I don't think that is true. The thing about any medium is that living in the present usually seems a bit worse than it actually is because it often takes time to appreciate hidden gems and to scour for them.
I wouldn't say that necessarily. I would consider this the Golden Age of Television for example (although not much from the 50's has been saved so it would be hard to compare even if I could), and video games are also at the top of their game as far as I know. I admittedly, have gotten out of gaming recently, so I'm just going by the impression that I get.
Avengers isn't the problem by the way, it is Transformers.
Avengers has been built up for nearly a decade with some good to great movies.
Tansformers is just trash with explosions shoved down our throat.
This topic should have been that movie series, not this one.
But why does a movie have to be bad to have a bad effect on the industry? Jaws, which is one of my favorite movies of all time, had a largely negative effect (in my opinion) in that it helped popularize the blockbuster mode of wide releasing films. Prior to this, films were released in various markets across the country little by little, and they largely relied on word of mouth (and thus quality) to spread. Now with wide releases, studios are more reliant on getting people in theater seats right away on opening weekend, and to do that before a movie has even been seen by the general public you can't rely on quality. This does nothing to effect my view of the film as a film, just my view of the film as an industrial object, two views which I separate when discussing the film in this way.
Being a good movie does not remove a film from its role in a certain system, nor does being a bad movie mean a film is more at fault for the system it's a part of
--
My bracket wasn't good enough to beat SuperNiceDog's in the GameFAQS Rivalry Rumble. Congrats!
This is Yesmar.