Oz the Great & Powerful got me thinking about an interesting subject - that of sequels, prequels, and re-imaginings. Even if the stories aren't really anything particularly interesting, audiences are still drawn to them because they love the original so much. It's an intriguing phenomenon, and Hollywood undoubtedly understands the psychology behind this. Since the 1980's, sequels or similar re-imaginings usually dominate the Top 10 Grossing films of the year. Do we really need 4 or 5 Shrek or Die Hard films? No, but we've already spent so much money on the other films that we're at least curious what happens to our beloved characters.
Some sequels slotted to be released in 2013 (left to right, top to bottom): Red, Scary Movie, Monsters Inc., Iron Man, The Hobbit
It's no wonder why many talented filmmakers have shifted their efforts towards television (ex. AMC = American Movie Classics, known mostly for their award-winning TV series). With a television series, we follow a group of characters through various different plot lines week to week. We stay tuned for one reason: curiosity. What's going to happen next episode? What hilarious Dwight prank will Jim pull off on "The Office" next? What will Rick & the gang be faced with next on "The Walking Dead"? We get to know the characters and care about what happens in their fictional lives. Movies can do the same to the point where we "can't wait!" for the next movie in a series to come out. We all experience this. Hollywood producers have adopted a pseudo-TV-style method of operating - they generate sequels to create interest and then satisfy that interest.
Top Grossing Films of 2012 (from Wikipedia):
- The Avengers = "sequel" to Iron Man, Thor, etc.
- Skyfall = sequel
- The Dark Knight Rises = sequel
- The Hobbit = prequel
- Ice Age: Continental Drift = sequel
- Twilight: Breaking Dawn pt. 2 = sequel
- The Amazing Spider-man = reboot
- Madagascar 3 = sequel
- The Hunger Games = first in a series based on a book
- Men in Black 3 = sequel
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 = sequel
- Transformers: Dark of the Moon = sequel
- Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides = sequel
- Twilight: Breaking Dawn pt. 1 = sequel
- Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol = sequel
- Kung Fu Panda 2 = sequel
- Fast Five = sequel
- Hangover pt. 2 = sequel
- The Smurfs
- Cars 2 = sequel
Top Grossing Films of 2001 (from Wikipedia):
- Harry Potter = start of series
- LOTR: Fellowship = start of series
- Monsters, Inc. = sequel on the way
- Shrek = start of series
- Ocean's 11 = start of series
- Pearl Harbor
- The Mummy Returns = sequel
- Jurassic Park 3 = sequel
- Planet of the Apes = reboot
- Hannibal = sequel
Movies are increasingly being made more available to the public than each year before it. Many years ago (in the times before blu-rays, DVDs, and VHS), if you missed a movie in the theater, it meant you missed the movie. There were no re-screenings or take home versions until years later. It, therefore, made no sense for Hollywood to start thinking about generating films that featured "returning" characters. With the ever quickening availability of films on Netflix, Red Box, and the like, it becomes a race to generate the next film in the series as fast as possible... then get it out to the public quickly in all forms of media possible! While convenience and availability are certainly on the rise, are originality and innovation taking the back seat? In some cases, yes.
I certainly do not hate every sequel or re-imagining of a classic movie ever made. I do think that many of them are complete crap and are designed to be purely cash cows. The Harry Potter series is anomaly - a movie series that was based on a book series where each film was strong, respectful of the source material, but also unique enough experience to make it an amazing series... which still made a boat load of money! Quality films can make money, and quality films can result in a quality movie series. But often times, it's the factory-generated, assembly line sequels that make the most dough.
Joey Kane
04/06/2013
Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website. They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.
Note: I don't own the rights to any of the photos on this website. They're copied here from Google images for entertainment purposes only.
No comments:
Post a Comment