HSX Forum

Movies

Reply Topic List All Forums

report abuse

A collection of Avengers-related thoughts about the movies.

Posted by: DTXbro (a.k.a SenJohnBlutarsky) on May 07, 07:46

1. The movies may be following a luxurification path similar to that experienced with respect to many goods and certain entertainments (sporting events, concerts). As the American economy intensifies the have-have not divide, exhibitors and producers could understandably focus on high-end consumers who are relatively price-insensitive, willing to pay for 3D enhancement and better refreshments. This could generate higher prices (and profits, consequent to luxury-level margins). If the industry had a do-over for the Avengers weekend, it might have charged an additional buck or two for Avengers showings. Increased prices could remove some consumers from the mix, but they probably would be abandoned as much as lost by the industry. Will affluent consumers prefer different types of movies? How much would variable ticket pricing influence greenlight decisions?

2. Competitive factors may incline exhibitors and producers (to the extent producers' interests or sympathies are aligned with those of exhibitors) to favor spectacular movies at the expense of less-flash, more-substantive works. I rarely attend a theater because I prefer to watch movies (and other entertainments) at home, for reasons including convenience, comfort, and far better refreshments. More threatening to exhibitors: My children increasingly share this preference. The primary motivator for a trip to the big screen is a movie whose scale can not be handled by even the largest home screen. I am willing to drive to the theater, bend to the theater's schedule, eat lesser popcorn, put up with rude patrons, etc. for The Dark Knight Rises in a theater, but not for an Adam Sandler film -- even if I love Sandler. The Sandler movie is better at home. But the Dark Knight is better in a theater. These "scale" movies may be the most potent weapon theaters (and producers, to the extent they care about exhibitors) possess in which may be a battle for survival. This point, again, seems likely to become more influential in determining which movies are made (or at laest are well-funded).

3. We may be witnessing the infantilization of the movies (and their patrons). Young children not only do not mind watching a rerun, they often prefer a rerun to an unfamiliar episode. When watching something for the first time, young children like familiar characters. Young children like simple entertainments. Studios are producing movies based on standby characters, with concepts as shallow and familar as board games -- the Tic Tac Toe Movie is likely being pitched this week -- for undemanding consumers who watch multiple showings. Producers are grafting ever-more-predictable plots on ever-more-familiar, ever-flimsier canvasses. Children of all ages are eating this stuff up like it was Velveeta-flavored Cheetos. HSX traders appear to be honoring this trend by gobbling every comic-related security in sight today.

4. It will be interesting to observe how some of these trends affect the star system (and the role of talent among actors). Comic-spawned movies do not rely on huge stars. Comic-based casts do not require huge paychecks. CGI and explosions do not require much acting talent. In a world in which exhibitors push superhuman spectacle, will Denzel Washington or Tom Hanks be able to command a $15 million fee? Will Johnny Depp or Angelina Jolie be able to compete with dynamite and software for eyeballs?

5. Will "artist" directors be made obsolete by "plumber" directors? Two of the most common paths to big-budget directing careers today involve music videos and commercials. Are these directors capable to telling a story more complicated than Cialis commercial? Is there any reason for them to do so? Will (could) Michael Bay ever become a Scorcese or Spielberg? Will the next Eastwood or Wilder or Lumet be able to compete for funding with someone who lands Iron Man 9 based on Motley Crew videos and Budweiser ads?

Before crediting any of this, you should probably check the GPA list for Delta House brothers.

A collection of Avengers-related thoughts about the movies. DTXbro May 07, 07:46

agreed on your point 3. Furthermore; 'why so serious' about this kiddiefare JMT-NL May 07, 07:53

You should probably go back and re-read points 1, 2, 4, and 5. :) {nm} DTXbro May 07, 08:04

okay... tried again... head hurts... AAArgh... JMT Smash ! {nm} JMT-NL May 07, 08:50

The most important point was in the final line.{nm} DTXbro May 07, 10:23

Luxurification? Infantalization? {nm} forlorne May 07, 08:28

I don't really agree with your points. medv4380 May 07, 08:29

I believe Robert Downey Jr. sold some Avengers tickets. But isn't that a vivid exception? Edward Norton is a fine actor, but DTXbro May 07, 08:47

RDOWN, in the same way JDEPP made the "Pirates..." franchise work, or HLEDG made BATM2 something very good into something... second gary May 07, 09:31

I think your mixing some rotten apples in with your oranges. medv4380 May 07, 09:58

Box office figures seem to suggest that many AVNGR patrons did not see the predecessor movies. I doubt most viewers cared about missing the DTXbro May 07, 10:22