Is the Hollywood 'mega blockbuster' model in trouble?

johnny_ultimate

Spin off from the Indiana Jones thread - apologies I can't move posts across to kick-start the discussion.

But as the title says: is the recent string of 'flops' an indicator of a Hollywood model in trouble?

Silentcorner

doublepost

SuperBowserWorld

I'm looking forward to watching Oppenheimer and Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning in the cinema. Hopefully these will wake the industry up. Will Smith slapping Chris Rock was a wake up call or a death knell.

Silentcorner

I think that maybe Hollywood is a tired dysfunctional town full of tired dysfunctional people ... it probably needs to move.

Production companies have never had so much data available to them, they know exactly how many times people watch movies, when they switch off and yet time and again they ignore the data.

Soundtracks aren't even half decent these days.

When an industry is struggling brutal honesty is the only hope you have to turn it around, I don't see that happening!

johnny_ultimate

A few general points: Firstly, a correction has been long overdue - a series of high-profile flops or disappointments has been a long time coming, and IMO it's very welcome. The thing is, the model of hyper-expensive blockbusters in a handful of genres / franchises that need to be megahits to be considered a success is not a sustainable model. They got a good run out of it, longer than it should've been tbh. But really it couldn't last forever, and we're seeing some of that play out now.

Disney is of course the main offender - 'exploiting their IP' for everything it's worth. I don't think the MCU is over and done with just yet, but really is it any surprise that they basically created a franchise ender style climax and then just started all over doing the same thing again and audiences aren't quite as enthused as they were before? Ditto the 'live action' remakes - only so many times they could serve up reheated gruel without audiences getting bored. They insisted on blandness, and naturally, audiences will occasionally shrug their shoulders.

But studios also gambled badly on streaming and are seeing the consequences of that. Of course cannibalising their own creations for a quick buck was going to backfire, whether that's alienating creatives (whether that's Warners and Christopher Nolan or Disney and Scarlett Johannson) or teaching audiences that they can just watch the stuff at home (Disney and Pixar being a prime example). It's noteworthy that the two studios that went all-in on streaming have suffered the most when it comes to theatrical re-releases - although modern Warner's self-imposed wounds are too numerous to count.

The worst thing about the $250 million - $300 million model (albeit with the minor caveat that some recent films cost more than they should of as they were produced during the pandemic) is that it breeds complacency and discourages risk-taking. When a film has to be a hit, then there's less incentive to make something bolder and more unique. But audiences, to their credit, do want to see something different at this stage - hence why more distinctive blockbusters like Spider-Verse and, presumably, Barbie will likely overperform relative to their budgets. Also noteworthy that Spider-Verse cost three times as less as some other superhero joints this summer, and has been many times more profitable (although also to caveat with the note that there are some grumblings of less than stellar working conditions for the artists who had to get that film out the door, which is not good!).

Also: there are endless great films out there still! So many it's bloody impossible to keep up with! Many are proving very successful on their own often modest terms - whether that's Parasite, The Quiet Girl, Asteroid City or Everything Everywhere... or many other less high-profile titles that do well within their own niche, or at least offer wonderful and robust counter-programming to anyone so inclined. Indie and arthouse cinema is in rude health. If anyone thinks there are not enough good things out in the cinema or that there's nothing worth seeing on the big screen / with a crowd, I say this with all due respect: you aren't looking even remotely hard enough.

If we could get back to a world where the upper end of blockbusters and studio releases were more stylistically diverse than superhero movies and a handful of other mega franchises, surely audiences would only increase. And these can be produced at a fraction of the cost of the average superhero movie. The problem is studios are less and less willing to spend, say, $75m on a $300m grosser, as was the successful model for decades - capitalism dictates they should spend more on a possible $1 billion grosser. The line must always go up. The system is the flaw, and a correction has long been inevitable.

Penn

One aspect that doesn't get mentioned enough is the Internet, and how so much information about movies is already known before you ever walk into the cinema. Sites/twitter feeds have to generate so much content that any morsel of news is spread around so quickly that most people see it whether they want to or not, and then there's so much analysis of trailers, photos, costumes etc that you know half the story before the movie. We know about actors contracts, and who is due to appear in later movies in the franchise.

Oftentimes it leads to two issues; movies that are super green-screened or CGI'ed to within an inch of their lives because actually filming something outside or on practical sets can lead to too many leaks (not that that's the only reason for it, but it's definitely part of it), and sites/twitter over-dramatising any minor issue (eg. Reshoots, actor comments) that can make people think the movie is going to be troubled.

The time travel part of Avengers Endgame was spoiled because of long-range photos someone took of them shooting part of the New York scene (where Cap was in his old CA outfit from the Avengers 1), as well as artwork of the toys of the heroes in the white Quantum Realm outfits. The three Spider-Men in NWH was spoiled by set photos leaking, as well as over-analysis of a small clip in the trailer showing Lizard being hit by something that was clearly edited out. As guilty as most of us are for engaging in it, it's also hard not to see it on Twitter even when sites/feeds try to be clever in how they phrase things to not spoil it, but also making it clear there's something to spoil.

We shouldn't know as much about the films and next 5 years of these franchises as we do. In some ways, actually seeing the film becomes just part of the process rather than the thing to look forward to.

Gusser09

Watched Guardian of the Galaxy vol 3 last night and really enjoyed it. That being said i dont like going to the cinema much so was good to watch it at home.

The way people consume and want to experience content is always changing and evolving. Im not sure the big studios can keep up wiith it.

With downloading so big now and cinemas / studios losing so much revenue these days to illegal streaming i think its about time the "stars" were brought down a peg or two salary wise. Then maybe the war against piracy and illegal streams would hold water.

The figure given for Chris Pratt and Guardians of the galady is 20million per movie. Is that sustainable? If he is earning that much i wont be made feel bad about not paying for it.

Arthur Pants

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120822699#Comment_120822699

The fact that there is a 'next 5 years of these franchises' is a big part of the problem.

johnny_ultimate

Stars being paid a lot of money is not a new phenomenon. Demi Moore was paid $12.5 million for Striptease, which was a record for an actress at the time. Plenty of similar stories from the 90s.

The thing is, that was a $40-50 million movie even allowing for that payday. And these days blockbusters - beyond the Tom Cruise ones - are less star-led than they are franchise led.

silliussoddius

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120822699#Comment_120822699

Regarding photo leaking, doesn’t spoilers etc. ruin the element of surprise these days? They are really hard to avoid and unless a hidden gem comes along it’s hard to avoid an almost step by step development of a film.

Penn

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120823052#Comment_120823052

Exactly. Look at the next Captain America film. Even before the Disney showcase thing last year where they announced characters coming back who haven't been in the MCU for ages, it was being spoiled on Twitter with things like "Spoiler: Character making long-awaited return to MCU" with a picture of the character under. That's not even giving you 2 and 2 and letting you add them together, that's basically just saying "4".

But even then Disney ended up announcing it anyway, about 2 years before the film comes out, which gives a huge hint towards not just what the film will be about, but also how it might tie into other MCU films/shows.

If you're in any way interested in the films and you're on social media or forums, it's next to impossible to avoid these things, partially because the studio don't want you to avoid them. They want to generate discussion and buzz. But it means there are rarely any worthwhile surprises in the films now.

Imagine how great the Illuminati reveal in Doctor Strange 2 would have been if we didn't already know/suspect it was going to happen, because even shots in the trailer made it fairly obvious it was going to happen, just didn't reveal the who.

Penn

Also just in general, there's just so much new content on streaming services all the time, not to mention old stuff I probably haven't watched, that going to the cinema just isn't always as appealing these days it was always "a treat", and now it just can often feel like a hassle. An expensive one too. For the sake of waiting a few weeks for something to be on a streaming site (or other digital versions... ahem....), for the most part it takes something special to get me to the cinema these days. Something I have to be almost certain I'll like, because I just can't take the chance on wasting time, money and general effort on something I won't be happy with.

I absolutely loved Everything Everywhere All At Once. Would I have gone to see it in the cinema? Probably not. It used to be a guarantee that a superhero film would get me to the cinema, but I don't even know what the last DC superhero film I saw in the cinema was. Even The Batman I ended up not seeing until home release and I did really enjoy it.

Other than Oppenheimer and MCU films, I can't think of anything on the horizon that will make me want to actually go to the cinema to see.

hayrabit

great to see it !

a whole load of bs remakes and woke storylines is sure turning folke off going to cinema

according to this YouTuber , an indie flick (never heard of it til today) with Jim Caviezel (legend ! Person Of Interest is prolly me fav show 🙂) , called Sound Of Freedom (premiered 4th July and topped box office) which tackles subjecte of people (sex)trafficking , and all proceeds r due to go to charity ☺️

commentary starts at 4:30 -

https://youtu.be/dcyDZf6uaOk

might go see it - been an age since been at cinema

:)

Agent Coulson

Can someone actually explain what “woke” is to me please I’ve been seeing posted and hearing it said now for a few years and I still have no idea what it actually means in any context outside of being woke up from a sleep

johnny_ultimate

That weird Jim Cavizel film is being sold as some big old triumph, but genuinely had to laugh at how the film has a pyramid scheme of sorts built into it:

“As the end credits play, Jim Caviezel re-appears to say how the makers of “Sound of Freedom” believe this movie could be the “Uncle Tom’s Cabin for 21st-century slavery.” He says that the children shown in the movie are the real heroes but spends most of the time trying to empower you, the people, to spread the word, scan the QR code, and buy more tickets so other people can see this movie and put an end to this horror. But there’s little transparency here about how seeing Monteverde's film can help stop child sex trafficking, as this movie suggests. The suspiciousness of "Sound of Freedom" is queasy itself.”

https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/sound-of-freedom-movie-review-2023

On the darker side, I’ve also seen critics who give it a bad or sniffy review / article being subjected to horrendous harassment campaigns on social media by the worst of the US far-right culture warriors, smearing said critics as ‘pedophiles’ or ‘groomers’. Nasty stuff indeed. The film itself may be fairly innocuous faith-based stuff about a very serious subject matter, but the atmosphere and culture around it has quickly turned noxious - being used as another weapon in a culture war rather than something that genuinely raises awareness of trafficking.

silliussoddius

Hasn’t Caviezel gone full Qanon, adrenechrome and Rothschild recently?

SuperBowserWorld

I think there is a lack of original and interesting storylines in blockbuster movies. A load of cookie cutter CGI makes the whole experience seem so bland and fake. The acting can be of a high quality but doesn't feel authentic. The actors are not invested in the story or the staging either, and feel like they are flipping burgers for lots of money, instead of creating art that will be watched again in 10, 20, 50 years time.

The Matrix was the last great, unspoiled blockbuster I can remember. Great story, acting, and fantastic original use of CGI. Great action directing. Came out of nowhere. Boom !

I am trying to think what else ...the first two Lord of the rings movies; the first two Toby McGuire Spiderman movies; Captain America, the Winter Solider. All remain grounded and had actors that sparkle in them.

I think it's a shame James Cameron went all in on CGI, instead of using it in a constrained, subtle fashion. Oh to have a some more stuff of the sheer brilliance of Aliens, Terminator 2, The Abyss Special Edition, even True Lies, or Titanic.

Now, he's become indistinguishable from the rest. I enjoyed Avatar 2 in the cinema, but couldn't be arsed watching it at home, even though it's "free" on Disney+. There are some brilliant sequences in it, but it feels like a toothpaste commercial. 😁 Or Horizon Forbidden West.

Can you imagine if he had a good story, and great actors and made a non CGI driven action movie? It would be sensational.

Hangdogroad

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120824047#Comment_120824047

If Jim Caviezel is involved then its definetly some kind of fundamentalist Christian, Qanon propaganda spouting malarkey.

silverharp

I think the whole streaming bubble skewed the movie projects that were picked with the obsession of making something that would create a "universe" allow spin offs , stuff for streaming etc. It can only be a good thing that Disney are getting a good kicking this year. They have commercially fcked up so hopefully it gives a chance for other studios to prosper and have more varied projects be made.

kerplun k

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120824065#Comment_120824065

I would love the ability to block words on here. Woke and Mary Sue would be the first on my list

kerplun k

Part of the me thinks the reason animation has done so well this year is because there’s no human face on the poster to s**t on.

Tony EH

Hollywood regularly goes through slumps, so the recent "slump" (even though most of the movies make money) is nothing really new. But, again, we see Hollywood "suffering" because of TV. Just like it did in the 60's, when American television took off in a big way, modern audiences are choosing to stay home and watch movies in the comfort of their own home rather than head out and pay to see a film in a cinema.

The problem for Hollywood today, however, is that they have few (if any) cards left to play to entice audiences back into theatres. In the 50's and 60's they did this by using bigger screens or using gimmicks, like 3D. In the 70's studios were, literally, throwing money at any directorial talent and letting them go mad on personal projects (which resulted in the greatest decade of cinema that's ever been).

Plus, you'd have to wait about 4 years or more before a given film would appear on TV and it was in a panned and scanned version (not that a lot of people even knew what the difference was). These days, a lot of people won't budge from their 70in OLED surround sound set up, and are perfectly happy to wait a couple of weeks, or months, until the film appears on one of the streamers. For instance 'Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.3' is available online, barely two months after it first appeared in the cinema.

Into the bargain, the budgets of these movies are so out of control that they have to make back obscene amounts before that can be considered profitable.

I don't know how the studios are going to combat the current slump they are experiencing. Perhaps pare back the more extreme types of movie and go for a more "quieter" type of film with a more reasonable budget? But that probably won't get the bums on seats either.

Hangdogroad

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120824599#Comment_120824599

Mary Sue's a new one on me.

Flaneur OBrien

Also, cinemas are generally manky, soulless hellholes.

my kid is 5, so prime age to be introduced to the cinema. We try go once a month, but our local multi-plex has barely any staff, there’s maybe 10 other punters in the cinema when we go (usually around lunchtime on a Saturday). The extortionate cost for her is ridiculous as well. €10 for her, €12 for me.

It’s completely off putting.

Also, this is a huge bug bear of mine, but the lights should never come up until the actual credits are rolling, not the putto credits, or what happened to me twice recently, about 3-5 seconds before the movie finished, ripping me out of it completely.

I know it’s not commercially viable anymore, but I really do miss the two screen cinemas where going to the cinema actually felt like an event, instead of a consumer transaction.

Dont be at yourself

Was in New York a while ago and went to an early morning screening of Black Panther in an Alamo Drafthouse. Really cool experience -- small theatre, comfy seats, amazing menu of food and drinks served to your seat, well curated movie merchandise for sale. No ads before the movie -- they were showing interviews with Blank Panther writers etc instead. Whole experience was pleasant. Night and day experience to Screen 72 in the local Omniplex.

With the rise of home cinema, the gulf between the couch and the movie theatre is not as large as it once was, and they need to start competing on the experience -- an ever-shrinking theatrical window is not enough to get people in seats.

Silentcorner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120824065#Comment_120824065

It's the colloquialism given to the corporate/state religion that we are all supposed to pretend not to notice!!

In fact, you have license to call anyone who speaks about it as a far-right conspiracy theorist/misogynist/racist etc. and if you can somehow fly a Ukranian flag on your avatar then all the better.

You get to insult anyone who mentions woke on here without restraint, you'll get a load of thanks! Because woke is a figment of all our imaginations apparently!!

nix

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120824284#Comment_120824284

Yeah i kinda agree, While i really enjoyed Avatar and its sequel in the cinema, i cant bring myself to watch them on the home screen, it just wouldnt have the same punch. And im a bit miffed he has locked himself in to even more Avatars, it seems like just so many missed oppertunities with what else he could have done. As when it comes to action movies or cinema experiences, Cameron is King.

With regards to what happened to Marvel, i dont think it was people getting tired of the Marvel content so much but more just how the Marvel content was handled after end game. Diversity and social justice pandering above all else instead of putting in the effort to make enjoyable/fun movies, im not going to say anymore on that as its been talked to death countless times in other threads and i dont want to devolve this thread into more of that, thats just my opinion on what i think was the decline of the Marvel machine, recent firings and movie/tv delays to support that, and that was all mostly before the writers strike.

Hollywood will bounce back, im just surprised its taking them so long, its hard to hit the breaks though with all the marvel/star wars crap they already have in the works i guess, i also wonder if this writers strike is just a way to get things back to the way they were before "End game"..

nix

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120824619#Comment_120824619

What animation movies have done so well this year? Besides the new Spidey, Super Mario, and foreign anime.

TinyMuffin

I’ve only started goin back to the cinema lately. Looking forward to seeing Oppenheimer.

silverharp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120825680#Comment_120825680

Pixar have had an awful year, judging by my son's friends, tv anime is huge, Attack on Titan and a few others

nix

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120825696#Comment_120825696

Yeah that was my exact thought when i read the line, Pixar have been releasing nothing but stinkers and hemmoraging money for a good while now, Super Mario is the only real successful blockbuster animation i can think of, Spiderman i can only presume is doing really well, but i dont know much about that one..