You are probably wondering why I have a photo of John Carter up there when the title of the post is what it is. But it all makes sense soon, I promise you.
I read many film sites during the day and often I find articles that I find interesting and thought provoking and in turn decide they are something I like to comment on. Today it was an article on BadassDigest that talked about how very differently the entertainment reporters and media have handled the failure of two films: John Carter and Battleship, and offered a theory on why that was.
The BadassDigest post was tied to an La Times article today debating this very idea and offering up some theories as to why the entertainment media went to such lengths to attack John Carter and give Battleship a free pass. In essence, both films were financially flops and the LA Times article lays that fact out plainly:
Their overall numbers aren’t all that different. Disney’s “John Carter” did a paltry $72 million in the United States and an additional $210 million overseas; “Universal’s “Battleship” is on track to do even less in America than “John Carter” while so far making $232 million overseas. According to the Hollywood Reporter, Universal could lose $150 million on “Battleship,” while Disney took a $200-million write-down on “John Carter."
One of the reasons the LA Times believes that each failure was treated differently is as simple as the fact that John Carter came first and therefore gets attacked the hardest and most furiously. Now this makes sense and is a logical reason, but as Devin Faraci at BadassDigest suggests, it is not the only reason.
Mr. Faraci believes that the more important reason is that Hollywood hates creative types. He elborates that the entertainment media and reporters take their marching orders and receive their information from the PR departments of the studios, which are controlled by the suits.
As Mr. Faraci writes, John Carter was a passion project for two time Oscar winner Andrew Stanton, who was the director on the film. Stanton oversaw the script, exerted huge control over the look of the film, the overall story, and the editing of the film. He truly owned the film. So when it bombed, Mr. Faraci believes the studio was more then happy to lay the blame on Stanton's shoulders.
With Battleship, it was a different case. That film was made by committee, it was influenced heavily by the suits with their marketing studies and charts that show them the perceived recipes for box office success. Sure there are screenwriters credited on the film, but they were brought in more to put the ideas generated by the suits into a filmable script. Not Peter Berg, the director, or either of the two (credited) writers on the film claimed that this film was their vision or passion project.
Now I have not seen either film so I can't speak to the quality of either. But it obvious to me just how different the process was with each. One was developed by someone who had real passion for the material and all involved really tried to make the best film they could. The other was a typical film by committee, developed and controlled by executives.
There are alot of films with the same development process as Battleship released each year. If the suits had their way I am convinced they would want complete control over every film they oversee and finance. That is ultimately the battle with each and every film that goes before a camera.
The writers and directors, let's call them the Creatives,want to make the film and tell the story they created. They want the freedom to make the film their way with as little studio interference as possible. These individuals are all imaginative, creative, talented and unique. OK, well most are anyway. They are the key pieces to any successful film. Without the Creatives, there is no film industry.
The other group is the executives at the studio, let's call them the Suits. The Suits have only one objective: to make money. Money for the studio, for the investors, and for themselves. They see films as vehicles to use to make profits for the studio. Many of the suits do not understand the Creatives, they do not understand their processes, they do not understand their passion. The Suits only understand numbers. The Suits, while not understanding the creatives, also are jealous of them. The Suits wish they had the talent and imagination of the Creatives. But they do not.
Both the Creatives and the Suits wish they did not need the other to survive and thrive. But they do and so goes on one of the most interesting and fluid relationships in the film industry. Up to this point there has been some balance between these opposing forces, with marquee directors being able to make the films they want and hold off the advances of the suits. Filmmakers like Spielberg, Cameron, Jackson, and Nolan, all being able to make the films they want and present their vision.
Unfortunately for Andrew Stanton, his film did not make enough money and because he went out of his way to make it HIS film, he ultimately has to take the fall somewhat as well. Sure, the head of production at Disney resigned over the failure of John Carter. But it was Stanton who was crucified in the press. It is the nature of the business I suppose and I am sure Mr. Stanton will work again in the industry and bounce back.
From where I am sitting, I think there is much wrong with the way the media handled the failure of each film. I feel there should have been more attention given to Battleship and articles written about how writing a film based on surveys and pie charts is not a successful way for films to be made. But there will not be as Mr. Faraci is correct in regards to who the entertainment reporters take the marching orders from.
The uneasy truce between the creatives and the suits will continue on unabated, as it has since the industry was born. Each side trying to claim just alittle more ground on the other and move the flag more into the others territory. It is something I think will never end. But I do, as a creative myself, always smile when a writer or director is able to make the film they want and it is a success. Like Joss Whedon with The Avengers, or hopefully Christopher Nolan with his final Batman film.
In a few years the failure of these two movies will be forgotten as new flops will take their place. The film industry keeps moving, never stopping to catch its breath, and keeps producing product for us to consume, no matter how many films flop or how many negative news stories are written about a film or films. The industry is a survivor and a fighter, just like the Suits and the Creatives that inhabit it.
Source:BadassDigest
No comments:
Post a Comment