Comments on: Open Forum Friday: Are We In Danger of Losing Movies Made for Grown Ups?

By: rusinchicago

rusinchicago — Mon, 13 May 2013 15:21:48 +0000

what I don’t understand is why someone isn’t capitalizing on this. go crazy! think of a multitiered media outlet that had say 100 seat flex-space / dinner theatre designed with crowd-sourced menu of films and events. it’s all tied in with festivals and cable station partnerships. a new venue for what everyone wants! sort-of a Starbucks venue/brand for movie loving crowd.

why can’t we get this!!!

I know Sundance and others started to do this (they were literally going to build the first Sundance theater down the street from me…its now a brand new Target, LOL) I think it needs a creative up-and-coming business mind the likes of google, netflix, etc.

By: patrik

patrik — Mon, 13 May 2013 15:10:36 +0000

And just one of the above is playing within a 2 hour drive radius of where I live, and it’s only playing there because there’s a swedish aspect to the movie. Otherwise none of the above would play at my “local” cinema. Sure, finding them on dvd/bluray wouldn’t be so hard I guess but I would like to see more movies like that in the cinema. I think it’s much less of a problem for you north Americans though.

By: Kurt

Kurt — Mon, 13 May 2013 14:13:34 +0000

What Swarez said. I find now shortage of adult fare at the cinema…usually by way of film festivals…It’s certainly still out there with only the most modest of effort seeking it out.

Currently playing:

The Gatekeepers
Mud
Kon-Tiki
To The Wonder
Upstream Color

By: Niklas

Niklas — Mon, 13 May 2013 12:52:11 +0000

The question is why is this an issue at all? If themes targeted towards adults are made for TV and those are the themes you want to explore.. go make TV! I’m sure Danny Boyle could get a meeting with HBO etc.

By: swarez

swarez — Mon, 13 May 2013 10:43:57 +0000

No, there is plenty of cinema for grownups out there. We just have to put in little bit of work to seek it out.

By: bullet3

bullet3 — Sun, 12 May 2013 23:38:22 +0000

The other issue, as Soderbergh laid out recently at his State of Cinema talk, is that the baseline distribution costs of a wide release make anything that’s not a big action movie hard to justify.

It takes 30 mil to release/market a wide movie domestically, theaters keep half, so that’s 60 mil baseline, regardless of your budget. That means even if your movie costs nothing, with the way movies die at the marketplace now after opening weekend, it’s gotta open with at least 20 million opening weekend, if you want any hope of getting a return on your investment theatrically.

Well anything remotely edgy, or non-action oriented, is gonna have a hell of a time opening to those kinds of numbers, so studios will actually feel safer spending 100 million on a comic book movie than 1 million on a Primer or Upstream Color.

It’s all pretty depressing. Ya, these types of movies will continue to get made on TV and VOD markets, but its not the same as seeing them on a big screen, and its a damn shame things have gotten to this point.

By: Josef

Josef — Sun, 12 May 2013 21:29:45 +0000

The problem is that younger people are the ones that always go to the movies. Most older adults that I know go to the movies 5 to 6 time a year. So these blockbuster movies that cost so much money need to be targeted to teenagers and younger adults so they can make their money back.

Personally, I don’t mind it. It seems like blockbusters in the summer are for kids (which makes sense because school is out) and in the fall/early winter we tend to get movies that tend to be more for adults. However, I do agree that it would be smart for movie companies to do modestly budgeted movies (around 50 million). Not every blockbuster needs to have these 150 -200 million budgets. I also agree though that a movie cannot be for adults and still be rated R, and making a movie rated R does not make it better nor more adult.

By: bullet3

bullet3 — Sun, 12 May 2013 19:41:28 +0000

What Hollywood desperately needs is for the bubble to burst and for a massive string of these big budget movies to start failing in a row. The only way we’ll get back to modestly budgeted (not indie, but the sweet-spot 30-60 mil range), intelligent Hollywood movies is if people stop going to these blockbusters.

By: Lior

Lior — Sun, 12 May 2013 16:00:52 +0000

Well, Iron Man 3 just made 175 million dollars in one weekend domestically so this is not gonna change anytime soon.
This issue Danny Boyle is raising is not anything new. He joins other filmmakers such as Cronenberg. It’s interesting because now high-profile filmmakers themselves are starting to diss Hollywood, and I guess the fact they mostly work outside of the Hollywood system allows them to speak more freely.

But let’s be honest, there was only one period in history where Hollywood was focusing on movies for adults, and that was the 1970’s. People pay to see comic book and animated movies, so that’s what Hollywood is making. I don’t see many American animated films, but most of the comic-book ones are pretty average. There is this movie-going mentality lately of “average is good enough”, or “just turn off your brain and enjoy”. We’re not asking much from Hollywood, apparently, so why should it deliver? When a crapfest like Twilight is making the equivalent amount of the budget of a small country solely based on the strength of its franchise?

I got nothing against blockbusters or PG-13 films. For me, an R doesn’t necessarily mean a better movie. But what Hollywood needs is some risk-taking, even in the blockbuster department. Have a single vision behind the movie instead of a script being re-written a million times by a dozen writers until it’s totally watered down.

By: Scott-El

Scott-El — Sat, 11 May 2013 23:41:31 +0000

Think we’ve already lost them, but when you guys don’t even mention the interesting examination of corporatism and its implications in your Oblivion review, can you blame the studios for not being interested in interesting fare?

By: Ian Strope

Ian Strope — Sat, 11 May 2013 21:47:03 +0000

The TV thing is critical here. I know that I go see movies that have a higher spectacle quality and are therefore worth the adventure and cost of going out to the cinema. For everything else I will enjoy it from home. Maybe movies are skewing more big, but with TV becoming really good there is no loss of mature storytelling in the visual media.

By: Gregg

Gregg — Sat, 11 May 2013 18:17:26 +0000

This seems completely dismissive of Eastern cinema– true, if it’s focusing on “Hollywood,” films, then things have turned soft. This is an era of over-sensitivity– Hollywood has to play their moves just right. They can’t risk losing any portion of the shrinking theatre going audience.

While yes Hollywood continues to shrink in this way; this only gives rise to more provocative and original films that are financed by smaller, independent companies.

Hollywood has become bloated and skeptical– they have to tread lightly into these things now or someone might get offended.