during the build up to the film, that effort felt like it paid off.  And it's the only movie where the character of Indiana Jones actually seemed to me like a well read educated collage professor and not just a dumb action hero.

For The Ark they just went with the most boring theory, Shishak took it, Shishak is assumed to be the 22nd Dynasty Shoshenq so it winds up in the Egyptian city with a Libyan name, Tanis.  Only Lucas and Spielberg could have made such a great film out of such boring starting premises.

Temple of Doom isn't based on a real mystery at all, other then Colonial fear mongering about Thugges (who probably didn't even really exist).  It's the worst Indy film for a multitude of reasons.  In fact the absolute worst film either Lucas or Spielberg were ever involved with.

But it's with The Last Crusade that this issue really caused disappointment for the 2017 version of me.

The Last Crusade was once my personal favorite Indy film, way back before KOTCS existed, and before I was very informed on actual Grail Lore.  But now I've written on that topic extensively on this blog and elsewhere.

So the other day I watched The Last Crusade again, and It's still a very good movie, very fun, it stands the test of time in all of those ways.  But it's use of Grail Lore feels like such a major missed opportunity.

The key exposition scene early on name drops Arthur, but the history for the Grail it goes on to build actually totally precludes Arthur or any contemporaries of his from having anything to do with it.  Instead we get this completely made up story of Three Brothers.

It's such a missed opportunity because I feel they could easily have used real Grail Lore in a way that kept the same basic sequence of events for the main 1938 narrative of the film.

The valley of the Crescent Moon, filmed at Petra, but implied to be located in or near the Republic of Hatay, 1938-1939 (that part of modern Turkey that looks like it should be part of Syria), they could have called Sarras.  And instead of this lame Three Brothers story that Knight guarding the Grail could have been Sir Galahad.  And then the Tomb with the Shield and the other returning Knight could have been Sir Bors and Perceval.  Then you'd have a fun modern Adventure film that also works as a sequel to Medieval Grail Romances.

It doesn't make the movie bad, but it makes me feel like they could have done better.  KOTCS feels like the best version of that story they could have told on every level.