I used to think I was one of the few people that went to movies to be entertained. I don't need to be inspired, politically moved or socially motivated; I need to be entertained. Hollywood has a case of the blues due to the fact that people aren't going to movies anymore and they just can't figure it out. Now contrary to popular belief, the Hollywood crowd aren't really the sharpest knives in the drawer. They only "play" doctors, lawyers and secret agents. They are simply overpaid actors.
I know the Oscars were several weeks ago, but I've been taking the time to reflect on the industry and would have to say that it's a circle-jerk. Case in point: Capote, with its critical acclaim only grossed $27.9 Million. Syriana (which I really liked) only did just over $50 Million and Crash (also liked that one) did $54 Million. Contrast these movies with King Kong $217 Million, the latest Harry Potter $290 Million and real "critical stinkers" like Cheaper by the Dozen 2 at $82 Million, you have to start to wonder what the measure of success is in the move making business. It is still a business isn't it?
Brokeback Mountain was in my opinion a terrible movie, but had such a "Star Wars" like cult following in the gay community (meaning people see it multiple times) I would say that it was a huge success at $82.1 Million. Hollywood is doing what we would call the classic circle-jerk. They give themselves these pointless awards in a public forum for films nobody watched and call it success.
And they wonder why we stop going to the movies...ENTERTAIN US! We know you're all politically liberal, want to protect the environment, support gay marriage and want to stop racism among other things. Now how about making some entertainment. We went to your movies when you were making the likes of: Caddyshack, Fletch, Conan (only the first one), Gladiator, Star Wars, The Patriot, Sixteen Candles, American Pie, Porkys, When Harry Met Sally, Titanic, Lord of the Rings, Austin Powers, etc. etc.
Why do you insist on boring us with pictures nobody will ever watch and then insult us by getting dressed up and awarding yourself for the junk you just made?
...you just don't get it, do you? (Dr. Evil)
That'll bloody teach them!
I still feel that the Academy is wrongfully and blatantly ignoring the added difficulties that tie in with acting opposite special effects.
Rachel Weisz had Ralph Fiennes to work with; Naomi Watts had to act opposite air, nothing, zilch. Now that's talent!
Cheers
Posted by: Martin | Saturday, March 25, 2006 at 09:31 PM
What amazes me is the stories I hear from my Partner, who works in the Film/Television industry out here in Vancouver. At the end of the day, the director is supposed to be in charge of each shot and getting the right feel/tone etc... but it's the Producer who has the final say. If the Producer doesn't like the way a certain scene is done, he has the right to change it.
As for the Stars themselves. My partner has met quite a few along the lines of Tom Welling, Patrick Stewart, Hugh jackman amongst them. Hugh jackman was the only one out of those who actually walked around set, got to know the crew, and indeed played Soccer with some of them during breaks in Filming. Most of these guys have such overinflated ego's they can't see beyond their A**.
I found my way here via BlogExplosion.
Posted by: Dawn | Friday, March 31, 2006 at 04:26 AM