The loudest message that will ultimately reach Hollywood's ears is when theater chains begin shutting down across the country. And perhaps this has already begun... so far so good here in Fly-over country, our Marcus Corporation megaplexes don't, on the surface, seem to be in any real jeopardy. Though I will say - - my daughter and I went to see Transformers 3 on the second night and it was mostly deserted, nearly had our own screening room. Say, didn't we have this conversation last year here at GITS? And the year before that? If a bunch of "lowly" scribes get it, why don't THEY? Doesn't really make a lot of sense. I suppose some marketing guy is whispering in some studio head's ear, "Don't fret the numbers, sir, the "Battleship" movie will save us all, it's presented in that exciting, groundbreaking process called "3-D," EVERYONE loves the 3-D, right?" I love how the three success stories this past summer were the least likely to be so... Midnight in Paris, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, and The Help. Mere aberrations, right Marketing guy? "That's right... boy, that "Battleship" movie, I promise ya'... cinema gold!"

I'm 31 and I feel like an old fart. I didn't see a single movie this summer. And I didn't feel like I missed out. They're going to be in real trouble when the videogame generation (which really is me) and the old fart generation begin to merge. Why are good movies that Hollywood can't figure out labeled a fluke? And insipid tween garbage like Twilight what every movie has to be retrofitted to be like? Seriously, every remake is a more Twilight version of the original. Stop homogenizing everything. Please.

I think this summer's movies (and ticket sales) highlight the problem with how Hollywood movies get made. They often start with the star. And while there's interest in stars, I don't think stars truly sell tickets. What sells is the premise. What REALLY sells, what has folks going to see the same movie multiple times, what has people telling their friends they MUST see this movie is STORY. Put a great story on film, and audiences will pour into the theaters. Finding Nemo (for example) didn't sell because of the pretty music and the spiffy animation. It sold because there was a great story told well. It would have sold if it was stick art. There are FX spectaculars that do well in the box office despite feeble stories. But, if they took the time to fuse a good story with the FX, the studio wouldn't know what to do with all the money.

Perhaps they are too Oscar obsessed and don't dare release anything that could come close to having Oscar buzz released before December so that Academy members, all afflicted with Alzheimer's apparently, will not forget the film come February?

@kjb: Did you see this post about the Disney exec who talked about "spectacle" over "story"? Therein lies the rub. Movie lovers have been worn down by crap in the theaters. When a film comes out like "The Descendants," we need to talk it up and plunk down our dollars. That's the only language Hollywood speaks.

I don't know if it's the same in the US, but in the UK the whole cinema going experience is a)so expensive and b)barely differentiated from watching Blu-Ray on a 48" screen at home, that regular cinema going is virtually dead. It's all about the 'event'. There's no chance for a film to make a slo-burn profit - there aren't enough ticket sales to go round. So it's all about killing the opposition with the big 'fuck-off' movie. But this is leading to less and less intelligent movies - so much so that even their intended audience is tiring of the 'same old same old'. the trouble is the model is broken - it needs cinema going to become a social medium again. The hope lies in the decreasing cost of exhibition and distribution (something already kicking-off in the States). It just needs someone to pick up the baton over here.If I won the Lottery , it's what I'd do. And a few years down the line I reckon I'd be making my money back.

Nuts as it sounds, I think it's time to wonder aloud whether the movie industry has decided to marginalize itself. I know it sounds ridiculous, but, let's face it, the players now seem content to ignore society as a whole in favor of a relatively small segment of the population.

@Lazzard: You've been around the blog for a while, so you've doubtless seen my posts on actor-writer-producer-director Edward Burns (for example here). Right now using digital filmmaking, distribution and marketing, microbudget movies can survive. Of course it helps if you are Edward Burns and can book a slot on "Good Morning America" to promote your movie. Another person to follow on this front is indie film producer Ted Hope. There is definitely something going on in that arena. But it's a mere pittance compared to the major studios (I will be posting something in the next day or two about this, but bottom line whereas the major studios' B.O. haul from summer was around $4.4B, the top 10 indie films from summer grossed a mere $64M). What I'm talking about are movies like The King's Speech, The Fighter, The Help, films that indie financiers are willing to back to the tune of $20-30M. That is the new 'high' low-budget movie that seems to be the sweet spot for adult dramas. Same thing with The American, a $20M thriller that ended up doing $67M worldwide, almost assuredly all of it because it starred the hugely bankable George Clooney. If those $20-30M budget movies continue to roll up impressive ROI's, maybe the studios will start investing in them directly (I believe all of the above movies are negative pick-ups, straight out acquisitions, or simple distribution deals with major and/or specialty divisions). And maybe those budgets will creep up so the films can get a few more bells and whistles in terms of special effects. But mainly I just want to see more movies like The Descendants which all my connections who have seen it have raved about it. Or even 50/50 which numerous GITS posters have said is really good, some even saying it's great. I still like big Hollywood movies when they're done well like the reboot of Star Trek, How to Train Your Dragon, or even this summer's Super 8. But it's great to see movies like True Grit and The Social Network to balance things out.

Sites we Like…... [...] Every once in a while we choose blogs that we read. Listed below are the latest sites that we choose [...]…...

That link says "Not found." for me. I did find something online quoting Andy Hendrickson saying that when it comes to tentpole films, the notion that it's all about story is "bullshit". With due respect, I think he's wrong. He says the top 12 all-time box office gross films are "spectacle" films. I'm more than a little puzzled by this claim, even before getting to adjusting for inflation. He's arguably correct about some of those movies. But people went to Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings because they already LOVED the stories. But, look at inflation adjusted, and his argument falls apart, in my opinion. 1. Gone with the Wind 2. Star Wars -- the "spectacle" part was fun, but people kept going back because they LOVED the story Lucas told and the characters he created 3. The Sound of Music 4. ET 5. The Ten Commandments 6. Titanic 7. Jaws 8. Doctor Zhivago 9. The Exorcist 10. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs 11. 101 Dalmations 12. The Empire Strikes Back Dunno about you, but when I think of these movies, the first thing that comes to mind is not FX. It's story. I agree with you -- if this is the attitude of Hollywood execs, the films will not improve. Look at those top grossing movies (inflation adjusted). They surely had spectacle, but it's the story that had people lining up to buy tickets. Shoot, George Lucas still doesn't know what to do with all the money he made.