Hollywood has always been about money. Studios won’t greenlight a new project unless they’re certain it’ll return them a profit. It hasn’t been very long since we were introduced to 3D, but look at how popular it has become. Looking back and beginning with Chicken Little in 2005 – Disney’s first 3D movie – it would be hard to find an animated movie being produced in America that wasn’t being released in 3D. In terms of live-action films, 3D has generated immense popularity only recently, after Avatar succeeded on so many different levels and became the highest grossing film of all time.
However, I’m concerned about Hollywood’s future intentions with 3D. Now that it has proven to be able to generate greater financial cash flows for studios, an increased amount of focus is being directed towards how studios can make the most money, without much care for the movies that viewers want adapted. Who honestly wanted to see a sequel to Clash of the Titans? The first movie received very poor critiques, as it should have. Yet it made a profit, mainly because 3D had recently become popular (with Avatar) and the studio knew that the 3D option would attract other viewers. Wrath of the Titans got equally crap reviews, but luckily for the studio, the international impact helped the film generate a profit.
That’s just the beginning. Sequels aren't really an issue when it comes to 3D because even if it’s filmed in 2D, one crappy film that was successful at the box office will be enough for the studio to start developing a sequel. 3D seems to be more popular overseas than it is in North America, so the impact of 3D on sequels is more dependent on how the film will perform internationally.
That’s just the beginning. Sequels aren't really an issue when it comes to 3D because even if it’s filmed in 2D, one crappy film that was successful at the box office will be enough for the studio to start developing a sequel. 3D seems to be more popular overseas than it is in North America, so the impact of 3D on sequels is more dependent on how the film will perform internationally.
What bothers me is the recent news of the nine month delay of GI Joe: Retaliation so that it could be post-converted to 3D. The first film was mediocre but fun and it made a profit at the box office, so a sequel wasn’t too surprising, especially since they cast The Rock. However, what the hell is Paramount thinking when they change the release date of a (likely) high grossing summer flick that has had numerous clips and trailers released just ONE MONTH before the theatrical release? They spent so much on marketing, but now they’re just going to throw it all away so that they can generate a few extra bucks by releasing it in 3D next year. In nine months, enough people will have forgotten about GI Joe, which means Paramount will have to re-initiate their marketing campaign and waste more funds. By the way, they’re also making their most loyal fans wait another nine months to see a movie that needn’t have been delayed. That’s a good way to keep fans.
Aside from its impact on sequels, 3D is also killing originality. Instead of studios looking for new projects to pursue, they are re-releasing films that people are not asking them to re-release - ones they know will bring back viewers just because 3D gives the viewer a different experience. Who asked for Phantom Menace in 3D? Since when do we need to relive Finding Nemo in 3D? And did you hear Warner Bros. will be re-releasing all of the Harry Potter films in 3D? Unfortunately, this is the impact of 3D. Since it’s still relatively new and people are dumbfounded by its apparent amazingness, studios are using it to their advantage to rake in as much cash as they can. I’m not complaining about watching The Lion King in 3D because I had not seen it in a long time, but I would much rather Disney had developed a new animated film to try and recapture the magic of all those 90s classics (and all the earlier ones as well). They’ll probably re-release Aladdin and Tarzan in 3D soon enough.
There’s nothing we can do about it. I’m not going to go back to the theater and re-watch every single 3D re-release (I'm speaking only for myself), but seeing as everything in Hollywood revolves around money (what a surprise), it’s inevitable that we’re going to keep seeing large revenue-generating films back on the big screen in 3D. Since studios are going to focus more on these re-releases, it means there will be less focus on new, more unknown projects that are a bit more of a risk for studios. This is unfortunate because they may turn out to be surprisingly good projects capable of earning a good profit (such as Chronicle). Risks can turn out to be favorable, but why would studios risk anything at all when they have a definite way to make a profit?
I’m not saying I blame studios for what they are doing. It is, however, unfortunate.
Follow us on twitter Follow @MillenniumSandE
No comments:
Post a Comment