"Barbie" is pop. "Oppenheimer" is rock and roll.

Sure, "Barbie's gross exceeded that of "Oppenheimer," $162 million to $82.4 million, but "Oppenheimer" will have longer legs in the public consciousness, because when you go deep, that's when people resonate.

Now if you weren't aware of "Barbie," you were living disconnected in Ted Kaczynski's old shack in Montana. The story was everywhere. This is the carpet bomb publicity that's been employed to almost no effect throughout the 21st century. You can't reach everybody and they don't care anyway. And I was getting overwhelmed with the "Barbie" hype until I saw the movie was directed by Greta Gerwig, from a script she wrote with her significant other Noah Baumbach. I have respect for both of them.

Greta Gerwig was the queen of mumblecore, a film movement from a few decades back that only film aficionados are aware of. You might go to the movies today, but are you aware of their history, can you place those films in context? Probably not, you're a fan of what is called "popcorn movies," high concept blockbusters that are entertainment as opposed to art. But I caught the bug as a result of the buzz and checked out some of that genre's flicks and Greta Gerwig was phenomenal in them, as an actress. And then she did "Frances Ha" with Baumbach. It was a financial blockbuster. Well, no, it grossed a grand total of $11.3 million, on a budget of $3 million. But if you saw it, you'll never forget it. Oh, it's not that good, it's subtle, but so is your life.

And Baumbach did "The Squid and the Whale" and while everybody is going to USC to become a director, Noah graduated from liberal arts enclave Vassar. That's right, avoid the liberal arts, they'll kill your earnings potential. And that's statistically untrue, in the long run liberal arts majors can and frequently do make more, because they're more nimble, but one thing is for sure, your horizons will be widened, you'll have something to say if you get a liberal arts education.

And then Gerwig became a director herself, with the indie success "Lady Bird," and then the general public became aware of her with her mainstream success "Little Women."

In other words, Gerwig had a track record. She'd paid her dues, developed her so-called "craft." Had experience. Furthermore, the audience was aware of her as a high quality filmmaker who delivered, there was eager anticipation for "Barbie." Then again, the main driver was that title, because it's hard to start from square one like with "Oppenheimer."

Christopher Nolan has a similar career arc to that of Gerwig. He too started off in indies, although not quite so far down the food chain as mumblecore. Nolan made his bones with "Memento"...talk about innovative. And sealed the deal with "Insomnia," wherein Al Pacino and others wander in Alaska during the midnight sun...Pacino's inability to sleep is palpable. And then Nolan dove completely into the mainstream with Batman movies.

Now stars might not mean much anymore in the movie business, but writers and directors still do, and just like with Gerwig, but even more, the general public is aware of Nolan, and waits in anticipation of his next release.

And although Nolan did make two "Batman" movies, both he and Gerwig do not repeat themselves, every film is a new adventure.

Contrast this with the music business, where the goal is to blow up someone young with no experience, someone the public has never heard of. Experience works against you in the big time music business, because if you've got it you're too old to play the game, they don't even want you. However, you can kill on the road. That's the story of the twenty first century, the older people on the road playing music that sounds not a whit like what is ensconced in the Spotify Top 50, never mind played on terrestrial radio.

So... If the movie was called "Barbie" and Gerwig and Baumbach were not involved it would have been an uphill climb, been seen as a dash for cash. But the imprimatur of those two along with good word of mouth and ultimately great reviews put gasoline in the engine and there was great success.

But that's "Barbie," what about "Oppenheimer"?

The "Oppenheimer" buzz didn't reach me until a couple of weeks before release. And the story was primarily about it opening on the same day as "Barbie." In addition, "Oppenheimer" is not sexy and light, it's anything but "Barbie." I mean really, a three hour epic about the advent of nuclear weapons?

But the public hungers for deep and serious. This is what the mainstream gets so wrong. All we hear is about the younger generations' short attention spans, meanwhile they'll burn through a Netflix series in a day. The younger generations reject crap.

But crap is what they're fed all day long.

So the theatrical movie business is on the decline, it certainly took a hit during the pandemic, and no matter what anybody says, it will never fully recover. Theatrical is for event movies. It takes too much time and too much money to attend, it had better be worth it, and most stuff is not. The old boomer days of going to a flick on a whim are history, furthermore you've got A+ entertainment in 4k at your fingertips at home. However...

Turns out if you deliver what people hunger for, high quality fare, they're interested, they'll show up. But the studios started focusing on dumbed-down product that can play around the world. Meanwhile, Hollywood movies are now tanking in China. Time to get back to the garden. But the opportunity cost and the number of dollars are such... Well, it's worse than that, the people running the studios don't even remember the good old days, the last time film burgeoned, in the seventies. They've got no point of reference. As for indies... That market is dead. You can make it, but it won't be distributed and no one will see it. Even worse, the streamers no longer want to pick it up.

Which means the public is looking for fare that is available to all, that is unifying, that is seen as something we can all relate to.

And the lessons for the music business are...

Legion.

Where is the unique product proffered by the major labels? Nonexistent. They just shift the same old stuff, new stuff just like the old stuff, written by committee and remixed ad infinitum, with the human element shaved off. Such when something truthful shows up, it dominates. This is the story of Chris Stapleton.

But how many Chris Stapletons are there? I don't see another on the country charts. As for the wannabe Americanans... Chris is 45 and has paid his dues. He can write, sing and play, all at a high level, whereas his imitators cannot. I mean if you haven't got a palatable voice, you'd better be one of the best lyricists of all time.

But all we get in rock is the Foo Fighters, who were retrograde to begin with. The Foos are comic book movies. Seen one, you've seen them all. Where is the innovation?

People want something new and different that challenges them. And one hit record can lift the entire business, never mind inspire others to follow in the creator's path.

But we haven't got that hit anymore. Nothing that everybody in America is talking about, that they want to check out. What we promote is niche, no matter what the media says. Drake? Taylor Swift? They're doing incredible business, but you can ignore them and feel just fine about it, it's not like the music of either is inescapable, like the Beatles with "Sgt. Pepper."

Yes, "Sgt. Pepper" was a great leap forward, and never forget there were no singles. And it was embraced by the public.

But "Oppenheimer" is more like the White Album. Longer and darker. Leaving you with more questions than answers. If it's all there on the screen or in the grooves, if you can stop and forget about it, it's not going to last.

We've got so many complaining that they've got the goods. But they haven't paid their dues like Greta Gerwig and Chris Nolan, never mind not being as talented. They believe they're entitled. TikTok is their market, where you live and die on your creativity, where it's all inherently niche. But as far as something more mainstream...

Mainstream doesn't necessarily mean compromised. Look at "Barbie" and "Oppenheimer." Mainstream means most people are aware and care. The music business lost this formula decades ago. It's not even looking to recapture the essence. It's like everybody at the labels is brain dead and compromised, which is why you no longer know their names. The legends took risks, affected the culture at large, the newbies are playing a role.

So ultimately "Barbie" and "Oppenheimer" are good for America. They have created rallying points. You can say you went to see a Tom Cruise movie, but there's nothing to talk about when it's over. He did his own stunts? See if that gets you into Harvard. It won't. It comes down to what you've got between the ears.

It's all about pushing the envelope. But that's too hard for most people. They want a safety net, a guaranteed return. But it's always the outside that breaks rules and sets trends, always. I mean what can you learn from a new "Avengers" movie, or "Mission Impossible"? It's like the latest pop confection. There is a market for it, but the rest of the public shrugs its shoulders, if it's aware and cares whatsoever.

And this does not only apply to art. Tech is all about breaking boundaries. When did everyone in America decide to play it safe?

In politics we keep hearing about what we can't do, when we used to hear about what we could do. And we hear from politicians that their hands are tied, that certain people won't go for it. But that doesn't mean you should stop, but push harder.

The opportunity for the lone warrior is always there. One person can make a difference. And it's not about money, but message. If people are only talking about the gross, you've missed the point. Quick, tell me what the biggest selling Bob Dylan record was! Hell, he never reached the sales pinnacle of even the nineties has-beens, he's never had a diamond record.

Money changes everything.

But what people don't realize is if you listen to your inner tuning fork and go your own way there's plenty of money to be made. But even more cultural impact. Bill Gates made more money than Steve Jobs, does that make him Jobs's equal? No.

Refocus.

And you've got to do it yourself because the overlords don't want you to, they want business as usual, they want predictable. Unfortunately, this is not what the public wants, and the public always wins in the end.

--
Visit the archive: lefsetz.com/wordpress/
--
Listen to the podcast:
-iHeart: ihr.fm/2Gi5PFj
-Apple: apple.co/2ndmpvp
--
www.twitter.com/lefsetz
--
If you would like to subscribe to the LefsetzLetter,
www.lefsetz.com/lists/?p=subscribe&id=1

If you do not want to receive any more LefsetzLetters, Unsubscribe

To change your email address this link