Does Hollywood lost some of it’s imagination?
by Steve McGrath
In the last years, the studios gave movie fans great movies but also a lot of sequels and remakes. Don’t get me wrong, those, from time to time, are fun to watch but it’s the dangerous growing trend that don’t like. Are movie goers responsible? Are studios playing safe? Are actors paid to much? Let’s take look at the 2003 to 2006 top 10 grossing movies and try to answer those questions.S = SequelR = RemakeSource: Lee’s Movie Info2006 1. Pirates of Caribbean 2 (S) 2. Night at the Museum 3. Cars 4. X3 (S) 5. The Da Vinci Code 6. Superman Returns (S) 7. Happy Feet 8. Ice Age 2 (S) 9. Casino Royale (R) 10. Pursuit of Happyness2005 1. Revenge of the Sith (S) 2. Chronicles of Narnia 3. Goblet of Fire (S) 4. War of the Worlds (R) 5. King Kong (R) 6. Wedding Crashers 7. Chocolate Factory (R) 8. Batman Begins (S) 9. Madagascar 10. Mr. and Mrs. Smith2004 1. Shrek 2 (S) 2. Spider-Man 2 (S) 3. The Passion 4. Meet the Fockers (S) 5. The Incredibles 6. Prisoner of Azkaban (S) 7. Day After Tomorrow 8. Polar Express 9. Bourne Supremacy (S) 10. National Treasure2003 1. Pirates of Caribbean 2. Return of the King (S) 3. Finding Nemo 4. Matrix Reloaded (S) 5. Bruce Almighty 6. X2 (S) 7. Elf 8. Terminator 3 (S) 9. Matrix Revolutions (S) 10. Cheaper by…DozenIn 2003, we see the start of this trend when 5-6 top movies/year are sequels or remakes. In the previous year, it was 2-3 movies.Are movie goers at fault?Yes but I think part of it is the price of tickets. Why pay $12 and take a risk on a movie? But when you know the characters and like the premise in advance, it’s a safe way to get entertained with your hard earned cash. If the price would be cut by half, I’m sure that most people would see more movies and take the risk. I know because I go when prices are lower(not half yet) and I see a lot more movies than in previous years. And yes, I’m guilty, I also go see the sequels or remakes.Are studios playing safe?Yes and we can blame the higher cost of big budget movies. I can understand them for playing safe because they loose more often than they gain. It’s a business after all. But if a sequel can bring box office numbers while recycling stuff from the previous movie, why not? It let them pay for the other movies.I don’t mind a remake like War of the World(2005) because the original was made in 1953. I don’t like those made in the 70
Tell others about
this page:
Comments? Questions? Email Here