Leave the World Behind

I'm not shifting goalposts. If 50 Shades and Hunger Games are the only examples of blockbuster movies made from recent novels, then my point is made i.e. "award-winning novel" has become a turn-off for Hollywood. The other movies mentioned by JohnnyUltimate are anything but blockbusters. "Are you there, God.." did OK but the book was written over 50 years ago.

I take no pleasure in this. I would love it if, for instance, Prophet Song or The Bee Sting were made into major movies, which would be an enormous boost to Irish literature. One of the streamers might pick up the rights but, on the evidence of this stinker and others, they would either bury it or make a mess of it. I think Neil Jordan was lined up to film Skippy Dies. Did that every happen?

"Any book of over 40,000 words" is a wonderfully broad definition of the novel. But let's agree that we know one when we see one, even if it is trash.

Now you're confused. I never mentioned 'blockbuster" novels. Let me summarise.

I began by questioning how Netflix decided to spend mega-bucks on this nonsense.

I challenged Rebel's suggestion that the movie was pitched on the basis that it was a "brilliant, hugely acclaimed book" and I asked "When was the last blockbuster movie made from a recent novel?".

You answered without giving a valid example (Jurrassic Park was written a quarter-century ago) and JohnnyUltimate came up with a list of art-house films. But I think I can answer my own question now.

The only blockbuster movies based on recent novels are - 50 Shades, Twilight, Hunger Games, Bridgerton, The Martian.

I accept Bridgerton as a blockbuster, although it was a streaming series, and The Martian as an interesting exception to the rule - a self-published novel rejected by countless publishers. None are very recent but all were written in this century. And I accept the loosest sense of the word "novel" but I exclude comics which have bankrolled Hollywood this century.

So, I say Hollywood no longer makes major movies from the latest "serious" or "acclaimed" novels, although Hollywood has struck gold with some trashy novels. In contrast, streamers are flooded with cash which can be wasted on this nonsense, perhaps because streamers are ignoring the experience of the Hollywood studios with recent novels or perhaps because they have a completely different metric of success i.e. subscribers and their clicks.

The interesting issue then is why streamers are making this nonsense if they are not subject to such immediate and direct commercial pressures?

You have the wrong end of the stick. I am saying the opposite - that this movie is a stinker which could never have been a blockbuster (unless you count the clicks which mean nothing).

I am also saying that Hollywood has not turned a recent "serious" or "acclaimed" novel into a blockbuster movie. It has made big bucks on stuff like Twilight and 50 Shades but the last thing a Hollywood studio producer wants to hear now is "this an acclaimed/prize-winning novel" because no such book has been turned into a blockbuster.

You say "Leave the World Behind" was very popular and sold "tonnes of copies", but how many copies did it actually sell? The sales figures for "serious" literature are depressing.

Doesn't matter because the deal was done before the book was published.

So the pitch was probably "Sam Esmail has Julia Roberts and Denzel Washington [what happened there?] lined up to do one of his cyber/apocalyse stories about a white middle-class family and a mysterious, super-rich black couple. He'll publish a novelised version to get some hype".

Your bit about "very contained" does not apply to Julia Roberts salary or the special effects. "Easy to adapt" gets the process arseways.

I should add one more (fairly) recent novel that made a blockbuster movie - The Da Vinci Code. I rest my case.

P.S. here's another "serious" novel that Netflix turned into a stinker despite a great cast and top-rate production. The luvvies loved it - four minutes standing ovation at Venice, lots of award nominations - but viewers mostly hated it. Another absurd ending but the main problem was the film couldn't make up its mind about the main character who had abandoned her children years before. Might suit you if you like feeling conflicted.

And what about White Noise with Adam Driver? A Don De Lillo novel which starts brightly but ends weirdly. Why can't these movies figure out an ending?

An aside, but I feel like that was a flaw in the classic low-budget Canadian sci fi Cube, which got a big bogged down in silly explanations for why they were in a killer cube, when the film’s strengths lay in how the characters responded to the situation. The why-are-we-here didn’t matter.

Masses of CGI? There's about 4 cumulative minutes of it to distract from the fact that it's 95% people talking in one location. I'm also not sure how many people would agree that the trio of aging former-bankables you named = blockbuster. Maybe back in 1998, sure, but they're all regulars on the indie movie scene now (and Obama is one of the last names I'd associate with a Blockbuster type of project!).

For instance, I doubt anyone would claim that Julia Roberts last two movies, "Wonder" with her and Owen Wilson, or "Ticket to Paradise" with her and George Clooney are blockbusters either, despite boasting older big name leads. Could argue her last real blockbuster was actually Oceans 12, which was 20 years ago. Or at a push Eat Pray Love, which was 14 years ago. She's been firmly an indie producer/actor for a long time now. So all in all, this is just not a blockbuster in scope, or story. Which you're backing up yourself with your anger over its ambiguous ending (it seems perhaps your biggest issue with it is that you yourself expected a blockbuster type movie, but didn't get one).

Seems to be getting no shortage of eyeballs on it, so i'm sure Netflix won't mind regardless. Anyway, it's an argument that's probably beyond anyones interest at this stage, so maybe best left as a "agree to completely disagree".

I feel like 'blockbuster' has lost all meaning here 😅... like, I don't believe the term belongs anywhere near this movie. I don't believe it was anywhere near the minds of anyone making it. It's only even come up in this thread because you have repeatedly made the point you reckon the intention was for it to be a blockbuster, and that it failed in that supposed goal. IMO it's a bit unfair to create a goal for a film that was never there, and then bash it as a failure of something they weren't trying to do. IMO it's just a regular 'ol "bit too expensive for its small scale" character-drama-suspense film, made for less than half Netflix's other big budget projects (though I obviously got a lot more out of it than you, and have no problem with narrative ambiguity). As far as Netflix goes, even if they didn't quite manage to capture what made Rumaan Alam's book so great, I'll always be happier with them taking a bit of a risk with something like this than pouring money into things like Red Notice, The Gray Man, and 6 Underground (which all cost a fortune more than this).

Anyway, as a step away, I like seeing more established stars taking a more active role behind the movies they're making, particularly women. This was made by Julia Roberts production company, and we've seen the effect Margo Robbie and Elizabeth Banks have had on the industry with the work they've put their production companies behind. It's a positive shift in power and perspective that will hopefully continue to put a bit more weight behind projects that might otherwise have not been pursued, particularly when you look at some of the other big women-run production companies like Pascal Pictures and Annapurna putting out some great stuff.

"Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in"

After 100 posts mostly at cross-purposes, I said I would stop but then I get this new set of misrepresentations and/or misunderstandings mixed with an effort to shut me down as irrational - "just move on" and "leaning towards the unhinged"

Firstly, I don't confuse opinions and facts. I stated my opinions forthrightly and no one has challenged the facts I offered in support of my view. When I said e.g. that this is film is "a mega-bucks stinker", I gave my reasons and invited responses but no one here has made a credible case in support of this movie. Believe it or not, I was initially fairly open-minded on this movie - here's my first post (#27) which was mainly seeking other views/information:

In defence of this movie, the most anyone here has claimed is that they found it passably enjoyable before the final scene, that lots of people watched it and that many seemed to enjoy it. My answer has been that "lots of people watching" is no measure of success in the age of streaming - it just means that Netflix subscribers clicked on their glossiest, most-hyped new offering - and that most viewers disliked/hated it, judging by the viewers ratings/comments on Rottentomatoes and iMb. (I never said "universally hated")

The level of critical analysis on this thread is depressing. I don't think I got a single fresh insight regarding the interactions of the main characters (and I was patronised by murpho999 who didn't even get the racism in Julia Roberts character). Leading media critics have had a "mixed" response to this movie but most critics today are out of touch with the audience (when did that great schism begin?). Look at "Lost Daughter" - the critics loved it, I mean "four minutes standing ovation in Venice" lllloooovvvveeedddd it, but the viewers were turned off. It was a box office flop but, of course, that didn't matter because Netflix bankrolled it. (Another Netflix adaptation of an "acclaimed novel" with a stellar cast and a nonsense ending - I'm sensing a pattern here).

I haven't watched It Comes At Night but I don't see much relevance. The endings can't be compared.

• Rose settles down to watch the final episode of Friends in a strange house after disappearing from her family in the midst of the apocalypse, versus
• Paul – believing Andrew is sick – forces Will and his family out of the cabin. A fight breaks out that ends with Sarah shooting Will and Paul shooting Andrew and Kim. Later, a visibly infected Travis lies in bed and is comforted by his mother. The film closes with a scene showing a devastated Paul and Sarah seated at a table, presumably having put Travis out of his misery and seemingly succumbing to the virus themselves. 

https://screenrant.com/it-comes-at-night-movie-ending-explained/

In any case, no one could call It Comes At Night a mega-buck stinker i.e. Netflix didn't piss away mega-bucks while insulting their subscribers. Rebel thinks there was no intention for Leave the World Behind to be a "blockbuster". Did Julia Roberts take $20,000,000 under false pretences or how can I get my hands on some of this free money?

Finally, I didn't say Netflix "should be punished", I asked

I don't know if Netflix will be punished for wasting all this money. It would be "unhinged" if there were no consequences. Its share price is driven by its subscriber numbers and revenues but seems unaffected by the quality of its productions. There is the nub of the problem.

Hollywood had to make money at the box-office and had no subscriptions. It produced a lot of dross but never deliberately insulted the audience with a nothing ending and it produced most of the greatest movies of all time. Why are Netflix and other streamers willing to spend big on movies with superannuated stars, hopelessly confused narratives and no endings?

Will anyone ever again make a great movie out of a great novel?

I do write in praise of movies I like but I don’t have to defend myself ad nauseam as I did here.

I also explained repeatedly that this film exposes deep problems with the current process of film-making and production. That’s what I tried to discuss.

The comments on Kermode’s review include some excellent summaries of my objections to this film. He loved it of course😣

I

Totally outnumbered by the negative comments, many of which are as critical as as I am, and for much the same reasons .

The positive comments are largely fatuous, nothing more than “I loved it” or “A good watch”. Like those 5-star reviews on Amazon for dodgy knock-offs. Kermode and Mayo are almost as bad.