lune7000
Junior Member
@lune7000
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 678
|
Post by lune7000 on Sept 11, 2021 17:16:54 GMT
After finishing Murder at the Gallop I realized that it was one of the last of it's breed in film- the murder mystery movie. This was a genre characterized by a focus on intellectual problem solving by a non-violent sleuth faced with a vast array of possibilities.
Now I am sure some here may point out mystery films that were made after the 60's- people love finding exceptions to a rule- but that is what they are, rare exceptions. Years ago there were dozens upon dozens of Sherlock Holmes, Charlie Chan's Thin Man type films and a good percentage of any studio's line-up had mystery films every year. That genre is pretty much dead today and a few films here and there don't change this.
Which leaves another mystery: who killed the mystery film?
Some suspects:
1. TV- Miss Marple migrated to broadcast decades after Margaret Rutherford laid down her magnifying glass so its a good suspect. But there is a problem: mystery TV shows themselves eventually vanished from the airwaves. And it doesn't explain why crime and sci fi, which also went to TV, continued to do well in film.
2. MTV- somewhat tongue in cheek here- but could the fall of the mystery be collateral damage resulting from the ever shortening attention span of viewers? Mysteries do require patience and memory.
3. Sex and violence: as restrictions on prohibited behaviors were ended, movies turned to the basic human temptations to view psychologically arousing scenes. Mysteries couldn't compete in a blood and porn world.
4. The youth culture: the rising dominance of the 10-30 year old demographic as filmgoers who generally have little interest in quiet intellectual problem solving. Eventually TV producers began to cater to the same group.
Who killed the mystery film?
Any clues or missing suspects?
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Sept 11, 2021 17:31:54 GMT
Television (how many mystery series and police procedurals are there now?) probably played the biggest role.
|
|
|
Post by london777 on Sept 11, 2021 17:46:12 GMT
Salzmank is the expert here.
Not my field, but has class something to do with it? I believe most classic crime mysteries were in middle-class settings. Before WWII the mass cinema-going public were working-class and enjoyed a peek into middle-class lives, both envying them and enjoying a frisson at watching posh people in deep trouble.
Difficult to either envy or sympathize with Agatha Christie characters these days. They all seem like fancy-dress puppets, not real people.
Knives Out (2019) dir: Rian Johnson was a deliberate attempt to revive the genre, and massively hyped as such with slogans like 'When did you last have fun at the movies?'. I would take one of the 1930s originals every time (not that I like them much either).
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Sept 12, 2021 4:50:54 GMT
How many times can you remake Sherlock Holmes ... a lot, obviously, but I suspect society hit a point where it was less interested in dandies solving silver spoon mysteries and more interested in movies that reflected their reality.
|
|
lune7000
Junior Member
@lune7000
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 678
|
Post by lune7000 on Sept 12, 2021 13:33:56 GMT
Television (how many mystery series and police procedurals are there now?) probably played the biggest role. This is what I thought at first- and it may still be true- but the classic mystery show has all but disappeared on TV. Police procedurals rarely involve much real mystery and involve simple cover ups of crimes of passion. The classic mystery had multiple suspects, complicated crimes, and the crime was usually done in a cold, calculated manner. Today's police shows also usually show the crime first, which eliminates the fun of solving the ending. The classic mystery is much closer to being a crossword puzzle than a film noir piece. I do think TV took over film noir. I agree that TV played a role in taking over the mystery movie in the 70's and 80's with Murder She Wrote, etc. But there must be larger forces that explain why it then disappeared from TV in the 90's. I suspect those larger forces are the ultimate culprit and that TV is a decoy suspect. The game is afoot.
|
|
lune7000
Junior Member
@lune7000
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 678
|
Post by lune7000 on Sept 12, 2021 13:42:49 GMT
Salzman is the expert here. Not my field, but has class something to do with it? I believe most classic crime mysteries were in middle-class settings. Before WWII the mass cinema-going public were working-class and enjoyed a peek into middle-class lives, both envying them and enjoying a frisson at watching posh people in deep trouble. Difficult to either envy or sympathize with Agatha Christie characters these days. They all seem like fancy-dress puppets, not real people. Knives Out (2019) dir: Rian Johnson was a deliberate attempt to revive the genre, and massively hyped as such with slogans like 'When did you last have fun at the movies?'. I would take one of the 1930s originals every time (not that I like them much either). The class element of classic mysteries is an angle I hadn't thought of. I agree that these characters were not very sympathetic- but in some ways people like it when a rich person is found out to be a killer. It should be noted that the mystery is a very flexible genre and doesn't require wealthy subjects (although an inheritance is a major motivation for killings). My gut tells me the answer somehow lies in how our minds have been shaped by technology. The decline in mystery movies may be related to the decline in reading books, doing challenging puzzles, going to the library, etc. Older classic films seem "quieter" than today's films.
|
|
|
Post by london777 on Sept 12, 2021 14:12:49 GMT
Salzmank wrote an interesting post about puzzle movies but I cannot find it using Search. Perhaps he or someone else could kindly post a link.
|
|
|
Post by Stammerhead on Sept 12, 2021 15:15:42 GMT
Perhaps they just ran out of possible suspects.
|
|
|
Post by marianne48 on Sept 12, 2021 15:48:43 GMT
1. Television does these so much better. They can present them in multi-episode format or hour-long stories, and/or as a continuing series.Theatrical mystery movies generally have to do a truncated version of a good mystery, so it's not the best format.
2. Theatrical movies of today are basically for kids and the foreign market. Loud, violent, CGI-laden graphics, with lots of explosions and gore, and limited dialogue, are the big moneymakers and probably will be for a long time; crime and sci-fi are suitable genres for this stuff, so they'll continue to be successful. Mystery movies, with limited violence, lots of exposition, and intricate plots that only people of a certain age (12 and over) are able to follow are a tougher sell for the moviegoing crowds. The theatrical market is only looking for a fast blockbuster; TV is more suitable for anything with an interesting script.
|
|
towncaller
Sophomore
@lostcauses
Posts: 174
Likes: 50
|
Post by towncaller on Sept 12, 2021 17:48:40 GMT
The Mystery movie, or even TV show, requires an investment in analytical thinking. Most programs on TV or movies made now don't ask for that, just that you sit back with popcorn or chips and go along with the ride. Many of them were replaced with such reality based programs as FBI Files, Forensic Files and the like. They are enjoyable and still require one to pay attention, often not revealing the criminals until near the end, and using "red herring" suspects. The police procedures are in full swing on these and still make for great viewing as they are factual.
IMO, the best fictional mystery/detective program ever was Perry Mason. Often several suspects, real killer revealed at the end, and great on police/legal procedures. After this comes Columbo and Monk, for me.
|
|
|
Post by london777 on Sept 12, 2021 18:58:47 GMT
Theatrical movies of today are basically for kids and the foreign market. Loud, violent, CGI-laden graphics, with lots of explosions and gore, and limited dialogue, are the big moneymakers and probably will be for a long time; crime and sci-fi are suitable genres for this stuff, so they'll continue to be successful. Mystery movies, with limited violence, lots of exposition, and intricate plots that only people of a certain age (12 and over) are able to follow are a tougher sell for the moviegoing crowds. The theatrical market is only looking for a fast blockbuster; TV is more suitable for anything with an interesting script. All perfectly true, provided you restrict these observations to the USA big studios. Movies for adults are still made in Europe, Russia, China, Japan and South Korea. And of course in the USA by independent makers and directors like Kenneth Lonergan and Todd Haynes.
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Sept 12, 2021 21:32:22 GMT
The mystery movie, that is, the murder puzzle from the Golden Age of detective mystery (generally, the 1920 thru the 1950s), began to change about the same time as the books began to change. In the early 1970s, book critics were starting to write about murder novels that included real character development and commentary on crime in society, grief, and other effects that a death by murder has on people. Both P.D. James and Ross MacDonald got New York Times Book Review front page attention. Most mysteries written today, especially with continuing characters from book to book, respond to that by developing over many volumes the protagonists’ love and family life. Some of the procedurals and the so-called “cozies” pay scant attention to the actual murder plot and the killer is often revealed, not through detection, the following of clues, but by a final attack on the investigator.
Today’s movie crime pictures are rarely mysteries by a Golden Age definition but may exploit violence and action, perhaps showing the good guys as ruthless and the baddies (Michael Mann’s “Heat” [1995] and the more recent but similar in plot, “Den Of Thieves” [2018]). Others take a more nihilistic viewpoint of life, showing crime and violence as a way of life, like “Drive” (2011), a Gritty Urban Crime Drama with car chases down busy streets, brutal fights, and men shot dead on cracked, sunbaked parking lots with weeds growing out of the cracks in the asphalt.
In short, the world began to change in the 1960s and during that time readers’ and movie watchers’ expectations changed with the times. Happily, we can revisit The Thin Man, Miss Marple, The Falcon and a dozen other classic era films and series that we can see again and again and take delight even by knowing the ending.
|
|
|
Post by london777 on Sept 12, 2021 22:02:22 GMT
Happily, we can revisit The Thin Man, Miss Marple, The Falcon and a dozen other classic era films and series that we can see again and again and take delight even by knowing the ending. Great post, Mike, but you can take delight. I will take a powder.
|
|
|
Post by Mulder and Scully on Sept 13, 2021 1:42:01 GMT
Lol another overreaction from the delusional, ignorant pretentious snobs.
They have been making tons of these films in the form of thrillers and cop dramas. Stuff like Inside Man, Prisoners, Gone Baby Gone, Gone Girl, Shutter Island, The Prestige, Jack Reacher etc.
They're still making Sherlock Holmes films. Just recently they released Murder on the Orient Express and Knives Out and their sequels are set to release.
Like political pointed out, these generic murder mysteries are a staple of TV. How many poilce procedurals and mystery series are there? I've lost count.
|
|
|
Post by Doghouse6 on Sept 13, 2021 3:06:58 GMT
They have been making tons of these films in the form of thrillers and cop dramas. Stuff like Inside Man, Prisoners, Gone Baby Gone, Gone Girl, Shutter Island, The Prestige, Jack Reacher etc. They're still making Sherlock Holmes films. Just recently they released Murder on the Orient Express and Knives Out and their sequels are set to release. Like political pointed out, these generic murder mysteries are a staple of TV. How many poilce procedurals and mystery series are there? I've lost count. This would constitute a reasonable enough reply, defended by numerous citations which, obliquely and in a non-confrontational manner, bring the OP's premise into valid question. This, however - - only makes you sound like a troll. I don't like to scold, but the CFB just isn't that kind of place. Unlike some other boards, it's generally remained a congenial oasis of maturity and mutual respect, even when disagreements arise. As far as I can tell, you haven't done much posting on this board, and lune7000 is also a fairly new user, exhibiting sincere senses of interest and enquiry spurring some truly engaging discussions. In short, it's a nice place, engendering loyalty and camaraderie. Kinda like to keep it that way. Can we count on you to help do so?
|
|
|
Post by Mulder and Scully on Sept 13, 2021 3:16:00 GMT
They have been making tons of these films in the form of thrillers and cop dramas. Stuff like Inside Man, Prisoners, Gone Baby Gone, Gone Girl, Shutter Island, The Prestige, Jack Reacher etc. They're still making Sherlock Holmes films. Just recently they released Murder on the Orient Express and Knives Out and their sequels are set to release. Like political pointed out, these generic murder mysteries are a staple of TV. How many poilce procedurals and mystery series are there? I've lost count. This would constitute a reasonable enough reply, defended by numerous citations which, obliquely and in a non-confrontational manner, bring the OP's premise into valid question. This, however - - only makes you sound like a troll. I don't like to scold, but the CFB just isn't that kind of place. Unlike some other boards, it's generally remained a congenial oasis of maturity and mutual respect, even when disagreements arise. As far as I can tell, you haven't done much posting on this board, and lune7000 is also a fairly new user, exhibiting sincere senses of interest and enquiry spurring some truly engaging discussions. In short, it's a nice place, engendering loyalty and camaraderie. Kinda like to keep it that way. Can we count on you to help do so? What the OP said is patently wrong. And I replied accordingly. I've seen way too many of these contrarian posts regarding cinema. Trends in cinema really haven't changed much. Audiences have always enjoyed crowd pleasing movies more than anything else, whether it's the 1950s or the 2000s.
|
|
|
Post by Fox in the Snow on Sept 13, 2021 3:36:35 GMT
This would constitute a reasonable enough reply, defended by numerous citations which, obliquely and in a non-confrontational manner, bring the OP's premise into valid question. This, however - - only makes you sound like a troll. I don't like to scold, but the CFB just isn't that kind of place. Unlike some other boards, it's generally remained a congenial oasis of maturity and mutual respect, even when disagreements arise. As far as I can tell, you haven't done much posting on this board, and lune7000 is also a fairly new user, exhibiting sincere senses of interest and enquiry spurring some truly engaging discussions. In short, it's a nice place, engendering loyalty and camaraderie. Kinda like to keep it that way. Can we count on you to help do so? What the OP said is patently wrong. And I replied accordingly. I've seen way too many of these contrarian posts regarding cinema. Trends in cinema really haven't changed much. Audiences have always enjoyed crowd pleasing movies more than anything else, whether it's the 1950s or the 2000s. Another overreaction from the delusional, ignorant knuckle dragger who equates popularity with quality.
|
|
|
Post by Mulder and Scully on Sept 13, 2021 3:43:43 GMT
What the OP said is patently wrong. And I replied accordingly. I've seen way too many of these contrarian posts regarding cinema. Trends in cinema really haven't changed much. Audiences have always enjoyed crowd pleasing movies more than anything else, whether it's the 1950s or the 2000s. Another overreaction from the delusional, ignorant knuckle dragger who equates popularity with quality. Lol another overreaction from the delusional, ignorant pretentious snob who equates movie quality with objectivety.
|
|
|
Post by Fox in the Snow on Sept 13, 2021 3:52:58 GMT
Another overreaction from the delusional, ignorant knuckle dragger who equates popularity with quality. equates movie quality with objectivety. What does that even mean? If you're implying that I think films can be judged as "objectively" good or bad, you couldn't be further from the truth. Apart from on a few purely technical levels (which even then can be argued as being "accepted norms" as opposed to objectively correct ways to perform the task) I believe appreciation of all art is completely subjective. Hence my point - even is something is massively popular and liked by everyone, bar one person, doesn't make that person's opinion any less valid. I don't equate popularity, awards, or critical acclaim with quality. I just like what I like.
|
|
|
Post by Mulder and Scully on Sept 13, 2021 4:03:47 GMT
equates movie quality with objectivety. What does that even mean? If you're implying that I think films can be judged as "objectively" good or bad, you couldn't be further from the truth. Apart from on a few purely technical levels (which even then can be argued as being "accepted norms" as opposed to objectively correct ways to perform the task) I believe appreciation of all art is completely subjective. Hence my point - even is something is massively popular and liked by everyone, bar one person, doesn't make that person's opinion any less valid. I said you equate quality with objectivety when quality is completely subjective. We the audience gets to decide if a movie is good or bad.
|
|