This is nothing new, it’s not a novel argument, the distinction between popular things and quality thins has always been wide, for the most part. An article in Esquire cites some comparisons, the Duck Dynasty finale last season which drew 10 million viewers compared to the Mad Men finale that drew only 3 million and an unfunny midseason episode of The Big Bang Theory that drew 20 million viewers while shows from comedic geniuses like Louis C.K. and Amy Schumer have to be made for pennies because they’re always on the bubble. That article is much more interesting and in-depth than this one but I just used it as a jumping off point to start a conversation. This argument always comes up around Oscar season, as people wonder if any of the nominees will actually make any money.*** It’s not out of the ordinary for studios to spend more money on advertising campaigns for Oscar consideration than the films grossed or cost to make because acclaim is what keeps them going if they can‘t bring in superhero money. Hollywood stars aren’t the draw they used to be because by now, those stars are reluctant to jump aboard established franchises because they think their name and face is still the draw but franchise sequels are the only movies that make money nowadays. They can win Oscars by doing gritty indie films but studios would rather pay a newcomer a few dollars to be the face of an already established franchise because paying $20 million to Will Smith isn’t worth the risk anymore. A theater like Laemmle that is supposed to specialize in art-house and independent cinema rarely does, at least in Claremont, because art-house and independent doesn’t sell. There’s a reason we only show documentaries and foreign language films, films that will probably be shortlisted for Oscars, twice a week while The Lone Ranger gets 21 screenings per week. Even though people claim to like smaller films, they really don’t, but good for them for pretending to. Maybe they’ll stumble upon something good by accident on Netflix. The movies that sell tickets and popcorn for Laemmle are low to mid budget passion projects headlined by Tom Hanks and Meryl Streep that don‘t make a splash at the box office. Sometimes a film breaks through and makes a star out of someone but it’s rare. Most indie films open in New York and LA and if they do well MAYBE they’ll screen for our friends in Omaha or Fargo a month later because nobody in Omaha or Fargo knows who Ellen Page is until Juno comes to the local theater. Theaters and television networks are businesses and as much as we hate seeing shows we like get the axe and shows we hate, or worse, don’t care about at all, thrive, we wouldn’t have anything at all if they weren’t around. That’s why the old model keeps being used, the same reheated jokes and premises keep being served up, the same shows keep getting spin-offs, the same movies keep getting remade and sequelized: It’s not worth the trouble to try something new and they want to stay in business. Most people eat the same food every day, date the same kind of people over and over again, maintain the same routine because it works and it’s comfortable and it’s easy. When people break out and try something new, we get interesting art and it gets us talking and that’s when the magic happens.^
*Do you really think Louie will get 11 seasons?
**A list that includes such gems from the past few years as Happy Endings, BFF, Apartment 23, Bored To Death, The Killing and Terriers just to name a few.
***When I say “people wonder” I don’t mean people I know or talk to because nobody I know or talk to cares about box office grosses or awards shows or Hollywood trends so I have to get my info online and skirt that world via podcasts and the internet. I'm aware that nobody I know cares about this stuff but for some reason I think about it a lot and write blog posts expecting people to read about it.
^That was the most cliché sentence I have ever written.
No comments:
Post a Comment