The Dishmaster

Entertainment News With a Side of Dish

Monday

5

July 2010

4

COMMENTS

Where Did All the Good Movies Go?

Written by , Posted in General

Ever since Tom Cruise jumped on Oprah’s couch, there has been a lot of talk about how he “fell from grace.”  It’s possible that he’s responsible for his own demise, but what of all the other A-list actors that haven’t had hits in years?  What about Bruce Willis, Harrison Ford, Jim Carrey, Michelle Pfeiffer, Robin Williams, Denzel Washington, and Eddie Murphy?  Did all these guys jump on Oprah’s couch?  It’s not as if younger actors are taking the place of these Hollywood veterans.  Who’s the new action star that replaced Bruce Willis?  And what comedic actor is the new Jim Carrey?  So what’s the answer?  The painful truth is that Hollywood just isn’t making good movies anymore.  The days of risk-taking and creativity are over.  We have entered an era of butchering our coveted classics with painful remakes, and extending a franchise way beyond its welcome.  Why?  Because it’s easy and cheap.  It simply does not cost the studio as much money to promote a remake.  We all know what ‘Charlie and the Chocolate Factory’ is about, so the title alone is enough – no need to see the trailer more than once.  It’s less of a risk, because the nostalgia will automatically bring people to the theater.  It also only requires two brain cells to come up with a remake, so pure laziness is another possible factor.  I understand that we are all a bunch of hypocrites that speak with out wallets (given that these movies all make money), but when there is no competition, our love for the theater means we’ll go no matter what – with or without quality.  So the next time you start your A-list actor bashing, ask yourself whose fault their slump is – the studio or the actor.

  • Jack

    In my humble opinion, there’s just no character development in movies today or for that matter the last 35 to 40 years.There’s Pacino, Nicholson & Deniro but let’s face it , even these guys have become a parody of themselves. I watch foreign films to satisfy my “Big Screen” needs. C’mon Dishmaster, Tom Cruise? Maybe he’s taken some cheap shots lately but great actor?

  • Jack

    In my humble opinion, there’s just no character development in movies today or for that matter the last 35 to 40 years.There’s Pacino, Nicholson & Deniro but let’s face it , even these guys have become a parody of themselves. I watch foreign films to satisfy my “Big Screen” needs. C’mon Dishmaster, Tom Cruise? Maybe he’s taken some cheap shots lately but great actor?

  • Shaq

    The problem is not that studios are lazy. The problem is that people are lazy. There has to be a serious draw for people to leave their homes to go to the movie theater today. No one asks the question, “What should we do tonight? I don’t know let’s go to the movies and see if there is anything good to watch.” Instead they say, “Lets stay in and order take out.”
    Today, you can seriously be very entertained just from being home.

    10 years ago you did have the internet and cable, but you couldn’t watch anything you wanted when you wanted to. They did not have on demand viewing, dvrs or tv shows you could view online. If you wanted to find something you wanted to watch, you could either stay home and channel surf or drive to the rental store or watch a film in the theater.

    People would go to the theater often. Many had already seen the must-see film. They were looking for something else to entertain them. They would have to guess what other films may be good. They actually would decide what film to see at the box office stand, rather than feel dragged out of their home to see the few must-see releases that come out each year.

    All of those first daring people that decided to venture out of the box would sometimes see a great film. It would then spread like wild fire from word of mouth. Studios weren’t dependent on franchises for films to be a success, because people took more chances at the movie theater.

    Things have changed. It is not the studio’s fault. They just make movies, based on the current formula.

    All of the best performing films in the last 10 years have all been from franchises:
    Avatar, Transformers:Revenge of the Fallen, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Twilight Saga: New Moon (2009)
    Dark Knight, Ironman, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)
    Spider-man 3, Shrek the Third, Transformers, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007)
    Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest, X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)
    Star Wars: Episode III, Chronicles of Narnia, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)
    Shrek 2, Spider-man 2 (2004)
    Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, Matrix Reloaded (2003)
    Spider-man, Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, Star Wars: Episode II – Attack of the Clones, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)
    Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Shrek (2001)

    Few franchise films are critically acclaimed, but they bring in serious cash at the box office. Movies that are a critical success do not produce nearly as much box office receipts as they used to.

    All of the films with strong critical reviews in the last five years made significantly less than the top performers. This is even for films that were very well known:
    Hurt Locker, Serious Man (2009)
    Slumdog Millionaire, Frost/Nixon, Milk, The Reader (2008)
    No Country for Old Men, Juno (2007)
    The Departed, Babel (2006)
    Crash, Brokeback Mountain, Munich (2005)

    It is not that important for studios to produce films with great reviews. It does not translate to box office success, nearly as much as it used to.
    Before 2000, it was not uncommon for the films with the best reviews to also be of the top grossing movies:
    Gladiator, Cast Away (2000)
    Sixth Sense (1999)
    Saving Private Ryan (1998)
    Titanic (1997)

    If people want better films, perhaps they should start supporting them at the box office, rather than only deciding to leave the house for a redundant franchise film.

  • Shaq

    The problem is not that studios are lazy. The problem is that people are lazy. There has to be a serious draw for people to leave their homes to go to the movie theater today. No one asks the question, “What should we do tonight? I don’t know let’s go to the movies and see if there is anything good to watch.” Instead they say, “Lets stay in and order take out.”
    Today, you can seriously be very entertained just from being home.

    10 years ago you did have the internet and cable, but you couldn’t watch anything you wanted when you wanted to. They did not have on demand viewing, dvrs or tv shows you could view online. If you wanted to find something you wanted to watch, you could either stay home and channel surf or drive to the rental store or watch a film in the theater.

    People would go to the theater often. Many had already seen the must-see film. They were looking for something else to entertain them. They would have to guess what other films may be good. They actually would decide what film to see at the box office stand, rather than feel dragged out of their home to see the few must-see releases that come out each year.

    All of those first daring people that decided to venture out of the box would sometimes see a great film. It would then spread like wild fire from word of mouth. Studios weren’t dependent on franchises for films to be a success, because people took more chances at the movie theater.

    Things have changed. It is not the studio’s fault. They just make movies, based on the current formula.

    All of the best performing films in the last 10 years have all been from franchises:
    Avatar, Transformers:Revenge of the Fallen, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Twilight Saga: New Moon (2009)
    Dark Knight, Ironman, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)
    Spider-man 3, Shrek the Third, Transformers, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007)
    Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest, X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)
    Star Wars: Episode III, Chronicles of Narnia, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)
    Shrek 2, Spider-man 2 (2004)
    Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, Matrix Reloaded (2003)
    Spider-man, Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, Star Wars: Episode II – Attack of the Clones, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)
    Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, Shrek (2001)

    Few franchise films are critically acclaimed, but they bring in serious cash at the box office. Movies that are a critical success do not produce nearly as much box office receipts as they used to.

    All of the films with strong critical reviews in the last five years made significantly less than the top performers. This is even for films that were very well known:
    Hurt Locker, Serious Man (2009)
    Slumdog Millionaire, Frost/Nixon, Milk, The Reader (2008)
    No Country for Old Men, Juno (2007)
    The Departed, Babel (2006)
    Crash, Brokeback Mountain, Munich (2005)

    It is not that important for studios to produce films with great reviews. It does not translate to box office success, nearly as much as it used to.
    Before 2000, it was not uncommon for the films with the best reviews to also be of the top grossing movies:
    Gladiator, Cast Away (2000)
    Sixth Sense (1999)
    Saving Private Ryan (1998)
    Titanic (1997)

    If people want better films, perhaps they should start supporting them at the box office, rather than only deciding to leave the house for a redundant franchise film.