The Impending Studio Meltdown

Hollywood may not follow the Mayan calendar, but 2012 projects to be a disastrous year for the studios.  Just as the American auto industry refused to end its reliance on gas guzzling sedans and SUVs when it became apparent that sales from those vehicles were about to collapse, so too have the major studios either missed warning signs completely, or, worse, recognized the signs but decided to keep going with their current business strategies anyway, until the whole system is run into the ground.  The auto industry was recently bailed out, and Hollywood’s bailout, for the next few years anyway, will come from overseas box office.  But that’s a losing proposition.  Producers can’t figure out what domestic audiences want these days, and the notion that for every hit movie aimed at American tastes their will be another completely different movie specifically tailored to foreign audiences just doesn’t make sense.  Tintin, despite its technological wizardry, 3D surcharge, or the fact that it was directed by Steven Spielberg, has underperformed considerably in the U.S., while making up for those losses overseas.

Is that the new model?  I hope not.  The Tintin comics are extremely popular in Europe, and that is surely why Paramount went ahead with such a large scale project in the first place; but how many of those types of properties are waiting in the wings (can the big budget 3D version of Asterix be far behind)? And remember that Paramount bet more than just a reported $130 million on Tintin: there’s a sequel already in the works, this time directed by Peter Jackson.

What a mess.  What a god awful mess.  2011 was bad enough.  Box office was down about 5% from the previous year, despite higher ticket prices and 3D surcharges.  It turns out, in fact, that attendance was at a 16 year low.  Think that will turn around any time soon?  Think again.  According to Ray Subers at Box Office Mojo, we have as many sequels, prequels, and reboots to look forward to in 2012 — 27, if you can believe it — as were foisted upon us in 2011.  That article lists a handful of titles that Hollywood is banking on to rescue their sliding box office numbers in the coming year: The Dark Knight Rises, Twilight: Breaking Dawn Part 2, The Hobbit, Avengers, The Hunger Games, and The Amazing Spider-Man.  But don’t be fooled.  As we saw this past year, a few blockbusters, even when they reach the coveted billion dollar box office mark, can’t save an entire industry.

And let’s look at those supposed sure bets.  Dark Knight Rises will almost certainly approach a billion dollars in receipts, though it will likely need to do it without the glowing reviews enjoyed by its predecessor.  Critics can’t wait to take Christopher Nolan down a peg or two, and this may be the best chance they get in a while.  Tom Hardy has received a lot of buzz as the villain Bane, but he’s no Heath Ledger; and no matter how disturbing his performance is, it will be no match for Ledger’s Joker.

The overall tone of the trailer smacks of desperation to me, a pulling-out-all-the-stops style of filmmaking that makes for a great trailer but an over-the-top, exhausting movie.

The previous Twilight movie, from Summit, earned less domestically than any of the other Twilight sequels — not a good sign.  By splitting the final book into two parts, it took a page out of the Harry Potter release strategy, and will surely be hoping for a Harry Potter finish.  But the Twilight franchise hasn’t built up nearly the goodwill with audiences necessary to achieve that kind of outcome, and Part 2 will probably earn around the same as Part 1 did — in other words, a ton of money, but not enough to make anyone forget about the the rest of Summit’s projected losses in 2012. [Update on January 9th: The Hollywood Reporter and TheWrap are both reporting that Summit may merge with Lionsgate in the coming days.  I have to admit, it's not entirely clear to me why two smaller studios would want to take on the risk and debt associated with running a larger studio.  Over the weekend, a movie produced by a division of Paramount dedicated to creating inexpensive horror movies such as Paranormal Activity was the number one film at the box office.  The Devil Inside, a movie with a million dollar budget, easily beat out other films which cost over a hundred times more to produce.  This is certainly good news for the studio releasing the film, but not necessarily good news for an industry accustomed to making much more expensive movies.  I suppose an argument could be made that a Lionsgate/Summit partnership would be better positioned to compete with the majors, but couldn't a persuasive counter-argument be made that bigger will not automatically equal better in the foreseeable future?]

The Hobbit looks to cash in on the overseas box office gravy train, and probably stands the second best chance of any film in 2012 to cross the billion dollar mark.  The Lord of the Rings movies were uniformly dull, but they made money by positioning themselves as cinematic events analogous to the Star Wars films.  You’ve probably forgotten that there were three Lord of the Rings films, each one more pretentious and plodding than the last (culminating in a final film that was just awful enough to win Best Picture), because, frankly, there is no appetite for those movies anymore.  I’m guessing you don’t own the disks, you don’t watch the films when they play on cable, and probably the only time you ever think about stupid Frodo and his idiot friends is when somebody references “precious” in a bad movie or sitcom.  But when The Hobbit is released this coming December, I’m also guessing you’ll be sucked in once again, hoping for that “event” experience at the movies that we all supposedly crave.

As for Avengers, The Hunger Games, and The Amazing Spider-Man, look for them to be this year’s contenders in the “most anticipated titles that underperformed” category.  Avengers features superheroes from not one but three hated franchises: Thor, Captain America, and Hulk.  It also features Iron Man, but how many times can you base a superhero movie around Robert Downey’s ironic detachment?  And The Hunger Games is no Twilight, despite what Lionsgate would have you believe.  If anything, it has more in common with I Am Number Four, a movie based on a young adult book series that didn’t cross over with thirty-something moms.  If the moms don’t show up en masse for The Hunger Games, and the movie needs to rely on teenaged girls in order to reach blockbuster status, then it too will be a casualty of overblown expectations.  Finally, The Amazing Spider-Man looks like it could be in real trouble.  Have you seen the trailer?

Maybe Sony believed that people went to see the first three movies because they loved the character.  Wrong.  There’s nothing special about the character.  They loved Tobey Maguire.  This new version stars the guy from The Social Network.  No, not Jesse Eisenberg, the guy who played his business partner.  No, not Justin Timberlake, the other guy.  What’s his name?  Good question.

What does the rest of 2012 look like?  Let’s put it this way: if you like crummy movies, you’re going to be very pleased.  Universal has a yet another American Pie sequel, four kids movies, a movie based on the Battleship board game, one of two competing Snow White retellings, four action movies (Denzel Washington, Mark Wahlberg, Keanu Reeves, and a Bourne movie without Matt Damon), a movie based on the Ouija board game, and the musical version of Les Miserables.  Possible highlights include three Judd Apatow comedies, an Oliver Stone drug war movie, and a comedy about competitive college a cappella groups.

Not blown away?  No worries.  Warner Bros. has a comedy about competitive church choir groups, a Zach Galifianakis/Will Ferrell comedy, a kids movie, a horror movie, a Clash of the Titans sequel, a movie based on the Dark Shadows TV show, a Nicholas Sparks weepy with Zac Efron, a Godzilla movie, a high school party comedy, a Jack and the Beanstalk retelling, a Sylvester Stallone action movie, and a 3D version of The Great Gatsby (as well as the new Batman and The Hobbit).  Possible highlights include a Steven Soderbergh movie about male strippers, an L.A. 1940s crime drama with Sean Penn, a Ben Affleck-directed CIA flick, and an Alfonso Cuarón film with George Clooney, set in space.

Disney isn’t even trying to be a real studio anymore, though it’s hoping to appeal to more than just little kids with John Carter and, of course, Avengers.  It’s also re-releasing two animated films in 3D, has three new animated films (including one from Pixar), another nature movie, and a movie about a make-believe kid born in a backyard.  Possible highlights include a feature length version of Tim Burton’s Frankenweenie.

Unimpressed?  Sony is sure to satisfy with a Ghost Rider sequel, two animated movies for kids, a movie based on the 21 Jump Street TV series, another Men In Black sequel, an Adam Sandler comedy, a Kevin James comedy, a remake of Total Recall, and a new James Bond movie to go along with the Spider-Man reboot.  Possible highlights include a thriller with bike messengers in New York, starring Joseph Gordon-Levitt, a new Kathryn Bigelow war movie about killing Bin Laden, and a Meryl Streep dramedy about marriage.

No?  Doesn’t do it for you?  In that case, Paramount is sure to get you excited with an Eddie Murphy comedy, a G.I. Joe sequel, Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters, a low budget horror movie, the Titanic 3D re-release, and World War Z, a big budget zombie flick.  Possible highlights include more craziness from Sacha Baron Cohen and a Seth Rogen comedy with Barbra Streisand.

Still not sold?  Fox is your last shot then, with a Three Stooges movie, the George Lucas WW2 black fighter pilot movie, a weird Cloverfield/superhero hybrid movie, The Phantom Menace 3D re-release, a Reese Witherspoon action comedy, a drama about public school teachers, an Alien prequel, a Ben Stiller/Vince Vaughn comedy, another Wimpy Kid, another Ice Age, a Taken sequel, a movie about surfing, a Billy Crystal comedy, and Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter.  The only possible highlight I can see on Fox’s schedule is Ang Lee’s version of Life of Pi.  Prometheus, the Ridley Scott Alien prequel, has a cool trailer, but it’s a horror movie, and as bad as 2011 was for movies in general, it was even worse for horror movies.  I’m sort of, kind of, a little bit looking forward to it, but I’m not getting my hopes up.

Among the current trends, this whole fairy tale retelling craze has to be the worst.  The conventional wisdom in Hollywood must have been that fairy tales would score with audiences by combining familiar storylines (conveniently in the public domain) with modern sensibilities and eye-popping special effects, in order to appeal to children and adults alike.  But there is zero empirical evidence that this will work, if recent attempts by the television networks are any indication.  It’s as if a genre appeared out of nowhere and took over Hollywood without at least one major success to point to as an example.  Last year’s Red Riding Hood bombed, and I don’t expect much from this pointless, doomed experiment.

I also noticed that Judd Apatow is once again being asked to supply audiences with some of the only comedies worth seeing this year (there are a bunch that he either produced or directed on the schedule, including Wanderlust, The Five-Year Engagement, This Is 40, and the as-yet-untitled movie he’s directing).  And the comedies not produced by Apatow are being made by disciples most closely associated with him, notably Seth Rogen.

There are also four 3D conversions of older movies to look forward to.  Haven’t seen Titanic enough in your lifetime?  Maybe you were unmarried the first time it came out, and now you have a bunch of toddlers.  Perfect!  It’s a heartwarming tale for the whole family!  The other conversions are Beauty and the Beast, Finding Nemo, and The Phantom Menace (the thought of a 3D Jar Jar Binks is actually quite disturbing to me).

There are the usual number of computer animated 3D movies to take the kids to, as well as a whole bunch of high profile releases from Lionsgate (home of Hunger Games), Summit (home of Twilight), Dreamworks, and Relativity (which has the other Snow White movie) that I didn’t cover in this post.  [Update: indeed, it's never been harder to distinguish a slick "studio" film budgeted at $100 million with a competing movie from a "mini-major."  Schwarzenegger makes his return to the big screen this summer in The Expendables sequel, a Lionsgate release that in years past could only have been produced by one of the larger studios.]  And it goes without saying that each year there is a movie or two that initially starts out under the radar but soon catches a wave of internet buzz and positive reviews.  Who knows what that movie will be this year, but, whatever it is, will it be enough?

Predictions are a dime a dozen, so I won’t go too overboard.  But, let’s face it, there isn’t much on the schedule in 2012 to inspire confidence.  There certainly aren’t many upcoming studio releases that accomplish anything beyond continuing the industry’s reliance on “tent-pole” blockbusters and animated hits for kids.  A generous reading of this year’s titles would be that Hollywood plans on sleepwalking through yet another year, resigned to leaving the awards and accolades to “specialty divisions” or independent studios such as The Weinstein Company.  But this may be perhaps the worst moment in recent memory for Hollywood to be phoning it in.  The competing pressures from video games and the internet have finally reached a tipping point, and this could be the year that a high profile movie tanks so badly at the box office that it takes other movies down with it.

If life were a movie, Hollywood may be hoping that 2012 borrows its plot from The Producers: make bad movies on purpose and then watch as a few of them become accidental hits.  In past eras, this wouldn’t have been such a big deal — there simply weren’t enough viable, competing alternatives out there to take audiences away from the movie-going experience.  But this is nothing like past eras, and studios should be genuinely concerned.  In the last three decades, the major studios decided it was in their best interests to feed our appetite for blockbusters.  If and when we decide we’ve had enough, or if the quality of the product is so terrible that we finally decide we can’t take another bite, then it’s not as if the studios can tweak the menu or hire a new chef.  To continue this annoying food analogy further, movies are as disposable today as hamburgers at a fast food restaurant, and you don’t really get a chance to improve on fast food.  You’re making junk, and when people stop eating it, you’re done.

Advertisement