Stupid Is As Stupid Does: Adults Aren't Going To The Movies Edition – Epsiode 9473
I have a hard time getting too angry at Steven Zeitchik for his idiotic trend piece on an LA Times blog today, entitled, “Is a multiplex full of family films the future of moviegoing?“.
Of course, “The reasons are in a sense less important than the consequences,” is as stupid a single sentence about the film business (or anything else) as I have read this year.
Still, he is just lamely doing what so much of the media does these days. He took a flawed notion that is in vogue this month – “children are the only ones going to the movies” – and he piled it on top of an accurate notion, that family films are the strongest, most consistent business in Hollywood (though he seems to be missing the fact that his has been true for many years), and came up with a moronic piece of trend spin worthy of the bottom of a sick parrot’s cage… only the Times can’t afford to print most of what it produces anymore. That’s okay, neither can I.
He is so busy navel gazing that he can’t look as far back as 2009… when the top five domestic hits were Avatar, Trannys 2, Harry Potter 5, Twilight 2, and Up. So, aside from the highest grossing movie of all time, is there anything that is remotely “a movie for adults” on that list?
The fact remains… as it has for a loooooong time… that people under 25 drive the movie business. They are the ones who get sucked into the idea of must-see and must-see now. Adults simply don’t, even less so with the DVD window practically close enough to be a few weeks away before a 50something gets serious about wanting to see a new release.
And within the under-25 segment, there are two segments (maybe 2.5); the pre-teens and the post-teens (the .5 would be college kids… but let’s stick to the 2 for this piece). The post-teens are your Friday night and Saturday date night. The pre-teens are your Saturdays. The post-teens want to get out of the house. The pre-teens’ parents want to get them out of the house.
There are a lot fewer films made for the pre-teens than for the post-teens and adults. So there is a tendency for even the most mediocre of those releases to do business… parents need somewhere to take those kids. And keep in mind, the under-8s pay less for movies, so a lot of the “family films” are selling more tickets than films for older groups that have the same grosses.
Also… the kids are also more susceptible to NEEDING to see 3D or whatever new gimmick lands. It’s adorable to sit in a room full of 1-digit kids with tiny little 3D glasses on at Toy Story 3. And then you realize that every one of them is now paying more to have that experience than I would pay to go so an R-rated movie at the multiplex, sans glasses. Clever.
Anyway…
Kids films are a strong business. Think of major independent production companies and realize that Disney paid almost double for Pixar what it did for the still-overpriced Marvel. And there is a reason why Pixar limits itself to one film a year. Realize that DreamWorks spun DWAnimation off because it could stand on its own without the weight of the larger company on it… and that it is still the source of the only profit that Paul Allen made on his initial DreamWorks investment.
When I was asked by a table full of adult men what they might like at the movies right now, I had to say that Toy Story 3 was their best bet outside of an art house. They didn’t like that. And maybe that’s the kind of conversation that led to Zeitchik pulling this trend piece out of his rectum. But Robin Hood did over $100m domestic, which is solid, regardless of the P+L on the film. And Date Night, a true adult play, is near $100m domestic. And going back to last year, from The Blind Side to Sherlock Holmes to The Hangover to The Proposal to Taken and on, there is plenty of commercial fare for adults… and still, a load of stuff for the biggest audience… kids.
And by the way… if you think a $50 million gross for Hot Tub (F***ing) Time Machine OR the highest grossing Kevin Smith film ever and the highest domestic gross for a Bruce Willis starring non-Die Hard film in just under a decade OR Greek doing almost exactly what Sarah Marshall did, are “prominent disappointments,” you need to get back on the meds. This is the ultimate media delusion… I though they would do better, therefore when they do okay not breakout business, they are prominent disappointments… well… aren’t we all up our own asses?
Every movie dreams of being a massive worldwide profit machine. Only a few become that. If you start playing the “what I expected” game versus, “did it make a profit?” game, you will live in a world of hurt. I know, losing the Super Bowl may be more painful than not getting to the Super Bowl at all… but long view, that’s bullshit. When today is a memory, coming in 2nd will always be better than coming in 10th. Was Warners idea when they greenlit Cop Out with Kevin Smith directing to get his best gross? No. Is there any rational reason, besides hope, to think it would do better than any other Bruce Willis movie (exceptions noted), comedy or action or drama, has in the last decade? No.
And yet, I am not really angry at Mr. Zeitchik. He’s just doing what so many others – many of whom should know a lot better and have the experience that Zeitchik doesn’t have – are doing. Blog vomit… online or in print.
What baffles me about these trend-of-the-month pieces is that the people writing them apparently have no memory whatsoever of what they themselves wrote about the previous year, or even month.
When the piece is “audiences want more of what they know they love,” because the last couple sequels were hits, there is no reference whatsoever to the previous month’s piece on “franchise fatigue.”
What I wonder is, do the writers of these pieces realize what a disconnected narrative they’re writing and don’t care because they have to find something to write about? Or do they actually buy it all?
I once again hold to this statement: this piece demonstrates that the Times spends a buck fifty on entertainment coverage.
“losing the Super Bowl may be more painful than not getting to the Super Bowl at all”
Here’s a random anecdote for the day: this is actually true.
One psychological study interviewed Olympic medal winners and assessed their level of “satisfaction” with the result. Unsurprisingly, the gold medal winners were the happiest with the outcome, but bronze medal winners were well in front of silver medal winners.
The theory suggests that it’s not the objective performance, but what they’re being compared to. Silver medal winners compare themselves to the gold medal winner – “if I had just done X a little differently, I could have won”. Contrast that with bronze medal winners who compare themselves to the first person behind them – “thank god I didn’t do Y, or I wouldn’t have got anything”.
“And maybe that’s the kind of conversation that led to Zeitchik pulling this trend piece out of his rectum.”
Why are you always bringing me into it?
You just keep butting in.
That’s a HEY NOW to Wrec and a HIYO to Foamy.
Went to see MICMACS yesterday–absolutely wonderful, by the way, would be a monster hit in a sane world–and many of the trailers were for little independent films that star folks like Michael Douglas, Susan Sarandon, Annette Bening, Bill Murray, Julianne Moore, Robert Duvall, Danny DeVito and Sissy Spacek–all of whom used to star in big studio films until they violated their contracts by no longer being 30.