More intelligent Films on the horizon?

[Beta Man]

I got this idea listening to Ron Howard on the Stern show..... he was discussing Frost-Nixon obviously.... but anyways, he had mentioned the public demanding more intelligent films, and given the recent success of Slumdog Millionaire, Frost-Nixon, Milk, The Wrestler, and Doubt..... It certainly appears to be a trend. Although not really my cup of tea, The Dark Knight (and batman begins for that matter) provided much more plot development than other "Comic Book" movies....

Ron Howard mentioned that many people took on the project with little compensation in order to get it green-lighted, because the studio didn't want to give the concept the chance, and although the movie hasn't really made it into the black yet, it's on its way.

Do you think there will be a trend to bring more "art-house" pieces to the silver screen given the success of the recent batch of oscar worthy films?


(sorry Bruce, beat you to this one )

[Sussudio]

imagine my surprise when i saw this thread's OP wasn't bruce

i definitely think there has been a rise of up and coming art house/indie movies making it to the spot light as a result of oscar noms in recent years. these types of movies prove that a big budget isn't everything; the story is what truly impacts an audience long after they're left their seats, not one whiz bang mega explosion after another. and the story is what most art house films emphasize above all else. i think the fact that the golden globes don't even choose to give best picture recognition to action movies is evidence that incredible special effects are no match for a powerful, compelling, and thought provoking plot :COUGH: Stealth :/COUGH:

[uziel5000]

I think The Dark Knight (and to a lesser extent Batman Begins) set a new standard in what people are going to expect in an action film or, at least a summer blockbuster. While not the first comic book film to develop an interesting story past the normal "blockbuster" trappings (that credit goes to X-Men IMO) TDK had the right combination of elements. Of course being the second highest grossing film of all time put it in a position where the rest of Hollywood will be almost forced to follow suit.

Where Die Hard, a great, yet less successful film than TDK established a trend of filmaking (Die Hard on a boat, in the jungle, on a stick etc...) for years, TDK, I hope could be the beggining of more intelligent action films in the future. A smart summer blockbuster?? TDK did it. It could happen again.

[mikejet]

My only problem is that these films can be made but no effort what-so-ever is made by the studios to provide wide distribution for them.

[Chordata]

I don't think there are "more intelligent" films being made, I just think the "more intelligent" films are getting better directors and better actors, and therefore greater visibility.

(The Ron Howard interview was great)

[Moefiz]

Originally Posted by mikejet

My only problem is that these films can be made but no effort what-so-ever is made by the studios to provide wide distribution for them.

Totally agree with you on this Mike..trying finding a movies like The Wrestler or Slumdog or Doubt at you local theater is next to impossible..

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by uziel5000

I think The Dark Knight (and to a lesser extent Batman Begins) set a new standard in what people are going to expect in an action film or, at least a summer blockbuster. While not the first comic book film to develop an interesting story past the normal "blockbuster" trappings (that credit goes to X-Men IMO) TDK had the right combination of elements. Of course being the second highest grossing film of all time put it in a position where the rest of Hollywood will be almost forced to follow suit.

Where Die Hard, a great, yet less successful film than TDK established a trend of filmaking (Die Hard on a boat, in the jungle, on a stick etc...) for years, TDK, I hope could be the beggining of more intelligent action films in the future. A smart summer blockbuster?? TDK did it. It could happen again.

Excellent observation. And I hope it does pan out in this direction.

[Chordata]

Originally Posted by Moefiz

Totally agree with you on this Mike..trying finding a movies like The Wrestler or Slumdog or Doubt at you local theater is next to impossible..

Two of them are playing at the first local theater I looked at, and two of them were in the top 10 grossing movies last week. They're not that hard to find, it appears. Where do you live?

EDIT: I see you're in PA.

[mikejet]

Originally Posted by O_V_N

Two of them are playing at the first local theater I looked at, and two of them were in the top 10 grossing movies last week. They're not that hard to find, it appears. Where do you live?

EDIT: I see you're in PA.

Now they are wide spread. But last year it was impossible to find them. I live in Southern California and Slumdog was playing at about 2-3 theaters only. Those were in West Los Angeles or Hollywood which is a 45 minute drive for me.

[Beta Man]

So, given this issue, do you think distribution of these films will pick up???? Hollywood loves to grab new trends, and bleed them dry!

[Moefiz]

Originally Posted by O_V_N

Two of them are playing at the first local theater I looked at, and two of them were in the top 10 grossing movies last week. They're not that hard to find, it appears. Where do you live?

EDIT: I see you're in PA.

Now they are easy to find with all the awards and Oscar buzz they are gettting but like Mike said a few months back they were damm near impossible to find.

[Pelican170]

Originally Posted by uziel5000

I think The Dark Knight (and to a lesser extent Batman Begins) set a new standard in what people are going to expect in an action film or, at least a summer blockbuster. While not the first comic book film to develop an interesting story past the normal "blockbuster" trappings (that credit goes to X-Men IMO) TDK had the right combination of elements. Of course being the second highest grossing film of all time put it in a position where the rest of Hollywood will be almost forced to follow suit.

Where Die Hard, a great, yet less successful film than TDK established a trend of filmaking (Die Hard on a boat, in the jungle, on a stick etc...) for years, TDK, I hope could be the beggining of more intelligent action films in the future. A smart summer blockbuster?? TDK did it. It could happen again.

Im sorry, but i really think that a majority for the fame of TDK came from the death of Ledger and if all that stuff didnt happen, this movie wouldnt be where people think it is today... Granted it was a pretty good movie, but the real problem is that half the movies that come out today are just garbage...

Sorry but i really dont see how or why you think TDK is sooo different from other action movies. i dont feel it gave anything "different" or "special"...

[fatediesel]

I think with the current state of the economy less of these movies may be made. In recent years when Wall Street was flush with money everyone wanted to get in the movie investing business but now that everyone is broke there will likely be fewer independent films made.

Studios are all having horrible years profit-wise and none of the best picture nominees have been big hits. Doubt has only made $28 million ($25 million budget), The Wrestler has only made $14 million ($7 million budget), Milk has made $24 million ($15 million budget), Frost/Nixon has only made $14 million ($35 million budget), and even Slumdog has only made $67 million on it's $15 million budget. I think they'd rather try and make more movies like Paul Blart Mall Cop which can be made fairly cheap and has a higher ceiling than best picture movies.

However, I do believe that with the critical and box office success of Iron Man and Dark Knight comic book movies will be held to a higher standard and we won't be seeing movies like Fantastic 4 anytime soon.

Note: I know the Milk and Frost/Nixon are still relatively early in their box office runs and all the totals will improve but the fact is none of these movies are likely to make as much as Beverly Hills Chihuahua, which only had a $20 million budget.

[toef]

Originally Posted by Sussudio

imagine my surprise when i saw this thread's OP wasn't bruce

Can't say I was surprised, because I didn't see any misplaced punctuation in the middle of the thread title. (Just kidding Bruce )

As for the OP, I'm not really sure I like this "trend". After listening to an interview with Peter Morgan, it reminded me of the politics going on in Hollywood. It seemed clear early on that a movie like Frost / Nixon was being groomed for a Best Picture. Scorsese, Mendes, and Clooney, among others, all wanted to direct it. Why? Because they found an interest in the script? I doubt it. It's more likely they wanted to throw their name on a BP movie. So when Mendes was rejected, what did he do? He went and did Revolutionary Road, another "I want an Oscar" type movie.

I think there is a blurred line between "made to be a good movie" and "made to be an Oscar winner", though a line nonetheless.

So I guess my point is that I hope there isn't a growing trend of "let's make a Best Picture movie" as if there is a formula or trick that people have figured out, to win the Academy's favor.

For that reason, I kind of hope Slumdog Millionaire wins. Not because I thought it was amazing (I actually didn't think it was THAT good), but because I genuinely think Danny Boyle was just making a movie he wanted to make, and is surprised at the attention it's received. Frost / Nixon, Benjamin Button, The Reader, and Milk, all seem like intentional attempts to win an Oscar.

So if that happens, what do we get? 5 attempts at winning an Oscar. 1 will win, and supposedly be remembered for a while, and some or all of the other 4 will fall by the wayside. Does any still talk about Finding Neverland? Anyone watch Elizabeth recently? (If so, which one?) If these really are the 5 best movies of their respective years, I don't think any would/should be forgotten. But they are, and they'll continue to be. Two years from now, I doubt many will remember The Reader, and if they do, they probably won't think "oh yeah, that was one of the best movies from 2008". Everyone knows Crash stole the Best Picture back in 2006 (2005 movies), but, without looking, do those same people remember what movies it stole the award from?

Maybe my way of thinking is just wrong. I guess NFL players play to win a Super Bowl, not just for the love of the game, so why wouldn't people make movies to win an Oscar? It could make sense, I guess.

[Canada]

Originally Posted by toefer

Can't say I was surprised, because I didn't see any misplaced punctuation in the middle of the thread title. (Just kidding Bruce )

As for the OP, I'm not really sure I like this "trend". After listening to an interview with Peter Morgan, it reminded me of the politics going on in Hollywood. It seemed clear early on that a movie like Frost / Nixon was being groomed for a Best Picture. Scorsese, Mendes, and Clooney, among others, all wanted to direct it. Why? Because they found an interest in the script? I doubt it. It's more likely they wanted to throw their name on a BP movie. So when Mendes was rejected, what did he do? He went and did Revolutionary Road, another "I want an Oscar" type movie.

I think there is a blurred line between "made to be a good movie" and "made to be an Oscar winner", though a line nonetheless.

So I guess my point is that I hope there isn't a growing trend of "let's make a Best Picture movie" as if there is a formula or trick that people have figured out, to win the Academy's favor.

For that reason, I kind of hope Slumdog Millionaire wins. Not because I thought it was amazing (I actually didn't think it was THAT good), but because I genuinely think Danny Boyle was just making a movie he wanted to make, and is surprised at the attention it's received. Frost / Nixon, Benjamin Button, The Reader, and Milk, all seem like intentional attempts to win an Oscar.

So if that happens, what do we get? 5 attempts at winning an Oscar. 1 will win, and supposedly be remembered for a while, and some or all of the other 4 will fall by the wayside. Does any still talk about Finding Neverland? Anyone watch Elizabeth recently? (If so, which one?) If these really are the 5 best movies of their respective years, I don't think any would/should be forgotten. But they are, and they'll continue to be. Two years from now, I doubt many will remember The Reader, and if they do, they probably won't think "oh yeah, that was one of the best movies from 2008". Everyone knows Crash stole the Best Picture back in 2006 (2005 movies), but, without looking, do those same people remember what movies it stole the award from?

Maybe my way of thinking is just wrong. I guess NFL players play to win a Super Bowl, not just for the love of the game, so why wouldn't people make movies to win an Oscar? It could make sense, I guess.

I remember that Diana Osana was ticked because Crash won over Ang Lee's Broke Back Mountain didn't win best picture, even though a lot of critics thought Crash was the better movie. My sister and dad loved it, I on the other hand hated it.

[EricJ]

Just a hunch, but I'm guessing we might not be seeing Bruce threads for the immediate time being...

As for F/N, it was a stage hit on London and Broadway theaters, which was enough pedigree to greenlight it for movies right off the bat, and having the same writer as "The Queen" had some studios eyeing it for Oscar-bait.
Whether it deserves it, YMMV, but it had more of a built-in inside track to be December Oscar-season material than "The Reader" or "The Wrestler", which were relatively unknown sleepers built on critical notice.

Does anyone still talk about Finding Neverland?

Well, "Neverland" was that year's Miramax/Weinstein promotion-machine bribe--which the Oscars shortened their For Your Consideration season to try and get rid of--and the fact that Harvey & Bob were still around to push "The Reader" into competition proves we may never get rid of them...
They're still waiting for that next "English Patient", and think they have a reserved seat every year just because of "Shakespeare in Love".

[Tadji Malik]

I hope they will make smarter films.

Hollywood makes money in two ways; theatrical release and video. Theatrical release is great for special effect movies and one time see films but you won't buy them ten years down the line.

That's where smarter films come in. People are still buying 'Casablanca' but ignoring 'Gas-s-s-s'. One's a classic; the other, well, MST3K fans may watch it.

If Hollywood wants to invest in it's future it will need to make better films today.

Besides, look at the competition nowadays. Internet, 700 channels on t.v., video games, and 100 years of archived film are beating Hollywood down. It's make better, more memerable and time resistant films or die.

[J_UNTITLED]

It's always been difficult to make decent or better films (just as its always been difficult to write decent or better novels, make decent or better music etc.) and in a squarely-corporate enviornment like Hollywood and Co. where the dollar is the bottom line instead of quality, it will continue to be perhaps even more difficult.

[Marquoz]

No, I don't see it happen.ing We've already had intelligent blockbusters that didn't start a trend. The Matrix was a thinking man's movie, how many debates are there about what the movie means? If that's not an intelligent movie, then well, I don't know what is. I didn't see very many movies follow in it's footsteps of forcing you to think during a blockbuster. Transformers still came out with absolutely little to no plot.

I also don't think that indie films will get a good backing in Hollywood either. Yes they are cheap, but they rarely get a wide release, and when they do, they don't hit the huge numbers that the studios want to see. Yes a lot of them have good messages, but those messages are usually messages people already know, or need to know but refuse to listen to.

[Rob71]

Originally Posted by fatediesel

I think with the current state of the economy less of these movies may be made. In recent years when Wall Street was flush with money everyone wanted to get in the movie investing business but now that everyone is broke there will likely be fewer independent films made.

IDK, it may go the other way. If the economy doesn't do a turnaround soon studios might be a little gunshy dropping $100-200 million into a film, which just might get more of these films green-lit.