Hollywood’s Blockbuster Makes Victims of Us All

This is as relevant now as it was in December 2011 when I first discussed it at Above The Line: Practical Movie Reviews. I stand behind the premise, that Hollywood’s Blockbuster makes victims of us all.

It is the grandeur and splendor of overblown big screen theatrics and the fact we have to pay more for the same movie in 3D and IMAX that’s snatched our breath away, pushed us back and down into our stadium seating, reducing us to moot observers lapping up whatever we’re given. It’s like in our herd instinct to stand around and complain about it we’ve grown a taste for genuflecting at the altar of manufactured movie gods and no one is taking words of descent to the leaders of the shows. Why? We’ve lowered our standards or maybe mediocre is enough or perhaps we just don’t care. It’s not enough to say a movie was “OK” or “pretty good” or “entertaining”. We shouldn’t have to resolve the fact that a franchise was just getting started so all the exposition and drawn-out history lessons were important for the sake of the original comic book or just because Disney did it on a stone tablet we should keep on doing it the same for the sake of tradition.

We need to make a stand and start demanding more from the movie makers or scrap the whole lot of them and start over. I’m just getting started here. Check out the full article at Above The Line -

http://rorydean.wordpress.com/2011/12/30/hollywoods-blockbuster-makes-victims-of-us-all-2/

This article is more than a little revisionist.

For every Indiana Jones there were twenty Ishtars.

I watched a lot more mainstream films in the mid nineties than now — and I’ve found more I like this year than that entire period.

And it is going to get worse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_industry

I think it has as much to do with the way films are distributed as with the blockbuster mentality.

It not just that “we” as are buying too much shit. It is also that we let them force us into smaller and smaller shoeboxes laughingly called theaters. That clearances force independent theaters to try to compete with the plexes, that print prices force plexes to buy in bulk, and sell as much over salted and priced popcorn to make up as much as they can in two weeks.

So, with independent theaters vanishing, including the repertories, and the last few decades giving us ever tinier auditoriums with thinner walls and ever louder digital sound, combined with the necessary price of theater “food” is it any wonder that people would rather stay at home?

So I think we have reached a point a family would rather wait for an “event” movie to gather the clan together. Hence IMAX suddenly proliferating after 30 years.

Unfortunately, I think that this is why it is harder to find screens showing unusual fare, because the screens running independent features all belong ot a chain. And they own three theaters with around 20 screens. Thank God(dess) that there is the UA 7 to show me all the bullets, bodies and beasts that the other theaters are too tony for.

Ii think that people are going to have to stop thinking of The Cinema as the “proper” way to view a smaller feature.

Doesn’t that have more to do with competition with streaming services than it does with the so-called ‘culture dictators’ who you only call dictators because they sell the goods other people like instead of the ones you like?

And are you really saying that the ‘blockbuster mentality’ is a new thing and that it wasn’t the case as far back as the 50s? Pretty much every generation in history has idolized the artistic past, so quit acting like it’s both something new and something tragic that movies with a broader appeal are given more funding.

Film has been a mass art much longer than it has been a fine art.

Well the thing is that whereas the effect I don’t want to argue with (people going solely to mainstream movies are shut out of a wide array of beautiful cinema and commonly given messages that dictate a commercial/consumerist value system), the cause described by things like “Culture Industry” sometimes lingers near the paranoiac. There’s no group of people saying, “We are going to make The Avengers so that people will forget all about the recession and vote for Romney. Maniacal laaaaauuuugghhh!”

There’s just a recent phenomenon of mass communication media that we’ve not matured into and insufficiently understand, so that those people in charge of the money know how to make back the most money via several observable processes like making movies simplistic in meaning and easily manufactured in design.

Or, since we love the McDonald’s comparison, it’s not like McDonald’s wants to poison its consumers and have them die earlier from obesity and cancers related to processed foods. It designed processed foods because they’re cheaper, easier, and less expensive. The obesity and cancers are a side effect, not a scheme. Obviously mainstream movies are not manufactured to make people think, but they’re also not manufactured specifically to prohibit people from thinking.

—PolarisDiB

@Polaris

I mostly agree with you, but I would nitpick one thing.

McDonalds targets children who are too young to understand obesity and cancers, the same way the tobacco companies do.

I think the bigger educational tragedy is that children are only exposed to ‘fine art’ in the context of homework, so they associate it with being a tedious chore they must memorize and repeat instead of a beautiful experience.

“McDonalds targets children”

True, and recently they’ve tended to target minorities who in some cases may lack the resources to make good nutritional decisions and spend accordingly, which is objectionable. However, I think DiB’s point was that the GOAL of McDonald’s is not to make people sick, it’s to make money in the short term. People getting sick is a longterm consequence of that short term goal.

" I think DiB’s point was that the GOAL of McDonald’s is not to make people sick, it’s to make money in the short term."

Right. The goal of targeted advertising is to sell more quicker, not kill your client base. It’s morally bankrupt, but not immoral. There’s a significant difference and one of the most significant parts of that difference is that it makes it actually harder than any sort of conspiracy could to undermine or reverse it — because the people doing it don’t think they’re doing anything wrong, in fact they mostly think they’re helping.

Hollywood studios have all the power; they don’t have all of the control. To claim anyone is in control on that level is to actually be almost optimistic that it’s even possible. Unfortunately the root of most our wider sociological issues is that we’re all victims of our own Monkeysphere.

—PolarisDiB

Doesn’t that have more to do with competition with streaming services…

Hulu didn’t show up, let alone with the Criterion Collection until loooong after all the repertory cinemas in my town had been killed by the chains, including Landmark, who specializes in “independent” films of the type they used to show. Within ten years four theaters that had been in operation since the thirties closed. One, a beautiful Art Deco auditorium that I saw all the Indiana Jones movies and “Silence of the Lambs” in is gone forever.

The distributors have definitely forced everything to a multi-print model and I don’t see digital distribution changing that anytime soon.

I haven’t used that term. I am pretty sure thatI have already said that I think that as media consumers we get what we have paid for in the past.

And are you really saying that the ‘blockbuster mentality’ is a new thing and that it wasn’t the case as far back as the 50s? Pretty much every generation in history has idolized the artistic past, so quit acting like it’s both something new and something tragic that movies with a broader appeal are given more funding.

Quit imputing me with thoughts that I have not stated. I made no such judgements regarding quality of product.
One “King Kong” took a year and $1,000,000 to make at a time that movies took about six weeks to make and $200,000. Most of that time was for the SFX.
That was a blockbuster in 1933
In fact, I was saying that if we are victims, it is because our arguably dysfunctional relationship with Hollywood is that of the enabler.

Those are all side effects of greed.

Mainstream cinema is not ‘for the people’ it’s for the studios. A giant industry’s greatest concern is self-preservation/profit, because the more money they have, the more they spend, and the more they spend, the more they need.

There are more distractions than ever, and it’s because they’re trying to fill every moment with a product. The percentage of American college students who were in school in order to develop a life philosophy has dropped from 80+% in the ’70s to 40% in the ’90s. Probably about 10% now. 1 in 14 Americans admitted that they would murder someone for 3 million dollars. Everything in the culture points to money and popularity being the most important things.

No conspiracy. Just a giant behemoth of stupidity that feeds itself. The people in power have so much money coming in that they don’t question the effects of their machine. Short sighted and stupid. So much power and no responsibility.

Money is so bad.

The baddest.

It’s true.
I hate money.

Especially Other People’s Money.

omg other people’s money is the worst!!

People go to these movies, because they want to see them. Otherwise, why would they go if it didn’t look interesting to them in the first place? I don’t think anybody is a victim. If you don’t want to watch these kinds of movies (the Hollywood blockbuster), then, don’t go watch them. There are plenty other movies out there that aren’t blockbusters. I don’t see why people complain about this topic on here all the time. It’s really quite simple. Watch what you want to watch, and don’t watch what you don’t want to watch. It works for me. Also, instead of focusing on the hate of movies you don’t like, instead, focus on the love of the movies you do like. I think you will enjoy cinema more this way.

What exists:

“Man I heard that new Ted movie was really funny. Let’s go.”

“Man I heard that new Ted movie sucked.”

“Man I thought Ted was really funny. Macfarlane is crazy.”

“Man I thought Ted sucked. Who watches that shit? They should have gone to see The Watch, that movie was funny.”

“Man why don’t more people to go to see The Watch? Everyone goes to see like Spider-Man and Batman and shit and it’s like the same goddamned movie.”

“Man why would anyone want to go see The Watch? Its like Paul or Cowboys & Aliens it’s the same goddamned movie.”

“Man The Watch sucked. It was a total rip-off of Paul. Why can’t movies be original anymore?”

“Man The Watch rocked. It was totally better than that boring ass movie Paul. "

“Man The Dark Knight Rises was so good. Most movies are just so unoriginal but that one was just really different, you know what I’m saying?”

And so on.

What doesn’t exist:

“I will watch Ted because it’s the only movie available. I have to accept that this is what movies are.”

“I will watch Ted, and then I will vote for Romney.”

“I will watch Ted because the television told me so. All hail the television.”

“So today I watched Ted. I’ve decided not to go to college, intelligent people suck.”

And so on.

What unfortunately very sadly does exist:

“Man what the fuck was with that movie Beasts of the Southern Wild? That movie was weeeiiirrddd. I don’t think they knew what they were doing when they made that piece of crap.”

“What the fuck? This movie has subtitles? That sucks, I want my money back.”

“I don’t know the critics all say this movie is really good or some shit but I just thought it was boring.”

“All There Will Be Blood is is talking! There’s no blood!”

“Man, Prometheus wasn’t scary.”

And so on.

—PolarisDiB

“The Watch”, “Paul” & “Cowboys and Aliens” all sucked!

“Rock the Block”
OK!

What exists in the studios:

“Wow, Ted was really successful. Do you remember that script we shelved that one time about the boy and his talking puppet? Let’s make the boy 40 years old and cast it with Will Ferrell. Is the guy who made Pineapple Express busy lately?”

“Well fuck. The Watch was a mess. That whole thing in Florida fucked us and we’re getting diminishing returns on comedies featuring aliens. You know that one movie we have in production, the one that is supposed to be like Super 8 meets Paul ? Pull the plug on it, we haven’t found a director interested and it’s not worth it. At least that little indie screenwriter we bought it from was cheap.”

“Hmm, The Avengers did amazing. Let’s see, the problem is that the Batman movies don’t set up a very good Justice League thing, so let’s revamp it again.”

“I don’t care that Michael Bay is an asshole who nobody likes. Transformers made like a billion dollars. Give him the turtles and he can make them aliens if he damn well wants to.”

“Fuck me, Total Recall was a disaster. Guys, we may need to rethink our marketing strategy for Red Dawn. "

“Hey, I heard this one foreign film was really beautiful. I say we buy the rights to region 1 distribution and put it in limited release to establish some name recognition, then remake it for general audiences. I did hear it was a little disturbing though so we may have to change some stuff.”

What doesn’t exist in studios:

“Fuck me, this script is great. We can’t make this, if we make this people will expect every movie to be good.”

“Fuck me, these foreign films are beautiful. If people watch them they’ll grow brains and stop watching what we’re producing. Block it out. Do everything you can to make sure nobody sees this.”

“Here’s the five year plan. If we can just get everyone who saw The Avengers to watch Ted, then they’ll stop going to college and McDonald’s will have more job applications, so we can ask the government to lower minimum wage to keep McJobs positions cheap and competitive, and that will then trickle up to our studio jobs which means we can save on overhead. Call Warner Bros. and 20th Century Fox, they need to hear this.”

What unfortunately very sadly does exist in studios:

“Fuck me this script is great. But I cannot figure out how to sell this. Let’s get some script doctors in here to bring out a little bit more of the action elements and give it a happier ending. Is Len Wiseman busy? He’ll probably really like this concept.”

“Welp, John Carter was a bomb. I guess we were right, the audience hates Mars.”

“Welp, this year we simultaneously broke the record for the highest box office returns, and had the most amount of bombs. Frankly, we cannot afford the marketing and advertising for 20 movies a year, especially now that the audience is degrading. So let’s roll back to 15, and make sure at least 12 of them are pre-established properties so that we can hedge our bets. Unfortunately we had some plans for a few smaller features to be released in August, but let’s push them to February so that they don’t compete with the big release we are planning for August. Otherwise they may vampirize our returns and this year won’t be profitable. Too bad nobody goes to see movies in February, but hey, these were small films, we won’t lose as much on them.”

—PolarisDiB

““The Watch”, “Paul” & “Cowboys and Aliens” all sucked!

“Rock the Block”
OK!"

Do you mean Attack the Block?

Really want to see that. What’s really funny is that I don’t care much for alien movies, especially comedies, and yet I want to see The Watch for Richard Ayoade, I saw Paul for Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, I saw Cowboys & Aliens because I really enjoy Jon Favreau’s style of directing, and I want to see Attack the Block because I’ve heard comparisons to Shaun of the Dead.

What do the studios think? Obviously, that I love aliens. But if Paul starred Vince Vaughn and Will Ferrell with the same director and script, if Cowboys & Aliens was helmed by Timur Bekmambetov with the same cast and script, and if The Watch replaced Richard Ayoade with Seth Rogan (who helped write it, by the way), I’d dismiss them completely!

—PolarisDiB

Entertaining stuff by DiB! (applause)

However,…I think you’re rubbing out the subtlety of the influence and impact of Hollywood. Now, I don’t think Hollywood controls people nor do I think that their influence is entirely new. I do think they do have an impact on quality of films, moviegoers’ tastes and willingness to consider a broader range of films. Distribution contributes to exposure, which influences preferences. You’re posts were funny and true, but I think they’re missing some of the subtle pernicious effects of Hollywood on culture. I want to be clear that I don’t categorically object to blockbusters or other “pure entertainment” type of films. There’s a place for them, but I do think that Hollywood influences availability of a greater variety of films and sacrifices quality, not for nefarious reasons, but for financial ones, as you’ve mentioned. The effects are not neutral upon preferences, and the negative impact is present.

@Shaun Brown
People go to these movies, because they want to see them. Otherwise, why would they go if it didn’t look interesting to them in the first place? I don’t think anybody is a victim. If you don’t want to watch these kinds of movies (the Hollywood blockbuster), then, don’t go watch them.

If that’s the only kind of movies you’re exposed to then of course it’s gonna look interesting to you. The mainstream public is bombarded with advertisements from studio companies with marketing budgets as large as a small country’s GDP.

Most people go to these movies because they don’t know any better.

@Balistik

Most people go to these movies because they don’t know any better.

But do you really think it’s that simple? I mean, I think this is partly true. If people haven’t only be exposed to a narrow range of films, then they’re not likely to venture beyond that range. Also, what’s playing at the local movie theater will impact their preferences and choices.

But suppose viewers had exposure to a greater variety of films—i.e., independent, foreign language, experiemental, etc. How many more people would choose these films over the typical Hollywood film? Do you expect it to be a significantly high number? This is speculation, but I don’t expect it to be that much higher.

I also suspect that education and parental selection of movies would be the key to greater exposure—not the Hollywood studios—mainly because the latter is driven almost exclusively by demand. Education and parental selection are also influenced by demand—i.e., citizens and parents must value and desire art.

I don’t know if this is correct, but I do think the issue is really complex.

Polaris, those quotes are greatness. I’ve heard many similar to those myself from fellow movie goers, and as for the ones that sadly don’t exist. You’re sadly right. They don’t.

“But do you really think it’s that simple?”

Personally, I think it’s really hard to say, what people have to choose from obviously is a big influence on what they see, but what people choose to see also obviously has a big impact on what is made available. In order for there to be really substantial change, there would have to be change on both fronts.

Do you mean Attack the Block?
Uh, duh…
Yeah. I did. Sorry.

I really liked AtB. Talk about no likeable characters.
Well, there was one person who wasn’t a council house thug.
But the movie was funny.

But suppose viewers had exposure to a greater variety of films—i.e., independent, foreign language, experimental, etc.

The internet has made a lot of people a lot more cineliterate in terms of cast, director etc. But I think not in terms of film itself. For instance, Hulu is rather deep in terms of quality content, not just in the Criterion collection. That could be a good place to find out more about cinema, but I hear complaints that it doesn’t have even as many blockbusters as Netflix.

Hollywood has not victimized me too much this year.

Parks, it sounds like you’re agreeing with me—i.e., it’s not that simple. (chicken-and-egg, etc., etc.)

@Linden

The internet has made a lot of people a lot more cineliterate in terms of cast, director etc. But I think not in terms of film itself. For instance, Hulu is rather deep in terms of quality content, not just in the Criterion collection. That could be a good place to find out more about cinema, but I hear complaints that it doesn’t have even as many blockbusters as Netflix.

I’m skeptical that availability on the internet will make much of a difference. Does greater availability of good information on the internet make much of difference (e.g., more well-informed citizens—I feel like I have to say, “Don’t laugh.”)?