Top 5 Worst Movies of 2017

If you follow any reviewing channel, blog, etc; then the idea of a top best and worst list of the year isn’t going to be rocket science for those new to my blog. You know the drill, I list five films and explain why I personally didn’t feel they weren’t worth the ticket price. If you disagree with what I have to say, I hope you can give the courtesy of not leaving a flaming bag of dog shit on my door step. But please keep this in mind: I’m not a professional critic, so I’ve not seen every film released that year in order to pay my rent. Hell, the only reason the films at numbers five and four are on the list, is because the three worst films, as well as two films I wasn’t exactly blown away, doesn’t make a good title. Either way, let’s do this!

Number Five – Alien Covenant:

Image result for alien covenant

You’d think after the art house level of pretentiousness as seen in Prometheus, that Ridley Scott would learn from his mistakes he made whilst trying to write a “deep” and smart story with a script with more holes than a Xenomorph at a NRA rally. Well thankfully while Scott isn’t busy trying to top Lost in the quest of establishing more questions than you can answer, it’s clear that him and his writers have learned little else. Particularly since the characters went from idiocy only present to get the plot running; to full-blown brainless with less personality than the Aliens themselves. One minute a crew member will open a quarantined room with an alien inside, leading to said crew member to slip on the blood of a person already killed by the thing; and then next they open fire on an alien and accidentally shoot the shuttles fuel tanks in the process. And naturally they explode, taking the shuttle in the process because this is a movie. I joked about trigger happy gun owners, at least most of them know which end to point the damn thing! And less we forget about how the story focuses on the ADD afflicted explorers on a foreign planet, as they can’t resist touching everything that isn’t nailed down, and get surprised about how an unknown substance may be toxic to a life that has never been on this planet till that point. You mean I got sick from huffing the fumes of undiscovered plant, how was I supposed to know?” How exactly is this exploring the origins of the original Alien film when the staff of Weyland Yutani spend most their free time playing in traffic? And yet given the excellent cinematography and scenes of Micheal Fasbender as the two robots; I was half tempted to recommend this film as they’re parts that we’re trying to an Alien film and give the attempt of action and atmosphere that we’re decently executed. But don’t get me started on how an already mediocre story with bland protagonists, is rendered more hollow due to scenes of character development and links to the previous film are already up on You Tube. Did nobody learn anything from DCs mishaps last year when it comes to cutting out random scenes and still expect the story to work? Is this the worst Alien film? No. Is it better than Prometheus? Yes, is a good movie on its own? Eh.

Number Four – Ghost in the Shell (2017) :

Image result for ghost in the shell

I’m going to be honest by saying how I wasn’t a fan of the anime this is based on; look I tried dear reader twice I did, but the only thing lower than this movies box office results, were my expectations. In fairness, I was going to be kind to this new adaptation; particularly since, to its credit, the great voice acting and art design in the original managed to sell my on a connection between the lead characters that managed to keep me awake during the run time. This film…..haven’t we learn nothing from Dragonball Evolution? Even someone like me could tell that this film is suffering the major (no pun I swear) symptoms of a bad adaptation. Streamlining the narrative, replicated scenes lifted straight from the source material removed from proper context leading to scenes feeling weightless, redone shots for the trailers and characters featured because the original said they had to be there. And speaking characters, you know something’s wrong with the lead character when the fact that a bunch of PC bullshit artist are accusing the film of “white washing” is the least of the problems with Major. With Scarlett taking the robot aspect of her character way too literally, I was expecting her to say beep bop during multiple scenes. I mean with pacing so dragged out it felt like each scene was put through a taffy puller, why not liven up this performance that was so phoned in the studio might as well replaced Black Widow with an actual robot with tunnel vision, if the multiple action scenes that involved her getting tasered are anything to go by. https://kennyspennyforathought.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/1936b-1h_0ttke350p8k-yje1xb_g.png?w=347&h=195The original is praised for its creative and gorgeous animation, while this film is well rendered but feels lifeless. Blandly shot, cinematography where most of the elements blend together, as when the characters that aren’t in the outdoor parts of Blade Runner city #46853, you have generic grey buildings. Hell say what you will about 2049, at least the scenery could be told a part from each scene to another. Next!

Number Three – The Mummy (2017) :

Image result for the mummy

Ah bless Universal for thinking they compete with Marvel in the cinematic universe Olympics Hollywood is going through right now. Now in theory a film series featuring Dracula, The Mummy and other monsters Universal owns the film rights to would’ve worked, if only Universal listened to the feedback from Dracula Untold, the film they tried to use as a franchise starter before; apparently that was too much to ask for. Instead of getting a modern-day version of the entertaining Bredan Fraisher Mummy film, we get a Tom Cruise vehicle where he basically plays himself without a sense of empathy or intelligence. As he sends his friends on idiotically dangerous plans, meanwhile Cruise is getting thrown dozens of feet in air by an ancient goddess and landing without a raised heartbeat let alone scratch due to him being possessed by a demigod; because the curses in this film are like the stars in Mario Bros, in the sense that you get one and you’re untouchable. Looking at the trailers I was confused about whether if this would return to the classic horror style of the classic monster film, or redo the Steven Summer film. Apparently so we’re the writing team; as we have scenes of horror, action and poorly executed comedy all Frankensteined together; because if none of the six writers are willing to talk to each other to make this shit fit, then someone’s got to do it. And less we forget how one of those writers was tasked to set up the Dark Universe, and by set up I mean dedicate thirty minutes to explain Sheild’s…ah I mean Prodigum’s location, purpose, previous achievements and leaders of the operation, hey look it’s Mr Hyde! All of this in the most nakedly blatant attempt to get audiences to see the next film in the series since Dawn of Justice. Listen Universal after this, Dracula Untold and your Wolf-man remake you’d better hope that The Bride of Frankenstein remake does better and sell like sugar flavoured blunts, in 2019. If Wonder Woman can come out as great as it did in the half a year time it did, after Batman v Superman was burned in effigy, what excuse will you guys have in the two years when this next film goes down like a wooden windmill in an obvious metaphor. Next!

Number Two – The Snowman:

Michael, I now have to take away the praise I gave you for Alien Covenant, because of the performance you did during this bore. There’s a fine, fine line between acting indifferent with those around you due to alcoholism (that being a plot point in this and the book it’s based on) and running out of shits to give by the time you get out of bed; this film shows Michael Fassbender sleep walking over that line, tripping over it and passing out on the floor. So when multiple other Hollywood actors are flown to Norway, and their characters given Norigeon names and are told to develop appropriate accents, the fact that Fassbender is snoring his way through this, to the point that he didn’t even get the name of his character right; well that shows how indifference the production was. Especially when word has since got out about how the film wasn’t even technically finished. And given how stilted and disjointed the story ended up, it shows. You’d think for a movie with the pacing of watching an ice cube melt in the artic, would have the decency to focus on the main character without ballsing it up by spending scene after scene showing how Fassbender’s family relationship is falling apart at the rate of of Harvey Weinstein’s reputation, and having his previous work as a policeman glossed over and explained through side characters. But sadly that’s what we get. No idea why the supporting cast constantly lining up to kiss our lead’s arse, when he ends up missing so many obvious hints from the crime scenes, and has others point them out for him, he makes Inspector Cluso look like Sherlock Holmes; when it comes for waiting for this plot to start, Godot ain’t got shit. And yet that’s despite the fact that our lead still figured out there is indeed a serial killer to catch before any other characters could’ve done, in a lucky logic leaping moment that could send the writers into orbit. I guess the rest of the answers were the 10-15% of missing scenes, which sends the story into a huge mess; the pacing being the main example, due to scenes moving slowly like a drunk turtle, while structurally the story skips over important details and answered of said information before it just kinda ends. This film tries to recreate the book it’s based of, and yet comes across like a book report that was set for Friday morning, and didn’t get start till Thursday evening. Next!

Number One – The Emoji Movie:

Image result for emoji movie

No surprise that a movie based around images you send to your friends when you’re too lazy to type words would fail when put in the hands that aproved and made The Smurf movies. Even knowing how this film “borrows” the story of like seven other animated films, with a concept that paint drinkingly stupid, with the expectations of most carbon based life forms being so low they’re limbo dancing with the germs in satan’s toe nail infections; I still came out mad with the result of several fart huffing sessions at Sony’s Animation studio. Pretty much every film commentator in the multi-verse has said accurately bad things about this film, so I’m just going to list the major things wrong with this film.

  1. A shitty script lifting the plot points and story notes as seen in everything from Wreck it Ralph to Toy Story. With a main character that doesn’t fit into his surroundings, only to end the hour and a half of agony realising his fine the way he is. Pretty much the story in half of all the kids films nowadays.
  2. Said story has crow bard so many apps into its script, no matter how little sense it makes, you see the cracks around the edges. Particularly when the movie stops the “plot” just so the characters can play Candy Crash, Just Dance, and watch You Tube videos. And don’t even get me started on the dues ex Twitter bird.
  3. Make the overall experience all the more unpleasant with unfunny jokes from unfunny characters. A lead that can’t even hear his own name without having an emotional breakdown. A talking hand who, plot wise, is about as useful as Stephen Hawkings bowling shoes. And finally Wyldsytle, ah.. Jail Break, a tomboy that wants people to ask her about her feminist agenda, and how she don’t need no man every ten minutes. To the point that she willing ditched her title of a princess emoji….because girl power. It’s clear that Jail-Break went to the Jane Foster’s Thor school of promoting equality between genders by ranting about how the men around her are complete jack assess.
  4. The voice acting: How is it that two characters are called meh, and yet they’re not the only hollow voice actors in this film. Particularly when everyone is waiting for their check to clear. I would say their phoning it in; but that would be an insult to Alexander Graham Bell, and second it would imply effort was made.
  5. The “dialogue” With every joke being a pun relating to emojis or the apps in question, with the punchline predictability of rain full in the british summer. I would make a joke about it trying to be a laugh riot, but i remember seeing more belly laughs during Charlettesvile. And did i forget to mention how there scenes that feel like Black Mirror as written by a tumblurite? Particularly when no human character is seen without a phone in hand or in eye sight, with a supporting character with a short temper and a large ego.

But hey, in the words of Denis Miller, “That’s just my Opinion, I could be Wrong”.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your time.

Advertisements

Shut Down Rotten Tomatoes: The Butt Hurt is Strong in This One

Fan boys arguing over the film efforts of studios and their review scores, have been more https://cdn.movieweb.com/img.news.tops/NEAbqpyXtQIKEF_1_b/Star-Wars-Last-Jedi-Fans-Petition-Rotten-Tomatoes.jpgcommon than the rising of the sun. And once again Rotten Tomatoes has been under scrutiny for giving a film a score that people disagreed with. This time being Star Wars The Last Jedi. And I’ll say this about these people, at least some of them waited to see the film before crying for franchise counciling…some being the key word. As seen by the two fan petitions to remove this film from canon in a world where Attack of the Clones almost got a theatrical RE release, and to close Rotten Tomatoes down as a result.

Never the less, like The Dark Knight Rises before; many came to insult the critics that don’t share the same world view as them. And given how The Force Awakens was spit roasted by right-wing anti SJW commentators that regularly criticise ANTIFA for attacking people who they disagree with politically; that’s saying a lot giving their low view of fans of Rogue One and Episode 7.  So where did all this hate and yet constant need of approval from this poor site come from? When it comes to Rotten Tomatoes being used as well a fire starter of back lash from disappointed audiences; the trend usually involves a big budget blockbuster being panned by critics and triggered fanboys lose their shit; despite the opposite happening now to Star Wars; this didn’t start with Suicide Squad, or X-Men: Apocalypse, despite starting the bullshit rumors of the site taking bribes from Disney; it didn’t even start with Batman V Superman, but it started with its predecessor: Man of Steel. Image result for man of steel2013 was a divisive year for cinema geek culture. With multiple big releases such as Star Trek Into Darkness and Iron Man 3 splitting their fan bases down the middle in terms of their responses. Hell at the time Thor’s second solo film was the MCU’s lowest rated project before Inhumans took that title. But Man of Steel was possibly the most divisive movie ever in terms of its quality explained by the reviews at the time. As the film was discussed as either being a cancer to the name of the Superman character, or the cure for said cancer. With the Rotten Tomatoes score reflecting this with a 56% rating. With many people calling Zach Snyder a hack, many of them brought up the film’s Rotten Tomatoes score as proof the film’s failures, and as someone who can say they liked and still keep a straight face, there are some worth mentioning. But whatever positive aspects that can be said about the film didn’t matter to those that were out for Snyder’s blood, because they got slightly more than half of the critics on their side.

http://swf.tubechop.com/tubechop.swf?vurl=s4KMNj76mzg&start=62&end=98&cid=8794200
And mob rule it was. As numerous well-known film reviewers on sites like You Tube became the fuel of many flame wars in the comment sections of their reviews of the film. This brought two faces of both sides debating it. As the discussion devolved into the extreme ends of fanboys and haters both throwing any coherent opinions against them in the dumpster file of those amused by loud noises and fancy special effects; or the dumpster of ‘they’re slamming the film based on bias perceptions of how they personally think a Superman movie should be made and nothing else’, all for ease of dismissal. The problem became less the faults of the film, but the spite often coming of those discussing it. I’m not saying that people like Erod The Blockbuster Buster for example had an axe to grind against Zach Snyder’s vision, but I am saying he (and others) took pride in guessing that Dawn of Justice (a film he admitted that he was planning to review negatively) would be a critical dud, as for the past two years he claimed this film would suck literally since the day it was announced.

But no matter who had the best argument or anyones thoughts on the film good or bad; given how Rotten Tomatoes draws its reviews directly from professional critics, or collect a review else where and sorts them into a nice and tidy pile of user and critic reviews, and a percentage of those who liked the film is presented. The logic went that the critics opinion meant that any mass consensus on a film, as judged via the tomato meter, must be cinefile gospel. Want to convince people that your negative views on the latest blockbuster rings true? boom! “26% on the tomato meter means it sucks”. Except what many of these people didn’t and still don’t realise is that’s not how the site works. People are so interested by the scores of an film’s review, they’ll focus on the numbers than the means to get the result. With none of those people realising that the percentage wasn’t an overall score of the movie, it was the consensus of what a bunch of critics think.

Rotten Tomatoes works like this: let’s say I made a movie and some how secured a wide release for it. Then on opening day I got ten professional critics to review it.rotten tomatoes.jpg If I followed the same judging system as the tomato meter, I would have to take into account that any sum opted review score lower than a six out of ten would count as a negative review; and anything below 59% on the tomato meter, is enough to grade a film as rotten. If seven critics gave my film a five out of ten or lower, the consensus would be that 70% of critics didn’t like my movie, while the other 30% gave my film higher ratings; there for putting at the rotten end of the metre with my movie rated with a 30% approval rating. Now sure the scores of the reviews are counted up, and even displayed underneath, but the big number is the only one that counts, so the only one we should listen to; at least that what everyone from the average person to big time marketing directors seem to think.

Image result for doctor strange rotten tomatoes
The current rating is now 90%

How else did you think that Doctor Strange, on the eve of its release, gained a perfect 100%, despite only have fourteen reviews and an average score of mid sixes to low sevens from individual ratings? And if you say “by being paid by Disney” I’ll beat the knowledge into if I literally have to. As I was saying, since the review scores were above a five, then each of the dozen or so critics recommenced Doctor Strange
under the sites rules. Even that is a common problem with the site as since the tomato Meter accounts for the amount of people who liked a film rather than the reasons for their opinions; you end with often inflated scores when comparing the meter and average scores. Particularly when two different films can get similar scores in one, but different on the other. Critics are to bad films, what heroin is for your teeth; the more you have, the worst the effects are.

Screenshot (169).png
SOURCE: ‘You’re Using Rotten Tomatoes Wrong’

Then came the criticism of how the site operated, and the realisation of it’s a research tool and source, then the simplified rounded number. The difference between Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB; the former presents the average score as a key feature. The discussion came between asking legitimate concerns, about how black or white the tomato Meter is, and bring up its lack of awareness of the concept of middle ground. And then there’s the flying monkeys that start throwing feces soaked petitions to shut the site down out of spite, due to the critics views of a highly anticipated film. Image result for shut down rotten tomatoes change.org With this petition released during the eve of the premiere of Suicide Squad. With it being rightfully laughed at by the masses; whether it’d be from the result of the film or the actions on principle. Regardless no one else since took that petition seriously no matter how many people were excited to see Margot Robbie in red and blue booty shorts.

But the biggest problems of the site, is the way it’s treated, depending on whether the big percentage does or doesn’t say nice thing about any given film. This is why I bring up the nerd war over Man of Steel, specifically the ones who hated it to the point they were calling the DCEU destined to fail before Batman V Superman even had a trailer; let alone meme status.https://ls-digitalfox.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/2017/05/batman-superman-martha-meme-Digital-Fox-Media-300x186-1-1-1.jpg Because the fan discord of the new Star Wars films is a similar yet backwards version of Man Of Steel. With the DCEU’s fall from…grace i guess, back in 2016, many people were willing to verbally bitch smack defenders of Dawn of Justice, Suicide Squad and then Justice League when they were getting spit roasted by the site; particularly at those lynching the site for giving a film they’d not seen yet a bad review. Now I’ve seen numerous of online content creators who were defending the site and its critics by saying: “yes these aren’t good”; are now some of the many with the pitch forks and torches at Rotten Tomatoes headquarters for giving a film a rating they’re not happy with; throwing the paid shill accusation like an aids cure. Sort of like…exactly like the Suicide Squad petition and other bullshit claims of Disney rigging the game against every other studio, but suddenly a pointless casino scene and Luke Skywalker drinking green seal milk is evidence enough that Disney is the sugar daddy of the movie industry.

Say what you will about The Last Jedi, but if either of these petitions makes sense in your head, you don’t give one damn about fair critique, particularly how the most negative, leftist bashing reviews of Episodes seven and eight regularly confuse disagreement with refusal to listen due to blindly following the “leftist propaganda within the film” which shows a lot doesn’t it. Not saying all hate for this film is because of the political reasons, there are parts I don’t like either. But I’m now regretting that i put Sargon and The Rageaholic on my favourite You Tubers list given how they’ve made carrers out of saying “the left can’t take critisim” and yet paint fanboys of Episode seven, and ones with legitmate critisim agaisnt their points on the matter with the same broad brush. Anyway, when films like The Dark Knight Rises, Suicide Squad and The Last Jedi are causing the critics of the site to get their inboxes flooded with hate mail and rants about the how broken the site is; If you’re wondering why many studios are pulling a Hilary Clinton in the sense that they blame everyone else first, self reflecting later; there’s your answer folks.

Screenshot (171).png
SOURCE:

Because Hollywood knows that If their expensive blockbuster gets rated poorly on the most popular film review site on the net, well that becomes a headline, which turns audiences away; and the studio executive has to explain why said movie made less money than the leading brand of bottled piss. So in the meantime enforce review embargoes until after the opening day, unless it gets rated Certified Fresh, then that’s easy marketing to get asses in seats.

In closing, i want to think about something: we either live in a world where a mass consensus of people reflect a film’s quality, and protest demanding said people to be silenced is a petty move; or it isn’t. Not saying you have to agree or like The Last Jedi, but saying you don’t agree with a popular opinion is more braver and professional than saying the system is broken that day because you disagree!

Thank you for your time.

Rebooting Hollywood Or The Effects of Hollywood’s Obsession with Remakes:

Image result for hollywood out of ideasAnyone that has been keeping track with mainstream movie news, will know that there is a new version of an already existing franchise or film being released every other month. I even surveyed multiple people, and 84% were aware of this.

Screenshot (11).png
See it here

This brings up discussions of whether Hollywood are out of ideas, and are relying on the safe path of familiarity to fill the producer’s wallets. At the same time, it brings up interest in the relaunch of said popular brand, whether it’d be from the already existing fan base, or the newcomers who have only just heard about the brand. Regardless the modern movie industry has fallen into the habit of relaunching an already popular film or brand; with numerous remakes of popular films already in the works. In March this year, cinema goers had the choice of Kong: Skull Island (the third King Kong reboot) a remake of Beauty and the Beast by Disney, or the live action version of Ghost in the Shell. So what’s the harm? Well before we ask that, we need to know the other important question, what’s the reason for this?

Image result for movie franchisesWell firstly there’s the obvious reason of money. And said money being made through different means, mainly franchises. With a lot of projects being made to set up multiple sequels to be produced, after said film is released and hopefully makes a splash at the box office. Due to the success of Marvel Cinematic Universe by Disney – with the Avengers sealing that franchise’s success back in 2012 – many studios from Warner Brothers, Fox Studios and Sony Pictures have been trying to launch their own attempts of cinematic universe like franchises with multiple sequels and giving multiple characters’ spin offs and cross overs; with properties such Spider-man, X-Men, DC Comics and Ghostbusters being planned and already put in action, all of which are released with further projects in the pipe line. Hence why many of the remakes/ reboots released are of well-known properties that are loved by their fans, and have already been financially successful in the past. Because as the old saying goes: if works once, it’ll work again and again. Image result for spidermanSpider-Man is a good example of this, as Peter Parker is on this second reboot at Marvel Studios. Since 2002 Sony Pictures had made millions on the Spider-Man trilogy with Toby Maguire as the star, with his final putting earning a worldwide gross of $890 million. However due to numerous disagreements with director Sam Rami, the studio and Maguire himself; the franchise had ended, with Sony starting the franchise again with a new crew and cast in The Amazing Spider-Man in 2012 which earned around $262 million. You can see why Disney was keen to make deals with Sony for the character rights, the sequel under performed; making Disney’s version (as seen in Captain America Civil War) the third big screen version of Spider-Man. With Sony planning to produce a spin-off for Venom, a popular characters from the comics.

Hell this works for sequels as well, if there are two things Hollywood loves most, is money and familiarity. Hence why a lot of films that make bank at the box office earn sequels, whether they need/ require them or not. Why? Because the predecessor established an audience that gave the their money to see it in theatres, and buy the DVDs. So the logic goes: is that said audience will spend more money on a continuation of something they enjoyed once before. Anyone who knows about the workings of studios, will know that they’ll not put anything in production, unless they know it’ll get asses in seats. But with sequels, BOOM! Audience already established, so put this shit on our release schedule and give the team all our money!

Image result for merchandising spaceballsHowever, there is one other source of money from a big budget reboot of an established brand, merchandising. With the studios making deals with manufactures to make products to generate hype for said rebooted brand. If someone loves a film to the point that they have a shelf solely for the merchandise, then a new version will get said person to by the new products. Whether it’d be: t-shirts, special edition DVDs with hours of bonus features, dress up items, and action figures with almost perfect likenesses to the character they’re meant to portray. Companies such as Hasbro, Mattel, Neca, Lego and Side Show Collectibles have profited heavily on this. As Mark Litwak said on the matter of movie merchandising, it’s a second form of advertisement:

If McDonalds agrees to distribute millions of Roger Rabbit cups to its customers, and spend additional millions of dollars to advertise the promotion, the movie benefits from increased audience awareness. For distributors, promotional campaigns are often the most alluring aspect of a product placement deal”. Litwak M, 2013 ‘Movie Merchandising’.

And his not wrong about the allure of merchandising, especially when aiming to audiences of families, children included; with it also aiming towards adult collectors. With successful franchises such as Star Wars –with products by Kenner and Hasbro – making over $37 billion over the last 40 years before the release of The Force Awakens, the push for merchandising in shops and geek events such as Comic Con makes more sense. Especially when a CNBC article by Javier E. David says that the Comic Con event in San Diego brings in $700 million during the three days of the events.

So while yes, the established geek market is the key market to hit, as many of them will be aware of the relaunched franchise; there is still more demographics to reach. The first is young people, mainly because they would be having the most disposable income, and would be more keen to see a big popcorn blockbuster than a slower drama piece. Image result for remakesI say this as films such as Total Recall, Robocop and Poltergeist were well-respected films with hard R ratings (or 15 in the UK) only to be rebooted as PG-13 (12A in the UK) that meaning anyone around that age range could pay to see the film. The second audience to aim for, being everyone else. Because if a franchise is going to be re-established to the worldwide public, the more audiences viewing the better. It draws attention to something they might not have been aware of beforehand, and if they’re a fan of something in a similar genre; then they may like this. And I do mean the world wide public, going back to Robocop and Total Recall, by the US box office both of them under performed. As both of them struggled to make more than $60 million in the US. When it comes to the world wide audiences: Robocop (2014) made $139 million, while Total recall made $184 million. And these are only two examples in a recurring trend, as Robert Schovo says in his video ‘Too Many Hollywood Reboots? Here’s why’; countries like China only take a small amount of English-speaking films to put them in wide release across the country, and as Robert says:

“They’re (cinema distributors) going to go with something that doesn’t get lost in translation. If you ever wondered why the Fast and the Furious movies are so huge – it’s because: men drive car fast, works in any language.” Schovo R, 2016. ‘Too Many Hollywood Reboots? Here’s why’!

Hence why so many examples like this are big expensive action films with explosion filled, exciting, money shots for the trailers; instead of some deep heart-felt rom-com. While (insert franchise here) maybe new to someone else, even if they’ve heard good things about the original from a guy who knows a guy, who knows a guy’s cousin whose seen it. Which also explains the remakes of multiple foreign films such as Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and The Ring.

Now, we need to ask the important question; what is the effect of Hollywood and the movie industry? Well for one thing the is that there are loads of remakes of well-known films still being produced, with sources stating that between 107 and 116 remakes are in various stages of production by various studios. Screenshot (12).pngWhich shocked the participants in my survey, as 80% were unaware of this. But also Hollywood has fallen into the habit of making films in order to kick starter a franchise using popular characters, in the attempts of building a cinematic universe with sequels, spin offs and crossovers in the vain of making the same money Marvel did with the Avengers. Regardless of the quality of the output, studios will pour money into blockbusters with massive special effects, using recognizable characters. Which will be seen all other the place in terms advertisement: i.e. movie screens, movie news and the internet etc.

But does it work for the studios? Yes, and no. Image result for box officeI mean it has worked for Marvel’s Cinematic Universe due positive word of mouth, and even Warner Brothers’ DC franchise has managed to turn a profit due to successful marketing campaigns. But for the rest of the market, I can be a hit or miss venture. Because all the money in the world being spent on trailers and action figures can’t prevent a film sinking due to one crucial element that can grantee a film success in the world of fandoms and the internet, positive word of mouth. Whether it’d be from the critics on sites such as Rotten Tomatoes, and the responses from audiences. The 2016 reboot of Ghostbusters is a good example, while the film rated well in terms of critical reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, when it came the audience scores, it was rated the lowest rated film within the franchise. I bring this up as the film failed at the box-office only making $128 million at the US box office on a budget of $145 million, with the film failing to break even. And what’s not helping is that smaller productions are given less attention due to being released days or so after a highly anticipated/ advertised film has hit theatres.

Screenshot (13).png
Source: Box Office Mojo

For example, a Will Smith drama from 2015 called: Concussion; only made a total amount of $48 million, in a world where movies are expected to make double their profits, that’s bad enough. But do you know what has released a week before: Star Wars the Force Awakens. That being said, the Indie/ Independent side of the film industry has gained large amounts of attention and influence. With events such as the Sun Dance film festival giving multiple indie productions more attention. Films like Drive and Troll Hunter being good examples of films starting at similar events and earning cult followings in the process. Even directors such as Quentin Tarantino and Paul Thomas Anderson being directors that started on their own and working their way to fame with their own ideas or ones that haven’t been tried yet. With the former having two of his films (Inglorious Bastards and J’Dango Unchained) being nominated for best pictures at the Oscars. This brings a balance between what is being released in cinemas; especially when films like Room and Whiplash end up topping the box office charts when given the attention.

Image result for indie movies

So is this good or bad? Honestly it’s both, as despite it being 50/50 on the quality of the output on the Hollywood reboot craze; it will get new people into franchises they probably wouldn’t have known/ cared about. And of course, actors, writers, producers, manufactures, etc. will have money to put food on the table. Even if we the audiences, will have to put up with the repetition.

Thank you for your time.