Are Movie-Makers Punished When They Try to do Something Original and Interesting?

I took the last week off and caught up on a lot of movies I’d been meaning to see, but it’s led me to a kind of disturbing conclusion.


First, I watched Cloud Atlas, which I absolutely loved. For some reason, I thought it would be silly and inaccessible, but I ended up thinking it was one of the best movies of 2012 (despite the distracting prosthetics, which didn’t really work, although I totally get how they fit the theme).


I also loved the big, challenging “point” of the film: that evil will always exist, it’s never going away, but that we need to fight against it anyway, though it might not really make any real difference.


Heavy.


I also watched Upside Down, starring Kirsten Dunst. It actually reminded me a lot of Cloud Atlas. It’s the story of lovers from two parallel worlds … well, hey, please just check out the trailer:



I know, right?


Upside Down isn’t as good as Cloud Atlas, and the reviews were harsh (it’s 27% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes). It ended up flopping in theaters. But the fact is, it’s a gorgeous movie to look at, and the premise is just wonderfully original and audacious. I had my quibbles with the film, but overall, I enjoyed it.


And did I mention was a fantastic, original premise the movie has?


Finally, I saw Man of Steel.


What. A. Terrible. Movie.


It was literally everything I hate about Hollywood movies these days: lots of explosions, massive plot holes, and absolutely no good reason to exist.


Unlike Upside Down and Cloud Atlas, there was nothing fresh about it at all.


Honestly, I just found Clark Kent (and the movie) to be confusing. His dad tells him, “It’s really, really important to keep your identity a secret, even if it means letting me die! But oh yeah, one day be sure to reveal who you are.”


Huh?


This “Superman as outcast” theme is actually very interesting to me, but it wasn’t developed at all apart from one or two scenes. And, of course, by age 33, Clark Kent still hasn’t revealed who his is — even as he, sometimes anyway, tries to help people, at least if the disasters happen right in front of his face. And they do. A lot.


So if Zod hadn’t come along, would he have never “come out” as Superman?


Oh, and if you’re going to do a non-linear plot, do a damn non-linear plot! Don’t sort of do it just to be cute.


So let’s recap: I saw two movies (Cloud Atlas and Upside Down) with fascinating, original premises reasonably well executed, and they both tanked.


Then there was one movie (Man of Steel) that could never in a million years be anyone’s idea of “original,” but it was based on classic, beloved superhero, so it’s going to end up being one of the biggest hits of the year, spawning a whole bunch of even-more-unnecessary sequels.


And don’t me started on last weekend’s wild, break-out success of Grown-Ups 2.


It’s almost as if mainstream audiences put the bar much, much higher if a film project is “different” or original in any way. Sometimes they’ll go, but only if the movie has widespread acclaim — if it’s basically perfect in every way. (And sometimes they won’t even go then!)


On one hand, I get it. I like my “popcorn” movies too. And I’ve been known to rail at length over pretentious, self-important arthouse films.


But the paranoid writer in me is starting to think that mainstream audiences are basically repelled by the truly original stuff. They mostly just want the tried-and-true — all the things they’ve seen a zillion times before.


This isn’t an original observation, I know. But if it’s true, and if the studios have finally figured it out, it means that mainstream movies are virtually never going to be original or interesting again. It certainly explains why so many studio movies are so incredibly shitty these days — why they’re mostly just remakes, reboots, sequels, and rip-offs.


Someone talk me down and tell me I’m wrong — that the failure of The Lone Ranger or the existence of Inception proves that hope is not lost, that audiences are smarter than I’m giving them credit for. Or maybe it was always thus, and artists and writers have somehow managed to survive anyway (for the most part).


Because after last week’s movies, I’m feeling kind of pessimistic.


In the meantime, do me a favor and check out Upside Down, okay?


Send to Kindle

The post Are Movie-Makers Punished When They Try to do Something Original and Interesting? appeared first on Brent's Brain.

1 like ·   •  2 comments  •  flag
Share on Twitter
Published on July 16, 2013 13:00
Comments Showing 1-2 of 2 (2 new)    post a comment »
dateUp arrow    newest »

message 1: by Andrew (new)

Andrew

Oh yeah, I can definitely agree with this. One thing that I feel like I've noticed too is that in American cinema (wow, I'm going to sound like a really huge pretentious douche right now) or at least any movies that go into "main" theatres (Regal Cinemas, etc) end up having a lot of common media stereotypes, recycle everything over and over, and like you've mentioned... for some reason, movies with realistic looking explosion effects really grab people's attention... but why? We've all seen if enough time and it's really not that amazing of technology in movies anymore.


I'm not huge on movies at all, but based on any foreign films I've seen (a few online, a few at the yearly film festival here) they seem so much more fresh and realistic; even if an American made movie has a "realistic" plotline (i.e. something about family, relationships or real life struggles) they're still recycled and end up having stereotypes for the characters based on what most (uneducated) people believe that say, a gay character should act.


I had the pleasure of seeing Laurence Anyways at the yearly film festival, a movie about a transwoman over the course of ten years from pre transition to post transition (this movie is also fiction, by the way, not a documentary, which I think is great because I'm tired of seeing the majority of trans films being documentaries) made in Canada (in french) and it was oh-so-refreshing to see something so much more realistic be portrayed in a fictitious sense that's not bombarded with jokes and insults and people calling the main character a "transvestite" and so on... well, to get to my point, I feel like movies made in other countries and languages aren't afraid to do something different and new, to make something beautiful, and not something cheap made for other people to get some laughs out of.


It'd be really wonderful if American cinema could be improved and make more movies (or, should I say, have these better kinds of movies be more widespread and known) instead of all the garbage I see trailers for on the TV these days.




message 2: by Brent (new)

Brent Hartinger Andrew wrote: "Oh yeah, I can definitely agree with this. One thing that I feel like I've noticed too is that in American cinema (wow, I'm going to sound like a really huge pretentious douche right now) or at lea..."
Yeah, it's hard to talk about this without sounding like a pretentious a-hole, isn't it?

*sigh*

Thanks for the comment.


back to top