Oh Hollywood. Indeed. I sometimes see wood in the morning. Oh shite, wrong board. I forgot where and when I was again.

Made me laugh. I like doing that. And drinking. Er, wrong board again.

Pinkberry made me giggle too. Will someone please Brisk me? Oh go on. Please. No? Ah well. A swift stroll round some other boards then a night on the tiles.

I do hope I don't fall asleep in the park again. That can get... messy.

Eveving All.

You kids pkay nice now. Be good.

I'm sure you shall. Remember, the blokes on those fancy bikes from Quadrophenia are watching. And so they should. Bless 'em.

R ox

Ha! Great minds think alike, Breanne.  

Seriously, about the subject...

There's been a lot of articles about an alleged "franchise fatigue" lately. As much as I want to believe this, I don't think the trend is going away. Greenlighting material with a pre-built audience will always be seen as a safer bet for those risking their millions and their jobs.

And despite some recent underperformers, let's not forget the other side of the coin. "Toy Story" (threequel) is about to do a killing at the box office. "Knight and Day" (original) is tracking very low right now. This could change, but right now it looks like a flop.

Quoted from Mr.Z And despite some recent underperformers, let's not forget the other side of the coin. "Toy Story" (threequel) is about to do a killing at the box office. "Knight and Day" (original) is tracking very low right now. This could change, but right now it looks like a flop.

Pixar is a different breed altogether though.  You can't really compare.

Also, Inception will rule the summer.

It's a good point, Z --

The adjustment that needs to be made has as much or more to do with seeking out original storytellers and giving them artistic freedom as it does with seeking out original premises.  Of course attendance will be higher at a recognizable franchise than an original film if they're both made poorly.  If Hollywood wants original ideas, they need to give people the freedom -- and money -- to express them.

Few of the all-time great films of the last fifty years were considered surefire hits while being made.

Quoted from Heretic Few of the all-time great films of the last fifty years were considered surefire hits while being made.

The Wizard of Oz, It's a Wonderful Life and The Rocky Horror Picture Show are three great examples of this.


Phil

Quoted from dresseme Pixar is a different breed altogether though.

Agreed, but I doubt other studios' big wigs would admit that Pixar's model is so superior (artistically and commercially) that they're not worthy of comparison. I think that Toy's monster opening (which is huge even by Pixar's standards) will be widely regarded as another victiory of the franchise model.

But I can see why my example might appear troublesome. Perhaps I should have picked another franchise like Ironman. The sequel did pretty good business. And if you factor in merchandising and other revenue streams, this is still a gold mine.

On the flip side, early eastimates are pegging a 5.2M opening to Jonah Hex. An epic flop.

My point is that boxoffice numbers are contradictory to say the least. Right now, it seems to early to assume that some sort of *radical* change is coming any time soon.

Downey Jr. was recently attached to a Wizard of Oz prequel.
http://www.hsx.com/security/view/OZTGP

(No surprise, considering that Alice in Wonderland passed the billion dollar mark)

Perhaps the industry might move into some sort of middle ground? Maybe the studios could embrace a more "balanced diet" in their future slates and add more original material without abandoning the current model? Here's hope.

Quoted from dresseme Also, Inception will rule the summer.

I hope so. I really do.

Balance is fine. I grew up on Spiderman comics and I love that franchise (though I believe they've now gone and ruined it by canning everyone).

It's when Hollywood wants to pretend the sucky cartoon version of "The Hulk" never existed and a mere few years later they do what they should have done in the first place, which is turn it over to Edward Norton.

And remakes of classic movies are irritating. Set aside the Karate Kid for a moment because it's aimed at kids and teens, but what about "Pelham 1-2-3" Is that even necessary?

And I hear they're going to commit absolute sacrilege in my book by remaking "Slap Shot". Why? Does Hollywood realize that the writer Ned Dowd (who also played Ogelthorpe the super-goon) played alongside the Hansons and others in the movie in real life, and that most of the story was born from real events? How do you recapture that? And how do you recreate Paul Newman's performance?

Quoted from Mr.Z On the flip side, early estimates are pegging a 5.2M opening to Jonah Hex. An epic flop.

Jonah Hex isn't doing well because the studios chose not to make a comic book adaptation of the title character, but a western in the same vein as Wild Wild West.  The twin gatlin guns on the horse was ridiculous.  Other non-period weapons only made it worse.  And adding zombies only make it embarrassing.  And why did they give that dance hall girl/prostitute oversized thumbs?  What the fuck was that about?

Why does Hollywood have to reinvent the western genre?  It was their bread and butter for decades.


Phil

I'm not familiar with the original but, from what you're telling, it does look like the cooks pissed in the soup, haha.

I'll believe it when I see it. The majority of remakes are universally panned by critics and make a killing at the box office anyway. A lot of sequels tend to make even more money than their predecessors. The studios have found their working formula and don't care that The Karate Kid was a highlight of your childhood. Not if you still go see it opening weekend.

Quoted from dogglebe The Wizard of Oz, It's a Wonderful Life and The Rocky Horror Picture Show are three great examples of this. Phil

Phil, two of those are well over 60 years old.

Well a (not so much) more recent example would be Animal House - anyone ever see the behind the scenes special on Biography?

First, no college wanted them after seeing the script. They finally lucked out with the University of Oregon. Then, when they were ready to shoot, the money men said "you have no box office draw" - i.e., no star. So someone knew Sutherland through a husband's cousin's uncle's butcher or whatever and they wrote a part for him on the fly.

The two things that made that movie successful were that Ramis and the other writers (i) insisted on the right cast and (ii) had unwavering faith that their script would be the greatest comedy in history.

They were damned close, if not right on the money.

Jonah Hex looked bad from the poster. Really was no surprise.


Tim Burton redesigning the sequel to Wizard of Oz? Interesting.


I guess it shows that Hollywood is running out of ideas. Really, it really isn't possible for film to go on forever. There will always be ideas, but Hollywood knows that sooner or later there has to be an ending.

My guess is, 20-30 years into the future, film will be less profitable and perhaps less admireable than it was.

What used to be a great thing is slowly crawling to a stop.

As I said, ideas come easy. It's how you create it and turn it into a film that is the hard bit.

A new idea could be worth ten bucks in 1920...

I believe they do want original ideas....original ideas well told!

I've heard many people complain about this and they all seem to think THEIR story is original or unique and Hollywood is just stupid for not buying THEIR script. I've read a shitload  of scripts, spec and produced and very seldom do I read something original. I would say that Killing On Carnival Row was original. Not my type of script, but definitely different and it's in production (I think)...

I have also talked to Hollywood people and tried to pitch to them (face to face) and I definitely believe they are looking for unique and original. Like I said, most writers just seem so convinced THEIR stories are fresh and new when they really are not. JMHO...