@Moon...
Indeed, look at Dredd - didn't set the box office alight (but didn't bomb either), however it did very well indeed on home video, and now there's a big campaign by fans demanding a sequel that's getting a lot of attention - so formerly low/no expectations for a sequel have become "actively pursuing a sequel". 
I think with these massive budget flicks ... there's just too many of them - and as such there's not enough risk attached to their stories. Oftentimes it's the usual sort of beats, the usual sort of actors, etc etc ... plus the budget can overtake the human element very easily. The Transformers movies are just glorified toy adverts with the second and third being moronic, lumbering, ADHD leviathons.
That's another thing - running times - some of the mega budget flicks could probably trim their budgets down if they just ruddy well re-learned how to be lean with their story telling. I mean come on, Transformers 3 isn't a deep character drama is it, so why on earth did it need to be as bloody long as it was? It's just too much movie. Plus, they could have smartened up the script an awful lot.
Yeah, it won't be a burst per se, but with a series of vast budgetted flicks not performing as expected, we should eventually see a trickle-down effect where the budgets get reigned in a bit. It'd also be nice to have some more variety - nearly every movie seems to be superhero or comic book related at the moment. It's getting a bit much - a bit overkill - at the moment. Also, there should be more riskier projects given medium budgets - get some daring material back into the multiplexes, you know?
I'd also like to see much more 'day and date' releases - simultaneous, cross-platform releases. One example was "A Field In England" here in the UK - a mixed bag of a film, but a very low budget flick that was a daring project with an idiosyncratic air about it, that released in cinemas, on VOD, DVD, Blu-Ray, and on freeview television all on the same day - and it did quite well for itself. The numbers are still being crunched, but initial views on the business side seem to be good. Give the viewer as many viewing option as possible, and you'll be able to bring in a bit more cash straight away while the iron is still hot (before people forget about the film, and therefore might never watch it, or just wait a couple of years for it to be on telly, rather than buying the DVD/BR/VOD when their interest is high).
Interesting times ahead, methinks. There'll always be a place for massive budget flicks - but there's too many of them out there nowadays. That's the problem ... also, in some instances, trying to create a franchise, rather than simply a bloody good film that could then become a franchise. One thing at a time, movie studios. Throwing enough money at enough explosions and enough A-List faces isn't filmmaking.
|
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by rongravy
Bookmarks