>>104671439>It's all cartoons vs boomercore movies, are they surveying 12 year old girls vs 55 year old men?>>104671451>You think men under 40 watches good movies?It's not just that. Here is the list of Academy award winners for best picture, 1990-2025
>1990: Dances with Wolves>1991: The Silence of the Lambs>1992: Unforgiven>1993: Schindler's List>1994: Forrest Gump>1995: Braveheart>1996: The English Patient>1997: Titanic>1998: Shakespeare in Love>1999: American Beauty>2000: Gladiator>2001: A Beautiful Mind>2002: Chicago>2003: The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King>2004: Million Dollar Baby>2005: Crash>2006: The Departed>2007: No Country for Old Men>2008: Slumdog Millionaire>2009: The Hurt Locker>2010: The King's Speech>2011: The Artist>2012: Argo>2013: 12 Years a Slave>2014: Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)>2015: Spotlight>2016: Moonlight>2017: The Shape of Water>2018: Green Book>2019: Parasite>2020: Nomadland>2021: CODA>2022: Everything Everywhere All at Once>2023: Oppenheimer>2024: AnoraUp until the early 2000s the movies indicated (and usually, the winners) were not just critical successes but also audience smash hits.
From a certain point forward the industry took a turn to the "inside" and AUDIENCE BE DAMNED, everything will be made for an audience of 120 (the movie critics and the award judges).
That can be seen on Rotten Tomatoes as well, with movies doing 90% critics review and 10% audience review or vice versa.
For the most part what happened is "back in my days water was wetter and wind, windier" but for real