The big picture (allowing for some exceptions) is this: The six major studios
want to make three kinds of movies. They want to make blockbusters costing a
hundred and fifty million dollars and up (with another fifty to a hundred
million dollars spent on promotion)—that is, films that are based on comic
books, video games, and young-adult novels. These movies mostly feature angry
pixels contending in the dead air—action sequences of total physical abandonment
and virtually total meaninglessness, in which nothing imprints itself on your
memory except the experience of being excited. They want to make animated
features for families, some of which—especially the ones from Pixar—are very
good. And they want to make genre movies—thrillers, chick flicks, romantic
comedies, weekend-debauch movies (female as well as male), horror movies. Movies
that have a mostly assured audience.
The range of films made by the studios has shrunk—serious drama is virtually out of the question. A good, solid movie like Tony Gilroy’s “Michael Clayton” (2007), with George Clooney, wouldn’t have a shot at being made now. I suspect “The Social Network” got made only because Aaron Sorkin wrote the script. “Lawrence of Arabia,” from 1962, which is playing all over the county October 4th for one day on big screens, wouldn’t even be considered now.
- More Here
The range of films made by the studios has shrunk—serious drama is virtually out of the question. A good, solid movie like Tony Gilroy’s “Michael Clayton” (2007), with George Clooney, wouldn’t have a shot at being made now. I suspect “The Social Network” got made only because Aaron Sorkin wrote the script. “Lawrence of Arabia,” from 1962, which is playing all over the county October 4th for one day on big screens, wouldn’t even be considered now.
- More Here
No comments:
Post a Comment