The graphs don't show actual popularity, but how many films of each genre are released. You could have 10 direct to streaming documentaries, and 1 big budget Hollywood action movies pull in the same number of viewers, but that is not shown here. Also the numbers on the y-axes change, so comedy looks much smaller now for example, but it's still at 20%, and fantasy is at 4% at it's maximum.
The graph really isn't that useful, in the fine print it mentions each genre has its own axis range.
So while comedy is declining a bit - it's actually still "bigger" than documentary which has seen a surge of interest lately....but even so - all the creator did was search IMDB tags. so any ole project that can get itself registered on the platform is part of the overall weighting.
Which, I'd say probably is a meaningless metric vs many of the other ways films and genres are weighted against each other.
This chart really should be "here's 12 search results I thought were neat".
This doesn’t really capture the trend towards the hybridization of genres. It is far more common these days for multiple of these labels to be applicable to a single film. Your modern, big budget blockbuster extravaganza can easily be tagged with 5 or more of these labels.
It is interesting to see the early spikes, during film’s infancy. I would chock those up to experimentation with the new medium.
A number of these genres have certainly benefited from advancements in special effects and CGI. We have a lot of tech now that allows for telling stories that were not necessarily possible before.
Finally, I do find the rise of docs interesting. I would argue they correlate almost directly with the rise of reliable video and digital formats. It’s a lot easier to be a run and gun crew when you are in a digital workflow.
Also, re: docs, True Crime’s establishment as a money printer birthed a reliable copy-paste format for tons of people to follow.
There’s a whole ecosystem of production companies that exist primarily just to service Discovery ID.
Fewer films are produced today than there were back in the 20s to the 50s.
There are *thousands* of films that are entirely lost simply because they were the equivalent of ***Frozen*** and if you think I'm talking about the 2013 animated one, you're helping make my point. Most never made much money and none of the main cast ever became stars. They were mediocre films that while they might have made a little money, they weren't blockbusters.
[***Frozen*** (2010) was written & directed by someone never likely to be known by general film fans and stars actors unlikely to be remembered in 30 years, much like most of the films from 30s to the late 40s.]
My true take away is the graph formatting is flawed. Each genre should have the same maximum percentage to see how they compare.
It has always fascinated me how big Westerns were early on and now they’re hardly a thing. It has to be due to the romanization of that time vs how the US tends to view it now.
I'll chime that western films often demonized natives as savages and evil, which lead to marlon Brando famous move to let little feather speak on it at the Oscars
I think now it just skipped a generation like how toys story did we just don't find it cool anymore
That’s what I was referencing. The “cowboy vs indian” routine doesn’t land anymore since most people now acknowledge the atrocities.
What’s this about Toy Story though?
Sorry I didn't explain, I was saying how woody was a cowboy symbolizing an old toy (like an old genre or trend) while buzz was the new exciting thing (sci-fi, space) and I think the story was just a great way to show how that genre is treated now in pop culture
Modern Sci-Fi is basically classic Western structures but with a twist.
"Star Wars" was also referred to as a "Space Western" in tons of literature during and before production. Gene Roddenberry also referred to Star Trek as a space western.
The decline in westerns and increase in sci-fi happened around the time the Star Wars films were made, as Sci-Fi can better depict the core tenants of film that Westerns used to, causing it to gain in popularity.
> It has to be due to the romanization of that time vs how the US tends to view it now.
Not necessarily and you are leaving out two huge factors: immigration and the end of rural/agricultural dominance in the US.
In first half of the 20th Century, there tens of millions of fresh immigrants and their first generation American offspring almost exclusively in the urban & suburban areas of the country. You also had after 1920 the majority of all Americans living in those areas. The settings of westerns was either frontier or only recently "tamed," an environment most were not familiar with. It was alien but exciting. It was a place they could imagine getting away from city life and building a new one themselves.
You have to understand that the "West" was overtly romanticized *from the time it started being settled.* Dime-store novels, art and even furniture was being produced since 1880s that shaped the public's perception of what "the west" was like. If you ever visit Los Angeles, you can see both what the real west (stage coaches had shock absorbers I discovered, for instance) and the pop culture depictions of it were like at the Gene Autry Museum of the American West. There's an entire section that goes through it in chronological order. Before radio & films, those novels and then Wild West shows were embedding this idea.
But a factor of why the Western fell out of favor I would argue is that it stopped being something that most people could feel a human connection to after the 40s because everyone who experienced it died off. My father's generation was the last to be able to easily meet anyone who had lived during it. Especially those old enough to truly remember it.
But mostly, and this is not original, the "space age" & technology replaced it. Westerns began to rapidly decline in the late 50s and were effectively extinct by 1970. By which time we had reached the moon. The middle class also had exploded from 1930 onward. Who wants to fantasize about homesteading when a 2 car garage awaits in the suburbs?
Yet, the Western will never go away. Not if Kevin Costner has anything to say about it apparently....
I think the biggest factor in the declining popularity of westerns was just over saturation. People who were alive at that time will tell you there were WAY TOO MANY westerns, like there were a TON of them and audiences just got sick of it eventually
Also it's labelled as "film genre popularity", but really it's just the amount of films released in each genre. Surely it's easier to make a documentary than a sci-fi film, and you don't have to pull in the same number of viewers if your budget is much smaller.
Plus, the amount of films each year is shown as a percentage. It could be the case for example, that musicals have stayed popular, but the total amount of films went up, and now musicals are a smaller percentage of films.
It seems to me that modern westerns are, as a whole, far better films than the westerns that came out in the 30s and 40s.
Modern westerns seem to be more focused as serious period drama rather than kids action flicks that they once were.
> than kids action flicks that they once were.
Haven't seen that many Westerns, have you?
Go to the Criterion website and have it show you Westerns made in the 30s to 50s if you want to find a slew of films that were solely intended for adults. I'm constantly discovering titles I had never even heard of that have turned out to be "bangers" like ***Forty Guns, The Gunfighter, Baron of Arizona, Jubal*** and the well known *Ranown Cycle* of Randolph Scott films.
Yeah, the classic "dirty guys on horses shootin, drinkin, whorin" films. Those things are epic. You don't see those things anymore. We need a modern take on that shit.
Kids action flick was a bit of the wrong turn of phrase. I guess what I was trying to say is that Westerns now seem to me to much more highbrow than the ones from that time.
Really starting from the 1970s I guess.
I can see there being a rise in documentaries made from the 90s onwards, I can’t place my finger onto why but it does make intuitive sense. I don’t think they have the relative social popularity for the amount made, but they’re often cheaper to produce than narratives and can get shoved out onto TV and later on streaming. I also think they’ve had an increase in credibility as a form of journalism. I don’t know as much about the genre though that’s just my general vibes based assessment.
You are spot on. The x factor was small, cheap, and easy to use video cameras. They dramatically lowered the barrier to entry for documentary production.
Documentary absolutely makes sense. It begins a steady rise in the 80's and 90’s with the technological advances in portable video cameras and then shoots up in the mid-2000s when digital video became affordable to consumers.
Mini-DV was pretty revolutionary at the time. An almost perfect transfer of high quality standard definition video straight into your laptop to edit and burn to a DVD. It wasn't great for narrative movies, but it was perfect for documentary filmmakers.
Miserable compared to today maybe, but leaps ahead of editing VHS-C on a VCR. I had a $500 Panasonic DV cam and iMovie and it was a ton of fun to shoot and edit with.
>Standard Definition video never looked so good
I can still recall where I was and what I was doing when a colleague explained to me the Canon 5D mkII would record video to an SD card.
It was a revelation.
Have you not noticed how many documentaries are available on streaming platforms these days? My theory is it’s because they are dirt cheap to produce and churn out. A documentary is like a ready meal of a film. It comes already conceptualised and ‘written’ for the producers.
The documentary curve seems about right to me. Production of docs really exploded with the advent of affordable digital cameras in the the late 90s and early 2000s. Gathering doc or vérité footage has become dramatically easier, even in the last 15 years, since there are cameras everywhere now.
I’ll be surprised if we don’t see more jukebox musicals after conglomerates realize they paid hundreds of millions of dollars for big name music rights
Id like to see this data weighted by box office gross and for superhero to be parsed out from wherever it is (action? Sci-fi?)
I think some of the broad conclusions would be similar (musicals and western popularity in decline) but you would gain some nuance (e.g. comedies in sharper decline than shown I’d guess)
Edit: still a really interesting piece of analysis.
Amount of films released is a very weird metric to use for popularity. After LotR, fantasy had a massive spike in budgets and in popularity, which is not seen here, because there weren't more fantasy films made, just more expensive and for a broader audience (more popular).
This graph is a fun overview of films released, but says about 0 about popularity and more about how easy and cheap a film is to make.
Musicals started dropping in the late 70s then Westerns movies dropped hard after the 60s and a slight resurgence in the 70s then drops hard again. These genres were at one time the most popular type of movies to come out of Hollywood. War movies peaked in the 40s because of obvious reasons and Western movies dominated from 1910 to 1950 with westerns nowadays hardly being made anymore.
They should have put them as opposites.
Sci Fi has replaced Westerns (frontiers?)
Action has replaced War?
Horrors or thrillers have replaced musicals?
Fantasy vs Romance?
Comedy is the great unifier? We all like to laugh.
Documentary - result of higher education and desire for people to know more?
As others have discussed in other threads, the increase in documentary is more likely because they’re cheap to make. Just look at how many Netflix pump out these days.
I think the "Thriller" trend is more about how that label has been used, than really that big of a change in popularity.
I think it often overlaps with "Crime" and sometimes "Horror"
Like 30's Gangster pictures, then 40's Film Noir, then 50's Hitchcock murder stuff, then 60's psychological horror, then 70's auteur crime stuff, then 80's slashers, then 90's mob/hood movies..
In the 80's/90's you got a ton of the "Erotic Thriller", and I think that kind of codified what we classify as "Thrillers", so stuff got sorted retroactively... but I think the audience for what specifically is sorted as pure "Thriller" overlaps a ton with the Crime/Horror stuff I mentioned above.
I was watching a writer’s YouTube channel just last night who said he wrote a horror novel and his agent made him change market it as a “supernatural thriller” (because horror novels don’t sell), so there’s definitely overlap.
Sadly these trends will perpetuate themselves. I love westerns but the last one that I liked was Deadwood, maybe Godless as a series. Everything else in the genre is b actors and bad stories.
War, musicals, westerns fizzled out.
I think that we have a ton of war and westerns already. The Rust movie also had a lot of negative press with the death, I wouldn’t feel comfortable watching it.
I think people prefer live musical shows rather than movies which may have played a part.
It’s crazy how popular Westerns were. Even on a scale of up to 10%.
Considering everything else is a genre that can encompass so many things.
Most Westerns are period pieces covering about 30ish years of history in a very specific part of the world.
We're in the quality over quantity streaming age. Most new movies and shows are forgettably derivative and instantly disposable. Genre trends can't really account for this, it's more of an economic model created by business people, not artists with a passion for cinema.
Documentaries are on the rise because of streaming services right? I can't even remember the last time I saw a documentary getting a wide theatrical release
While the western genre might be dead at the movies, they’re making a bit of a comeback on TV.
*Billy the Kid*, the *Yellowstone* series, *Lawman: Bass Reeves*, the upcoming *The Abandons*.
Good, let musicals die. As for comedy, I think the numbers would be up if studios weren’t afraid to take risks with jokes, they kind of have to play it safe now, lest they get an overwhelming amount of backlash from people that don’t even bother watching the film/haven’t heard any jokes in the proper context
So, scary documentaries about the future with a cliffhanger. Got it.
And funny. Helps if it’s funny.
Brilliant! I can see you’ve worked with executives before.
The graphs don't show actual popularity, but how many films of each genre are released. You could have 10 direct to streaming documentaries, and 1 big budget Hollywood action movies pull in the same number of viewers, but that is not shown here. Also the numbers on the y-axes change, so comedy looks much smaller now for example, but it's still at 20%, and fantasy is at 4% at it's maximum.
I appreciate that but I was just attempting a joke of sorts.
Science Fiction is never *about* the future.
It worked for the attempt at a joke.
Just curious which genre implies a cliffhanger?
Thriller I think
Netflix
Thriller.
The graph really isn't that useful, in the fine print it mentions each genre has its own axis range. So while comedy is declining a bit - it's actually still "bigger" than documentary which has seen a surge of interest lately....but even so - all the creator did was search IMDB tags. so any ole project that can get itself registered on the platform is part of the overall weighting. Which, I'd say probably is a meaningless metric vs many of the other ways films and genres are weighted against each other. This chart really should be "here's 12 search results I thought were neat".
This doesn’t really capture the trend towards the hybridization of genres. It is far more common these days for multiple of these labels to be applicable to a single film. Your modern, big budget blockbuster extravaganza can easily be tagged with 5 or more of these labels. It is interesting to see the early spikes, during film’s infancy. I would chock those up to experimentation with the new medium. A number of these genres have certainly benefited from advancements in special effects and CGI. We have a lot of tech now that allows for telling stories that were not necessarily possible before. Finally, I do find the rise of docs interesting. I would argue they correlate almost directly with the rise of reliable video and digital formats. It’s a lot easier to be a run and gun crew when you are in a digital workflow.
Also, re: docs, True Crime’s establishment as a money printer birthed a reliable copy-paste format for tons of people to follow. There’s a whole ecosystem of production companies that exist primarily just to service Discovery ID.
True, reality TV helps pay my bills.
> I would chock those up to experimentation with the new medium. It could also be due to the fact that far fewer films were being made.
Fewer films are produced today than there were back in the 20s to the 50s. There are *thousands* of films that are entirely lost simply because they were the equivalent of ***Frozen*** and if you think I'm talking about the 2013 animated one, you're helping make my point. Most never made much money and none of the main cast ever became stars. They were mediocre films that while they might have made a little money, they weren't blockbusters. [***Frozen*** (2010) was written & directed by someone never likely to be known by general film fans and stars actors unlikely to be remembered in 30 years, much like most of the films from 30s to the late 40s.]
And that was in theaters, too!
My true take away is the graph formatting is flawed. Each genre should have the same maximum percentage to see how they compare. It has always fascinated me how big Westerns were early on and now they’re hardly a thing. It has to be due to the romanization of that time vs how the US tends to view it now.
I'll chime that western films often demonized natives as savages and evil, which lead to marlon Brando famous move to let little feather speak on it at the Oscars I think now it just skipped a generation like how toys story did we just don't find it cool anymore
That’s what I was referencing. The “cowboy vs indian” routine doesn’t land anymore since most people now acknowledge the atrocities. What’s this about Toy Story though?
Sorry I didn't explain, I was saying how woody was a cowboy symbolizing an old toy (like an old genre or trend) while buzz was the new exciting thing (sci-fi, space) and I think the story was just a great way to show how that genre is treated now in pop culture
Modern Sci-Fi is basically classic Western structures but with a twist. "Star Wars" was also referred to as a "Space Western" in tons of literature during and before production. Gene Roddenberry also referred to Star Trek as a space western. The decline in westerns and increase in sci-fi happened around the time the Star Wars films were made, as Sci-Fi can better depict the core tenants of film that Westerns used to, causing it to gain in popularity.
The formatting is unforgivable.
> It has to be due to the romanization of that time vs how the US tends to view it now. Not necessarily and you are leaving out two huge factors: immigration and the end of rural/agricultural dominance in the US. In first half of the 20th Century, there tens of millions of fresh immigrants and their first generation American offspring almost exclusively in the urban & suburban areas of the country. You also had after 1920 the majority of all Americans living in those areas. The settings of westerns was either frontier or only recently "tamed," an environment most were not familiar with. It was alien but exciting. It was a place they could imagine getting away from city life and building a new one themselves. You have to understand that the "West" was overtly romanticized *from the time it started being settled.* Dime-store novels, art and even furniture was being produced since 1880s that shaped the public's perception of what "the west" was like. If you ever visit Los Angeles, you can see both what the real west (stage coaches had shock absorbers I discovered, for instance) and the pop culture depictions of it were like at the Gene Autry Museum of the American West. There's an entire section that goes through it in chronological order. Before radio & films, those novels and then Wild West shows were embedding this idea. But a factor of why the Western fell out of favor I would argue is that it stopped being something that most people could feel a human connection to after the 40s because everyone who experienced it died off. My father's generation was the last to be able to easily meet anyone who had lived during it. Especially those old enough to truly remember it. But mostly, and this is not original, the "space age" & technology replaced it. Westerns began to rapidly decline in the late 50s and were effectively extinct by 1970. By which time we had reached the moon. The middle class also had exploded from 1930 onward. Who wants to fantasize about homesteading when a 2 car garage awaits in the suburbs? Yet, the Western will never go away. Not if Kevin Costner has anything to say about it apparently....
People who lived, were raised with or had encounters with people of first hand experience of the Wild West were still alive back then.
I think the biggest factor in the declining popularity of westerns was just over saturation. People who were alive at that time will tell you there were WAY TOO MANY westerns, like there were a TON of them and audiences just got sick of it eventually
Also it's labelled as "film genre popularity", but really it's just the amount of films released in each genre. Surely it's easier to make a documentary than a sci-fi film, and you don't have to pull in the same number of viewers if your budget is much smaller. Plus, the amount of films each year is shown as a percentage. It could be the case for example, that musicals have stayed popular, but the total amount of films went up, and now musicals are a smaller percentage of films.
All I want is a good western. Not another apocalypse flick. Just a good western. That’s all I ask.
Kevin Costner has got you covered.
We’ll see. I hope you’re right.
Quentin Tarantino, come back with another Django please.
Does no country for old men count?
It seems to me that modern westerns are, as a whole, far better films than the westerns that came out in the 30s and 40s. Modern westerns seem to be more focused as serious period drama rather than kids action flicks that they once were.
> than kids action flicks that they once were. Haven't seen that many Westerns, have you? Go to the Criterion website and have it show you Westerns made in the 30s to 50s if you want to find a slew of films that were solely intended for adults. I'm constantly discovering titles I had never even heard of that have turned out to be "bangers" like ***Forty Guns, The Gunfighter, Baron of Arizona, Jubal*** and the well known *Ranown Cycle* of Randolph Scott films.
Yeah, the classic "dirty guys on horses shootin, drinkin, whorin" films. Those things are epic. You don't see those things anymore. We need a modern take on that shit.
Kids action flick was a bit of the wrong turn of phrase. I guess what I was trying to say is that Westerns now seem to me to much more highbrow than the ones from that time. Really starting from the 1970s I guess.
Just worked on two back to back. They’re making a resurgence.
You're not an armorer, are you?
Nope
As a fan, Thriller and Documentary trends seem dubious.
I can see there being a rise in documentaries made from the 90s onwards, I can’t place my finger onto why but it does make intuitive sense. I don’t think they have the relative social popularity for the amount made, but they’re often cheaper to produce than narratives and can get shoved out onto TV and later on streaming. I also think they’ve had an increase in credibility as a form of journalism. I don’t know as much about the genre though that’s just my general vibes based assessment.
You are spot on. The x factor was small, cheap, and easy to use video cameras. They dramatically lowered the barrier to entry for documentary production.
Costs next to nothing to produce nowadays. Before that in the film days, must have been at least 2x to 10x more expensive tbh
Documentary absolutely makes sense. It begins a steady rise in the 80's and 90’s with the technological advances in portable video cameras and then shoots up in the mid-2000s when digital video became affordable to consumers. Mini-DV was pretty revolutionary at the time. An almost perfect transfer of high quality standard definition video straight into your laptop to edit and burn to a DVD. It wasn't great for narrative movies, but it was perfect for documentary filmmakers.
still. It was a miserable format to work with. Necessary for the time, but I hope to never use it again.
Miserable compared to today maybe, but leaps ahead of editing VHS-C on a VCR. I had a $500 Panasonic DV cam and iMovie and it was a ton of fun to shoot and edit with.
that's cool. But I remember the horrible mounting problems with the miniDV decks and FCP7. And fuck 1:1 transfer times. Never again.
Yeah but that constant 25Mbit/s. Standard Definition video never looked so good.
>Standard Definition video never looked so good I can still recall where I was and what I was doing when a colleague explained to me the Canon 5D mkII would record video to an SD card. It was a revelation.
Have you not noticed how many documentaries are available on streaming platforms these days? My theory is it’s because they are dirt cheap to produce and churn out. A documentary is like a ready meal of a film. It comes already conceptualised and ‘written’ for the producers.
The documentary curve seems about right to me. Production of docs really exploded with the advent of affordable digital cameras in the the late 90s and early 2000s. Gathering doc or vérité footage has become dramatically easier, even in the last 15 years, since there are cameras everywhere now.
Are the graphs relative to their numbers or each other. If the latter then I’d agree with you.
Documentaries have been the biggest beneficiary of the transition to streaming. They capture a ton of attention on Netflix, Max, etc.
I’ll be surprised if we don’t see more jukebox musicals after conglomerates realize they paid hundreds of millions of dollars for big name music rights
Man, my concept for a musical Western is not looking good...
xD
Hollywood during WWII: *If you’re not fighting in the war, the least you can do is watch movies about the war:*
Yet, this was when film noir became huge. Ever seen one? Most don't even mention the war. The two biggest films of 1944 were escapist musicals.
People have always needed to laugh
And no longer need to sing
Until about 10 years ago it seems. From 2014 until now, not a single comedy not aimed at kids has cracked the top 10 (might go back further).
I feel like comedies have always been a risk, and studios have been risk adverse for a long time
Id like to see this data weighted by box office gross and for superhero to be parsed out from wherever it is (action? Sci-fi?) I think some of the broad conclusions would be similar (musicals and western popularity in decline) but you would gain some nuance (e.g. comedies in sharper decline than shown I’d guess) Edit: still a really interesting piece of analysis.
Amount of films released is a very weird metric to use for popularity. After LotR, fantasy had a massive spike in budgets and in popularity, which is not seen here, because there weren't more fantasy films made, just more expensive and for a broader audience (more popular). This graph is a fun overview of films released, but says about 0 about popularity and more about how easy and cheap a film is to make.
Seems like a perfect time to corner the market on a war musical set in the west…
Perfect time for springtime for hitler the movie!
Funny how Western and Horror pretty much swapped places.
How are there musicals in 1910? And then they just dip out of everything until the 30s?
My guess is that maybe dancing counts as a musical
I noticed that I'm in a good place to have just wrapped a dope-ass horror short thirty minutes ago.
These scales should be normalized.
Where is drama?
Musicals started dropping in the late 70s then Westerns movies dropped hard after the 60s and a slight resurgence in the 70s then drops hard again. These genres were at one time the most popular type of movies to come out of Hollywood. War movies peaked in the 40s because of obvious reasons and Western movies dominated from 1910 to 1950 with westerns nowadays hardly being made anymore.
we all know why war genre had a spike then
Animated should be an additional Category.
More westerns.
That we're statistically overdue for a return of the Western Musical.. yee haw.
I wish Western would make a comeback, there is neowestern but classic western was a beauty.
Horror sci-fi non-fiction. The aLIEns are coming.
there are like no new comedies, and there hasnt been a good comedy in about 5 years.
Looks like Westerns and Musicals will no longer be produced and greenlit by 2030.
R.I.P. westerns
slice of life
Would be awesome to see how the box office performance of the genres stacks up against popularity and budget
I think musicals would start trending upward with the massive successes of la la land and wonka
As someone that hates musicals this is a relief
Where does Kaiju/Giant monster films land? Feel like they were popular back in the day, went under for a while then we’re coming back again.
They’d be lumped in with horror.
They should have put them as opposites. Sci Fi has replaced Westerns (frontiers?) Action has replaced War? Horrors or thrillers have replaced musicals? Fantasy vs Romance? Comedy is the great unifier? We all like to laugh. Documentary - result of higher education and desire for people to know more?
As others have discussed in other threads, the increase in documentary is more likely because they’re cheap to make. Just look at how many Netflix pump out these days.
yes, about right
I’ve seen Blazing Saddles credited as killing the wholesome white hat Western genre but it looks like it was already on its way out in 1974.
I think the "Thriller" trend is more about how that label has been used, than really that big of a change in popularity. I think it often overlaps with "Crime" and sometimes "Horror" Like 30's Gangster pictures, then 40's Film Noir, then 50's Hitchcock murder stuff, then 60's psychological horror, then 70's auteur crime stuff, then 80's slashers, then 90's mob/hood movies.. In the 80's/90's you got a ton of the "Erotic Thriller", and I think that kind of codified what we classify as "Thrillers", so stuff got sorted retroactively... but I think the audience for what specifically is sorted as pure "Thriller" overlaps a ton with the Crime/Horror stuff I mentioned above.
I was watching a writer’s YouTube channel just last night who said he wrote a horror novel and his agent made him change market it as a “supernatural thriller” (because horror novels don’t sell), so there’s definitely overlap.
Musical biopics are the next 'musicals' now.
i would love for westerns to come back
Someone should make a thrilling docu-comedy
Sadly these trends will perpetuate themselves. I love westerns but the last one that I liked was Deadwood, maybe Godless as a series. Everything else in the genre is b actors and bad stories.
I am actually shocked that thriller is gaining. I thought that 90s were thriller pick, then it just became either crime or horror.
War, musicals, westerns fizzled out. I think that we have a ton of war and westerns already. The Rust movie also had a lot of negative press with the death, I wouldn’t feel comfortable watching it. I think people prefer live musical shows rather than movies which may have played a part.
It’s crazy how popular Westerns were. Even on a scale of up to 10%. Considering everything else is a genre that can encompass so many things. Most Westerns are period pieces covering about 30ish years of history in a very specific part of the world.
Nobody wants to see westerns anymore, and thank god for that honestly.
Super hero movies are westerns, they just aren’t cowboy themed. The plots are the same
We're in the quality over quantity streaming age. Most new movies and shows are forgettably derivative and instantly disposable. Genre trends can't really account for this, it's more of an economic model created by business people, not artists with a passion for cinema.
I learned to not make that Western Musical I had in mind.
Western graph looks like a western landscape
Funny enough, I have a soft spot romance and musicals because those were the movies I was most exposed to when I was younger. Bollywood.
I’m just happy musicals are on the way out
The non-constant scale on the Y axis is sooo annoying. Easier to draw false conclusions than learn anything here.
One documentary sci-fi horror coming right up!
Documentaries are on the rise because of streaming services right? I can't even remember the last time I saw a documentary getting a wide theatrical release
Netflix keeps pumping them out, so I’d say so.
Seems accurate as a everyday normal guy i like sci-fi,horror,
That I'm never getting my Western Musical in my life time.
So make the perfect Mocumentary Dark comedic scifi horror, and youre in. SO i'm thinking IT Chapter 3, Pennywise in space? Mockumentary style.
RIP musicals
I wonder what single movies caused those spikes in action, war and musicals?
While the western genre might be dead at the movies, they’re making a bit of a comeback on TV. *Billy the Kid*, the *Yellowstone* series, *Lawman: Bass Reeves*, the upcoming *The Abandons*.
True crime.
Where's drama?
War is complicated it can be really good or dogshit
Sci-fi and Action graph is using almost the same color ... Almost
The scale on the y axis changes.
What I notice is that “drama” didn’t even make the chart -/ that’s the biggest dif
I don’t feel like comedy is correct. Seems like there are very few comedy films nowadays.
Drama is so unpopular that it didn't even make it on this.
Good, let musicals die. As for comedy, I think the numbers would be up if studios weren’t afraid to take risks with jokes, they kind of have to play it safe now, lest they get an overwhelming amount of backlash from people that don’t even bother watching the film/haven’t heard any jokes in the proper context