Winona Ryder worries about film's future and diminished interest in film among her young co-stars

[bttrsondaughter]

Winona Ryder loves working with the young co-stars she’s been given over the last several years, but there is one aspect of them she isn’t exactly a fan of: their diminished love of film.

Read more: https://t.co/YttwqhUVoL pic.twitter.com/wIw8besom3
- TheWrap (@TheWrap) August 28, 2024
• In a recent LA Times profile, Winona Ryder spoke from the heart

Comments

[varioussaints]

I also ask "How long is it?" because modern filmmakers are producing films with unnecessarily longer and longer runtimes and I'm so tired of sitting through something that could have been whittled down in the editing room but wasn't. Silly example, I know, but I rewatched Shrek recently and I could not believe how short it was for how complete it felt (only an hour and a half). I truly miss when a "long movie" was something like Hitchcock's Rebecca (which is just over 2 hours and yet I remember being captivated from start to finish when I was a child) and not Oppenheimer (3 hours? In one sitting? No thank you).

Also, I don't think you have to love filmmaking and films to be an actor, as frustrating as that might be to actors who are deeply passionate about both (like her). I do think it is sad that fewer actors seem to be passionate about filmmaking in general, but there are plenty of other forms of media for those people to be passionate about and work in. I am personally not a huge fan of movies because I don't really enjoy film as an art form, and when it comes to visual media for storytelling I much prefer longer form content with more room to explore characters and storylines (things like limited series and TV shows), so I'm really excited at how many very talented people are turning to other media forms than films for their work. Filmmaking is also a very specific sort of skill and talent niche, and while it would be very sad (even as a non film lover) to see a sustained dip in interest in filmmaking among actors and production members, it's not as if nothing else is happening. Things are ebbing and flowing like they always do.

Lastly, maybe if film studios actually put out stuff that was original and interesting and not the fiftieth Marvel movie or remake in a row we'd see a surge in popularity. I mostly watch reruns of older movies (pre-00s) these days.

[januarysix]

the "this could have been an email" of the film world is "this could have been a 30 minute or 1h episode of (insert tv series)"

[varioussaints]

Yes! I prefer older movies in part because I feel like so many more scriptwriters, directors, and producers back then actually understood the importance of tightly plotted stories, which is what TV dramas have to do to fit within the standard 40 minutes of runtime. On top of that, they have to do it for every single episode (at least in theory--I can't pretend they're all perfect or that I haven't sat through many dud episodes, even for shows I love, but on average they at least try). Films can obviously go longer than that 40 minutes, but when someone asks me to watch a 2-3 hour film with a story that could have easily been told in 1-2 hours I just can't do it. I can certainly pay attention for that long, but why would I want to waste my time and energy like that?

[spellmanian]

Bruh these overpadded movies kill me! Like fix your pacing bitch! It's one thing for a movie to be 3 hours if every scene matters and adds something, but most of the time it doesn't and you can tell they think a longer movie = better one or they weren't able to kill their darlings when writing the script or w/e.

[bulastar]

on that note, I miss Quentin Tarantino's former editor. His movies have gotten so boring since she passed away.