the 80th percentile displacement: why Russ Roberts (and you) hates modern popular movies
I.
I have a theory that explains why so many people are currently upset at the state of modern culture. They watch a new popular movie or visit a new trendy restaurant and are left in a state of genuine confusion as to who could possibly be enjoying this. Where is the modern-day Shawshank Redemption!?
II.
I recently had a delicious lunch at the famous New York steakhouse, Peter Luger. One thing that stood out to me, despite its notoriety, is that Peter Luger is decidedly not a cool restaurant to go to. People were not dressed trendy or fancy, and there were very few White bougie Americans. Instead, it’s a lot of different accents, different nationalities, and in addition to a large number of tourists, a lot of normal-seeming people.
For those who don’t know the story, Peter Luger was one of the “top” NYC restaurants for many years and was definitely a cool and exciting place to go. But this suddenly changed in 2019 after Pete Wells of the New York Times skewered the restaurant in what is now one of the most notorious and well-known restaurant reviews of all time, giving it zero stars.
This wasn’t just a restaurant review; it was a kill shot. Peter Luger was no longer an acceptable place to go. For those who read the Times (well, not read the Times, but identify as the kind of person who respects the Times) and care about “what’s what,” it had been decided: not only do you not go to Peter Luger anymore, you judge those who don’t know they aren’t supposed to. The status of the restaurant was revoked, even though the food itself (to my taste) remains excellent at being exactly what it is.
III.
When buying loose-leaf tea in Asia, there is often a quality system for helping you understand what to buy. If you want to buy a Longjing or a Sencha, you can do so in Quality Level 1, 2, or 3 (with each at a different price point).
Buying a “Level 3 Longjing” (the highest quality a specific cultivator offers of Longjing) does not mean this is the highest quality tea you can buy. It means that for what a Longjing is, it’s the highest quality available. But tea obsessives often prefer (and many consider) a different category, like a Gyokuro, to be a fundamentally “higher” quality tea.
I was thinking about this when reflecting on the experience of Peter Luger. For regular people (people with, say, 80th-percentile interest in food, where the 95th-percentile is the person who reads food blogs, comments on /r/nycfood and doesn’t shut up about the latest restaurant they tried), Peter Luger is the equivalent of buying the Level 3 Longjing. For what it is, and for the kind of meal it tries to be, it’s as good as it gets.
IV.
Russ Roberts recently wrote:
“I am getting old. Here’s how I know. When I watch a recently acclaimed movie, a best picture nominee or winner, it’s not that I don’t like it as much as everyone else, I don’t even think it’s a good movie. Recent examples for me include The Brutalist, Anora, and Minari... I never can suspend my disbelief that I’m watching a movie. I am getting old.”
[Russ later provided a list of movies he actually likes, including: Shawshank Redemption,Groundhog Day, Truman Show, Lives of Others, Scent of a Woman.]
My theory is that this has little to do with being “old,” but that Russ Roberts is a 80th-percentile movie appreciator. The movies he loves are the Peter Lugers of cinema: the highest possible quality of a “normal” movie — narratively driven, perfectly executed, and emotionally resonant.
V.
In the 90s, the prestige curve was aligned with what appealed to the 80th-percentile movie fan as the best (and most prestigious) there was. The movie studios made films to appeal to this group. The entertainment section writers were fans of the 80th-percentile movie and praised it. The zeitgeist followed. So when people talked about “Great Movies,” they meant the 5-star 80th-percentile movie. In the 90s, when a movie received buzz, you could watch it with your mom and your cousin and bet they would enjoy it too. Prestige and universality were correlated.
But the thing that changed is that movies are no longer made to appeal to the 80th-percentile appreciator.
In the 90s, movie nerds were isolated, didn’t have a place to congregate and were basically irrelevant. The film writer in a local newspaper was usually just a person with a job, not an uber-nerd watching Tarkovsky. But platforms like Letterboxd have made the 95th-percentile cohort legible. There is now a class of movie fans who congregate online, rate everything, and have decided that the Peter Luger of movies isn’t “good enough.” They want movies to appeal to the 95th percentile of movie nerdom: people who value cinematography, the subversion of tropes, and “vibe” over plot or dialogue.
Directors started making movies to appeal to this legible, loud group, and fans online judge movies against this new standard. Because this is now where the status and “buzz” come from, when there is buzz about a great movie, it’s going to be the 5-star 95th-percentile movie, not the 5-star 80th-percentile movie. As a result of this new status tier, the 5-star 80th percentile no longer gets made. (Though there is a good argument to be made that the 5-star 80th-percentile film not only still exists, but is actually thriving on prestige television).
VI.
This leaves the modern movie fan with a hollowed-out middle.
If the film studio wants a massive audience, they make the “5-star version” of a movie designed to appeal to the 50th-percentile of movie interest (eg the Marvel Cinematic Universe). If they want status and critical acclaim, they make the 95th-percentile “vibe” movie.
The highest quality version of the 80th-percentile movie (the movie Russ Roberts considers “perfect”) is no longer something the industry is interested in producing. It is no longer at the top of the prestige hierarchy. Russ hasn’t changed; just what he likes is no longer considered ‘sexy’ enough to keep being made. (The same dynamic has also reshaped the restaurant world, where trendy restaurants have moved away from the perfect execution of beloved classics toward entirely new kinds of dishes, presented in innovative ways).
I think its also a bit of optimization culture. With increased access to very good statistics, every facet of the world has been optimized. The movies that are being made mirror the optimization of shots taken in NBA games. (https://tinyurl.com/4e37muxb). As you can see now they only do layups or 3 pointers.
In movie terms the layups would be sequels, reboots, already popular IP, that gets a huge number at box office and is low risk. The 3-pointers are the Anora, Minari, etc. Artistically risky, but with the opportunity to win an Oscar. (These are also inexpensive)
So the middle has fallen out. A Shawshank Redemption or Truman Show may be considered straddling the line too much. Too high budget and not avant garde enough to contend for an Oscar and not safe enough to be an anchor blockbuster for the studio. Probably would end up as straight to Netflix.
It's all economics. But I don't think actual tastes have changed much and many feel like there is something missing now. Other movies that have fallen into this middle void are comedies and rom-coms. Which are a bit expensive since they rely on star power but not nearly as high grossing as action movies. Not worth the risk.
These are percentiles in amount of interest in a topic. I sometimes wonder whether the correlation between interest and critical judgement breaks down a bit when we're overexposed to a field. Maybe at extreme levels of interest we crave novelty as much as quality. The Brutalist, Anora, and Minari all have quality elements that make them stand out from conventionally good films, yet I don't feel much desire to watch any of them a second time.