Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Monday, February 06, 2006

Clueless In Hollywood

An interesting reader response to Evan Coyne Maloney:
What also struck me about the Hollywood Reporter article was the myopic self-centeredness of the filmmakers cited, their inability to look outside their tiny enclave of culture elitism.

The Crash co-writer says, "People want films that have something to say; they're tired of fluff."

Crash director Paul Haggis: "It's great for the films and great for the nation. It says people are embracing these issues, that they don't want to go to the theater to forget. They want to be involved, to participate."

Which "people" are they referring to? Who are "they"? Certainly not the American public.

Look at these box office figures. The average box office for the Best Picture nominees this year is less than $38 million. The highest-grossing nominee was Crash, with $53 million. It was the 48th highest-grossing movie of 2005.

Think about that. The highest-grossing Best Picture nominee earned less than 47 other movies released last year.

If Crash wins, it would be the lowest-grossing Best Picture since 1987. (In non-adjusted dollars: If you adjust for inflation, I suspect it would be the lowest-grossing Best Picture of all time.) And Crash is, thus far, the most successful of the nominated movies. (Granted, Brokeback is still in the theatres and is likely soon to surpass Crash, but not by enough to affect my underlying point.)

An excellent point, though this self-centered version of Hollywood can't last forever. Ultimately movie-making is a business, and businesses must embrace the tenants of capitalism. If these movies aren't making enough money they won't be made.

Really, though, the movie industry had better be careful. If they keep churning out crap the public at large isn't interested in their customers will turn to other venues for their entertainment. Apple is already offering episodes of popular shows for purchase/download in their iTunes store, and with video equipment and web hosting getting cheaper all the time it won't be long before entrepreneurs and entertainers around the globe are competing directly with the movie industry. But at this point that may well be inevitable, whether Hollywood gets it together or not.

Comments

Avatar for Dave

Look at these box office figures. The average box office for the Best Picture nominees this year is less than $38 million. The highest-grossing nominee was Crash, with $53 million. It was the 48th highest-grossing movie of 2005.

Yes, and I’m sure Tom Clancy and Stephen King sold more books this year than John Milton or Dante. Commercial success does not in any way equal artistic achievement. The fact that Herbie: Fully Loaded outgrossed Munich is an indictment of Americans, not Hollywood. We’ve become lazy, artistically blasé.
Dave on February 6, 2006 at 05:02 am
Avatar for Zsa Zsa

I find it odd how the Oil Industry is attacked for profiting??? When the Movie Industry is a money making profit industry too and I never see windfall profit tax encouraged there?…

Zsa Zsa on February 6, 2006 at 05:03 am
Avatar for Andrew

I hate to sound like an elitist or anything, but Dave’s absolutely right.  Just because a lot of people saw a cetain movie, doesn’t necessarily mean that the majority of those viewers thought it was good.  And this “self-centered version of Hollywood” has always been around.  Just look at movies like Citizen Kane that are cosidered masterpieces but tanked at the box office.

Andrew on February 6, 2006 at 07:03 am
Avatar for Mark

I would also agree with Dave.

I found this comment interesting -

If [Hollywood] keep churning out crap the public at large isn’t interested in

The way most ‘arts’ industries work (be it cinema, books, music) is that a few big earners subsidise the rest of the output. So Dan Brown, for instance, gives a publisher the liberty to publish more diverse and niche titles. Likewise Coldplay (in this country certainly) allow EMI to put out records by really esoteric (and probably loss-making) bands.

So ‘crap the public at large isn’t interested in’ really means ‘films most people don’t want to see, but a small group of people really do want to see’. Granted, these films might not make nearly as much money - but that certainly does not make them ‘crap’, nor do I think it constitutes a legitimate argument for churning out unoriginal blockbusters and nothing else. That might make more money (although I doubt it would be a good long-term strategy) but it would certainly make the cinema far less interesting.

Mark on February 6, 2006 at 08:03 am
Avatar for docdave

Sorry, I can’t agree with you.  Unlike you I go to the cinema to be entertained not to be indoctrinated in an ideology in which I disagree.  I do not find blatant sex, bloody violence and political messages, subliminal or otherwise, entertaining.  So if Hollywood insists on making ‘crap’ movies and ‘crap’ is ‘films most people don’t want to see, but a small group of people really do want to se, then I guess that Hollywood is going to have to get used to smaller audiences.

docdave on February 6, 2006 at 09:02 am
Rob
Rob
19421 comments
Send a private message

Andrew, no offense or anything but sometimes I wonder if you think anything is a big deal.

As to the artistic vs. popular discussion, that’s a valid point.  But also remember that it works both ways.  Take Stephen King, for example.  He is often derided as a sub-par, gimmick-writer for the unwashed masses, yet I think his work is often undervalued.  Does his work contain hidden symbolism and social commentary?  Not most of the time, no.  Is he one of the modern age’s most brilliant story-tellers?  Absolutely.  Especially his short story work, which is superb.

Just as sometimes people tend to see poor earning figures as indication of a work’s failures, some see earning success as evidence of a work being “artistically blasé.” And you see this sort of thing everywhere.  Like in the music industry.  People always saying they liked a band before it “sold out.” Meaning usually just that the band got popular on a larger scale and it no longer was “cool” or “unique” to like them.

The LOTR movies is a perfect example.  From every aspect that triology was a masterpiece.  Special effects.  Cinematography.  Everything.  One of the best set of movies of all time, in my estimation.  Tolkein’s story, especially, (though the “good vs. evil” tones are probably lost on most in this age of political correcness and nuanced multiculturalism) was masterfully done.  So should this work be discounted because it perfomed well in theaters?

Absolutely not.  Artistry is one thing, but there is also something to be said of accessibility.  What good is a masterpiece if hardly anybody can understand it?

Which is one complaint I’ve always had of James Joyce, myself.

Anyway, back to the Hollywood issue, I think a lot of Americans are just getting tired of being told what to like.


When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on February 6, 2006 at 10:02 am
Avatar for Andrew

Ultimately though, the movie industry lives off of profits and losses just as any other Capitalistic enterprise.

Which also brings up a good point.  A movie like Brokeback Mountain may not bring in anywhere near what LOTR did, but how much did Brokeback cost compared to LOTR?  With LOTR shooting, production, actors, advertising were all astronomical.  A lot of these “artsy” movies are relatively inexpensive and still take in a good amount of box office revenues as well as DVD rentals and purchases.  Sometimes finding niches can be more profitable and easier than pleasing the majority.

So I still don’t see what the big deal is if Crash or Brokeback take home more awards than some really popular high-budget movie.  Afterall, its film critics and professionals that are picking the recipients. It’s not a viewers-choice show.  So all of our opinions really don’t matter.

Andrew on February 6, 2006 at 10:02 am
Avatar for Justin B

I think Doc Dave is onto the real issue here.  Hollywood continues to put out movies that insult the ideology and values of the majority of Americans, and the Awards given by the entertainment industry tend to be given to those that are the most insulting.

Box office success is certainly not the only measure of the quality of a film, but compare Titanic (although weak by artistic standards), LOTR, Ben Hur--to this years drivel nominated for Best Picture.  Explain how Gay Cowboys or rampant racial stereotyping is more compelling or even more artistic than LOTR, Titanic, or Ben Hur that all three were great movies as well as hugely commercially viable when they won damned near every award.

On the flip side, the highest grossing movie last weekend with almost $30M, was Big Momma’s House II.  So box office earnings is not the best measure.  Ultimately though, the movie industry lives off of profits and losses just as any other Capitalistic enterprise.  If Big Momma’s House subsidizes some artsy crap, that is for investors to decide.  But Hollywood is continuing to cram gay cowboys down our throats… wait, that was not stated right… and most of us are tired of what Hollywood is offering.

Justin B on February 6, 2006 at 10:03 am
Avatar for LoadTheMule

The fact that Herbie: Fully Loaded outgrossed Munich is an indictment of Americans, not Hollywood.

And that indictment would be what? (I can’t wait for the answer to this.)

Regards…

LoadTheMule on February 6, 2006 at 11:02 am
Avatar for Dave

That they’re “clueless.”

Dave on February 6, 2006 at 11:02 am
Avatar for LoadTheMule

Clueless in what regard, Dave?  In that they’d rather see something mindless and lowbrow instead of something you deem more worthwhile and enlightening?

Gee, I know they’re just the unwashed masses that inhabit the flyover states, but do they really need someone else (omigosh, perhaps even you) passing judgment what they should/shouldn’t pay their money to see?

Regards…

LoadTheMule on February 6, 2006 at 11:02 am
Rob
Rob
19421 comments
Send a private message

You’re clueless because you don’t share Davey’s taste in cinema and literature.

Got that LTM?  Or should we ask Davey to translate further for we plebes.


When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on February 6, 2006 at 11:03 am
Avatar for LoadTheMule

Rob, I’m reminded of the Andy Griffith Show episode where Andy tries to civilize Ernerst T. Bass so as to pass him off as a gentleman at one of Mrs Wiley’s soirees.  Though bathed, dressed, and Miss Mannered by Andy, et al, Ernest (under the thin veneer of temporary respectability) was still Ernest after all.  At the party he gets flustered with the small talk, commits a faux pas, and Mrs Wiley says, “Mr Bass, you are rude!” Ernest immediately seeks out Andy and proudly proclaims, “I got a ‘rude’ Andy, what’d you get?”

You reckon Dave is Mrs Wiley and we’re just poor ol’ Ernest?

Regards…

LoadTheMule on February 6, 2006 at 11:03 am
Rob
Rob
19421 comments
Send a private message

Could be.

It is amazing how some people think you can’t be intelligent until you read the right sort of books, or appreciate the right sort of artistic expression.  Some of the smartest people I have ever met (my own grandfather among them) probably only read a dozen or so books in their entire life.


When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on February 6, 2006 at 12:02 pm
Avatar for Justin B

No Dave, I think the undertones of the Political Left are well felt in our G Rated movies too.  Portray the rich or the powerful as corrupt and have the hero be some average joe that fights against the man…

Same plot from Erin Brockovich, and it happens to be the plot of Monsters Inc., and damned near everything in Hollywood these days including Syrianna.

Good times.  Fight the man.  But where is the outrage about offshoring of American Jobs when movies like Star Wars and LOTR are shot in Australia and New Zealand where the cinemas pay far less in wages than they would pay to an American worker?  The Left is not fighting for the Hollywood “grips” and such when Hollywood moves their movies to be shot “on location” which is code for wherever the workers can sound and look American, but at a much lower cost.

Hollywood does not have any Evil Corporations that do Evil Things do they?  Google does not ever do anything Evil?  Nope, just us middle Americans, the Republicans, and big Corporations that are not based in Hollywood or run by Liberals.

Justin B on February 6, 2006 at 12:02 pm
Avatar for Zsa Zsa

Rob… My grandfather went to school up until the 3rd. grade! He was an interesting guy and would emphasize to me that Education was the most important thing a person could do! He was a very wealthy man and made his money in the oil bussiness. I think back in his day it was very different! He could read and loved the Wall street journal and educated himself…
The motion picture business puts out a great deal of mindless Blah! Parents allow their children to watch this garbage and the movie makers are big money makers. I don’t recall my grandfather ever reading a book, but he wasn’t stupid by any means!...And if he was? He sure fooled me!

Zsa Zsa on February 6, 2006 at 12:02 pm
Avatar for Andrew

Andrew, no offense or anything but sometimes I wonder if you think anything is a big deal.

Sure I do.  I think terrorism is a big deal.  I think cancer’s a big deal.  I think the government’s excessive spending is a big deal.  I just don’t think the fact that the Best Picture award didn’t go to a movie you wanted is a big deal. 

These awards are based on their artistic merit, not box office success.  Critics decide who is nominated.  It’s their opinion and they shouldn’t change it just to fit in with the majority.  I’m not saying I agree with their choices (actually I don’t agree), but I’m not going to care either.

I’ll definately agree that a lot of movies have liberal tendancies (I’d even say some had out-right liberal agendas).  But it’s their money and they can do what they want with it.  If I don’t like or agree with it, I just won’t watch it.  If everyone had that attitude things would quickly change.

Andrew on February 6, 2006 at 12:02 pm
Avatar for Dave

The facts are that, in general, “G” rated movies far out-gross the “R” rated ones. Hollywood thinks that the majority of the USA is “square” and wants to change the views (including voting patterns).

Are you suggesting that G-rated material can’t get people to change their views or voting patterns?

Dave on February 6, 2006 at 12:02 pm
Avatar for Dave

You’re clueless because you don’t share Davey’s taste in cinema and literature.

Seeing as you just called Hollywood “clueless” for not sharing the public’s taste in cinema, I can’t see why you’d find it all that shocking.

Dave on February 6, 2006 at 12:02 pm
Avatar for Chief RZ

Justin,
You and I agree on their insulting ideology.  A person close to me is in the movie industry.  The facts are that, in general, “G” rated movies far out-gross the “R” rated ones.  Hollywood thinks that the majority of the USA is “square” and wants to change the views (including voting patterns).  I’m on my way over to your blog.

Chief RZ on February 6, 2006 at 12:03 pm
Avatar for robert108

ZZ: Great point! In our free enterprise system, people vote with their dollars.  It’s no coincidence that the lefties want to redefine success to suit themselves.  They consider themselves superior to the rest of us, and so consider the “polling data” from the Hollywood elite more meaningful than the dollar votes of the population, just like the last two elections.  Just more elitism here.  BTW, I really liked “Crash”. It harpooned many sacred cows.

robert108 on February 6, 2006 at 12:03 pm
Avatar for Zsa Zsa

The largest group of movie audiences are most likely not adult… They are easier targets and they buy into the teen idol sensationalism thing. I personally don’t like being told what to like and have almost entirely stopped going to movies. Motion picture makers are in it for money. The artistic side of it is seldom ever seen these days. Steven Spielberg is one of the only film makers that I can think right off hand who might have that artistic thing going for him??? But, I did like Drew Barrymoore’s Charlies Angels! I really don’t recall the last time I went to a movie?

Zsa Zsa on February 6, 2006 at 12:03 pm
Avatar for Justin B

Andrew is right.  I choose to simply ignore the Hollywood crap completely, save for the few movies that I buy or rent or maybe even pay $10 to go see a year.  I don’t watch Hollywood Insider or the E True Hollywood Stories of Paris Hilton or any of the Awards shows.  I don’t go and see many movies either.  I don’t go to plays or operas or art galleries.  But neither do most Americans.  I go to ballgames (of all varieties but have ASU and Phoenix Suns Season tickets), go to my kids’ little league games, go to their school plays, and read books like “Froggy Goes to the Doctor”.  I don’t like wine and love the outdoors.

The left and folks like Dave would convince you that it is because I am either ignorant, stupid (Summa Cum Laude from ASU in Business) or uncultured.  See, that is why Republicans just don’t “get” what Hollywood is trying to teach us.  We are the mindless ones.

Nope, we just want things that teach our children our values, not yours, and have other things that are more important than your self absorbed desire to prove your intellectual superiority to the masses that disagree with you.  That is why they are called the Liberal Elite or Elitists.  I don’t believe they are stupid or wrong for liking what they do, but they sure as hell look down on the rest of us for not jumping up and running to the box office to see Gay Cowboys or Jesus Christ smeared with feces.  I just don’t want their crap forced on me.

Justin B on February 6, 2006 at 01:03 pm
Avatar for Dave

I go to the cinema to be entertained not to be indoctrinated in an ideology in which I disagree.

If I limited myself to movies that portrayed libertarianism in a positive light, I just wouldn’t watch very many movies (Million Dollar Baby and..... oooh! The Fountainhead!). It’s really easy to enjoy a piece of art even if you disagree with its theme. Ayn Rand loved Hugo and Dostoevsky, despite having huge philosophical and political disagreements with them. Similarly, while I disagree with Orson Welles’s politics, that doesn’t mean I can’t enjoy Touch of Evil just the same. Art does not influence my political views, just as my political don’t influence my artistic views; both are strong enough and reasonable enough to survive bias. If Dead Man Walking is enough to make you oppose capital punishment (or liberalism enough to make you enjoy Fahrenheit 9/11), you should reconsider why you hold your fickle views in the first place.
Dave on February 6, 2006 at 01:03 pm
Avatar for Hubert

I don’t like either when I’m taught some controvercial truths while watching movies. That irritates me the most.

Hubert on July 19, 2006 at 07:00 am
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.

    

By submitting your comment you agree to our terms of service.