R.I.P.: Movies c.1891 – 2011?

Mark Harris over at GQ online has written a great commentary on the current state of creative decision-making in Hollywood, and questioning if it is the beginning of the death of the art form.

GQ reports:

For the studios, a good new idea has become just too scary a road to travel. Inception, they will tell you, is an exceptional movie. And movies that need to be exceptional to succeed are bad business. “The scab you’re picking at is called execution,” says legendary producer Scott Rudin (The Social Network, True Grit). “Studios are hardwired not to bet on execution, and the terrible thing is, they’re right. Because in terms of execution, most movies disappoint.”

With that in mind, let’s look ahead to what’s on the menu for this year: four adaptations of comic books. One prequel to an adaptation of a comic book. One sequel to a sequel to a movie based on a toy. One sequel to a sequel to a sequel to a movie based on an amusement-park ride. One prequel to a remake. Two sequels to cartoons. One sequel to a comedy. An adaptation of a children’s book. An adaptation of a Saturday-morning cartoon. One sequel with a 4 in the title. Two sequels with a 5 in the title. One sequel that, if it were inclined to use numbers, would have to have a 7 1/2 in the title.

And no Inception.

2011 is set to break the Hollywood record for the most sequels ever released in one year (topping out at 27, breaking the previous record of 2003’s 24 sequels). A list and perspective on that can be found at Box Office Mojo here. Harris’ article is made even more frightening when one considers the cost of attending movies with your family is skyrocketing (in part thanks to the extra 3-D glasses fee), and that the overall quality of the number of films being tossed into theaters is at a low point. As inexpensive Netflix becomes more integrated into our homes through X-Boxes and Blu-Ray players, it gets harder to justify taking the kids out to the show.

I don’t think we’re seeing the end of the great American art form as Harris’ expounds, but I can’t say I disagree that we are definitely looking at some troubled times ahead that I hope studio execs will see and react with some change to.

Comment with Facebook

About Hollywood Slinky

The Hollywood Slinky has lived in Los Angeles, Chicago and Chattanooga. The Slinky attended film school at Columbia College in Chicago, is one of the creators and host of the film-centered podcast Lights Camera Cleveland and is currently a public relations specialist for a multi-million dollar corporation. Mostly, though, he just loves movies.

12 thoughts on “R.I.P.: Movies c.1891 – 2011?

  1. Someone mentioned that if you look at ALL the films released year to year, you get an insane ratio of crap to good. Probably since the beginning of films, really. Remember, in the 70s, there were plenty of bad movies every single year also. This is just another example of chicken little complex the world has right now.

  2. I can argue on this one,
    if you’re talk about one for the masses i.e projecting to be blockbusters, indeed, 2011 is having one sequels to many. But as saying comic book adaptation had been put to death, i disagree. Comparing to novel/literary book adaptation, comic book adaptation still a paltry fraction in comparison, and given the vastly number of storytelling in comic, i’m not sure the trend will be die soon. BTW, we are still early in the 2011, and as before, not many exciting movies (unless you talk about oscar bait) in theaters. I still have my optimism high for this year, and there will be some original story come out this year that can be sleeper hit. Myself, i’m keeping my eyes on Hannah & Sucker Punch for examples, they’re not adaptation of any sort, am i right?
    On the other hand, someone mentioning Final Destination 5 coming this year, well that one franchise that should have reached it’s “final destination” eons ago. Should be put to death and out of pasture. Who still watching that movies anyway?

  3. and dont give me the “IMAX” argument. if I wanna have my eardrums blown out I’ll go to a Metallica concert but not while I’m watching Adam Sandlers latest

    1. That works.
      Scream 4 should count a sequel with a 4 in the title.
      Hoodwinked too counts as a sequel to a cartoon

      Now that I am looking at the list, I don’t see anything for plain old remakes. Maybe there were too many to count.

  4. I see this as a game

    four adaptations of comic books.(Captian America, Thor, Green Lantern, Cowboys vs Aliens, Priest – thats five not counting x-men)
    One prequel to an adaptation of a comic book. (X-men: first Class)
    One sequel to a sequel to a movie based on a toy.(Transformors)
    One sequel to a sequel to a sequel to a movie based on an amusement-park ride. (POTC)
    One prequel to a remake. (???)
    Two sequels to cartoons. (Kung Fu Panda, Cars)
    One sequel to a comedy. (Hangover)
    An adaptation of a children’s book. (Winnie the Pooh)
    An adaptation of a Saturday-morning cartoon. (Smurfs)
    One sequel with a 4 in the title. (Spy Kids 4)
    Two sequels with a 5 in the title. (Fast Five, Final Destination 5)
    One sequel that, if it were inclined to use numbers, would have to have a 7 1/2 in the title.(Harry Potter)

  5. i dont think its dying, just changing. mainstream movies are giving the audience less and less of what they want, but that doesn’t mean all movies are doing this. as more media is being put onto the internet, it becomes easier for independent movie makers to make a film and get it seen.

  6. What’s funny is I discovered this article, at work on friday. I was just telling my boss “For the last few weeks, I’ve been wanting to go to the movies…but when I look at what’s playing…nothing excites me. Not even the indie releases” Then, I go to GQ.com to look up an editorial (I work with a fashion company, so I have to frequent the site) and I saw this article. I was GLUED! I read the whole thing quickly but thoroughly and I agreed 100%! I made a similar comment in the Thor thread posted on here…i’m not trying to sound like a snob, but for a while, I feel the comic book angle has been played to death already. I’m not excited for all the comic stuff they have coming out soon and I’ve grown tired of remakes and sequels. I loved how he used the 70’s as a blueprint to how American cinema was at it’s apex in creativity then. I wholeheartedly agree too. I’ve mentioned in film discussions time and time again how original screenplays and original films have died since the 70s. Every year, you had something phenomenal coming out! Straw Dogs, Network, The Conversation, The Deer Hunter, Badlands, and most of those were the indie releases then! The major studio films were still also a breath of fresh air too. Rocky, The Godfather, Dirty Harry…It’s definitely a mix of things..but I will mostly say it’s the fault of the element that goes to the theater these days. It doesn’t deter me from going, it just makes me more careful as to what time I go to the theater. I choose early weekdays, on my days off mostly. People can’t put their cell phones away, people can’t stop talking, i don’t know…it’s definitely a subjective yet strongly solid article.

  7. Interesting. It’s the same with books.

    Luckily, there’s a theater I fondly refer to as the “dirt” theater near me that charges nothing for movie tickets. It keeps me going to the movies. But it doesn’t help that I don’t want to see half the movies that are out there…

Leave a Reply