Disappearing Subtext

Yesterday somebody commented on Wordplay about recent movies having no subtext. The basic issue was that dialogue these days is expressing theme, tossing out philosophies on life and saying exactly what is meant as opposed to steaming with underlying subtext. What gives with that?

The specific example used was Munich and the responses were very interesting:

(1) Mainstream filmmakers don't trust the audience. Basically, this sounds like we're dumbing down for viewers. I object to blanket statements like this one because it implies that we, the audience, are too stupid to grasp, relate to, digest, and appreciate complexities. Some films are actually made just so the audience can enjoy the inane stupidity of it. That's not dumbing down.

(2) Characters speaking their philosophies saves time. This answer puzzled me. It seems to be saying that on the nose dialogue relieves the author of creative exposition, but I think what it really means is that spoken philosophies relieve the filmmakers from costly scenes needed to expose a particular mindset. It's a plausible explanation but strikes me as an improbable one. Can you hear a film exec saying, "Hmm. We need to cut costs. Let's ditch some scenes and cover it with dialogue"? Somebody PUHLEEZE tell me this doesn't happen!

(3) Development execs don't get subtext. This is silly. So, they understood subtext in the 50's but not today? We've jumped leaps and bounds in technology and marketing and production value but the bodies behind all these miracles of modern filmmaking are devolving? Good grief.

(4) Unnecessary ironing out. This one says that subtleties are ironed out little by little. One person didn't get this part so we ironed it out. Another person didn't get that part so we ironed it out until one by one, all the clever stuff gets pressed flat. Okay. Maybe.

Now on to my unqualified, unprofessional opinion which I didn't have the intestinal fortitude to post on a board frequented by professionals so I slunk off (is slunk a word?) to the safety of my blog:

Subtext used in film depends a lot on the author, genre, and a whole host of scene contruction issues that vary from film to film based on a limitless number of variables like goals of the director, vision of the producer, and purpose of the character. In the case of Munich, the film deals with such difficult philosophies that Spielberg probably wanted to make sure there was no misunderstanding because he knew he could be accused of blanketly endorsing assassination!

I'm not sure subtext really is disappearing at all. But if it is and if points one through four made above are actually valid, then the solution is simple: KEEP THE WRITERS ON THE SET!