I guess I better burn the five Western specs I wrote... Just kidding. On a serious note for screenwriters though, is there any point in writing a western for the next couple of years at least? Will anyone in Hollywood even touch them? I remember around the time of Wild, Wild West there were a bunch of MTV-styled Westerns that never took off either. I remember I think one had James Van Der Beek. It seems like in 5-10 years there'll be some huge Western hit that reignites the genre, but for now that gamble won't be taken. Django Unchained is part Western, but it was so Tarantino that the success is more towards him than Westerns.

The western hasn't been a viable genre for decades. No spec writer should be working on a western unless they plan to film it themselves. This chart tells the whole story: https://kaedenyo.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/tumblr_mb0ml6xrjs1qa0uujo1_1280.png

What I'm seeing in Hollywood isn't a lot different from what happened in the late 50s - experimenting with different formats (Cinemascope vs. IMAX), with 3D (red/blue lenses vs. polarized lenses) and a trend toward bigger, bloated epics (most based on very familiar property - the Bible - or on historical figures). It all led to Cleopatra and the death of the studio system, and left in its wake a playground for the young and talented to come in and change everything. That can't happen soon enough. Maybe if the new Star Wars bombs, but that's not likely.

The look and settings are dead, the tropes are very much alive.

If we look at the tentpoles that failed: John Carter, Lone Ranger, Green Lantern, etc... the common denominator is that these were properties that did not have the requisite pre-awareness needed to reach their key demo: under 25 males.

Pliny, while I know where you're coming from with that analysis, I'd have to disagree. The problem with all of those movies is they just didn't look cool. John Carter? All I saw was some Indian looking guy standing alone in a desert. No clue what it was about. Didn't even know it was about/on Mars. Green Lantern? Green Hornet? Just don't care. Doesn't look badass or interesting. Lone Ranger? Johnny Depp is an Indian that makes many facial expressions. Cool. Wow. The first trailers I saw had next to no action scenes. These are big summer popcorn flicks. I have no idea who is in charge of the way these are marketed, but they should all be fired because this shit is a NO BRAINER. Popcorn needs to be marketed from the POSTER. Look at Back to the Future. There's a fucking Delorean time machine with flaming tire marks behind it. Sold! How old is that movie?? Lone Ranger. Johnny Depp as an Indian! Woopdy goddamn doo. It wasn't until way later and horrible tracking that they starting showing some of the train wreck scenes. Those looked cool, why not go with that FROM DAY ONE? The Sherlock Holmes reboot figured all this stuff out from the get go. So did Iron Man. I think of a Black Sabbath song when I think of Iron Man. I never read the comics. But I saw a guy flying around in a badass billion dollar robot suit doing cool shit. Sold! That's all it took. The movie LOOKED COOL. All this "brand awareness" shit drives me nuts. Harry Potter is massive because it's A SCHOOL FOR YOUNG WIZARDS. That's cool!' That's it!! Sure the books helped a lot, but without them, the movies would still be massive! It seems this mantra needs constant repeating. MAKE THE MOVIE COOL. Or if the movie IS cool, MAKE IT OBVIOUS WITH THE MARKETING. How is this ever messed up? If every single Lone Ranger ad had a giant train wreck (you know the term that people use to STOP AND WATCH SOMETHING) the movie would have had AT LEAST double it's abysmal numbers. This is and always will be a continuous boggler of the mind.

I don't know if that chart really tells the whole story. If you were to go by that chart then writers would be advised to stay away from Sci-fi and Adventure films, since they both are the next two smallest genres on the chart, and we know that is not true. I also have a long standing issue with both Sci-Fi and Western being listed a genres. I know this isn't the exact thread for this, but I'm still bring it up. "Western" and "Sci-fi" are SETTINGS not genres. You can have a Horror Western, or a drama western or a comedy western or a romantic western, etc... Same with Sci-Fi. You can have Comedy, drama, horror, adventure and romance Sci-Fi films. Just because most Western and Sci-Fi films are action films, doesn't mean that they all are or should be. Again, Western & Sci-Fi are settings for films, not stand alone genres. I don't think Westerns as a rule are dead, its is just that people didn't want to see this western film, that didn't look very interesting from the trailer. It looked silly. And maybe big budget silly westerns don't work (see Wild, Wild West and Cowboys vs Aliens) but on the other hand The Mask of Zorro is almost the same basic story as the Lone Ranger and that made 250M world wide 14 years ago. I have to agree with Doug (a few posts below) that films have to look cool and interesting to draw in modern audiences. The Lone Ranger did not look cool. It looked dull and silly. If they had made it darker and grittier would it have done better? Who knows? It probably would of cost a whole lot less, thats for sure. So, I don't think Westerns are dead, I just think bloated, silly westerns are dead. If someone does a cool, dark Horror or Action western film I bet the audience will show up for it. It just depends on if the studios will make those types of films.

The only train wreck people will be looking from now on is the Lone Ranger's opening weekend.

Hmmmm...three big budget bombs. What was it Spielberg and Lucas said just a month ago? The times, they are a changing. I don't think Westerns are out, not in the new paradigm that's evolving. Right now they're big business in TV, at least shows with a Western or Southern flare. If you write it with heart (instead of eating heart), your Western could be the one that opens the doors again. Think Unforgiven. You should've seen the dust cloud hanging over L.A. when that was a surprise hit and screenwriters were pulling out old scripts :-)

The chart shows that Hollywood doesn't make a lot of sci-fi movies but that's because they tend to cost a lot. However the ones they do make are usually major material and there's a large audience for that genre, so it makes sense to write one (although, you're aiming really high when you do). Westerns are very rarely that high profile, and those that are are usually made by well-established players. And yes, you can take another genre and flavor it as a western, but it's not really a western then. In a hybrid film one genre usually dominates, and it's usually not the western.

Yes, which is why most westerns moved to urban settings back in the 80s. Ironically that's about the same time that urban and suburban populations were greater than rural populations - severing that connection with our rural western past.

I think it's hilarious that Spielberg & Lucas should be complaining about the state of the industry when they were probably the two individuals most directly responsible for getting us here.

which movies were you thinking of?

Hey Scott, don't you think #1 and #2 contradict each other? If you buy a franchise for it's pre-awareness in your target group, why do you need to do an origin movie? In my opinion, franchises are valuable, because they give you recognizeable characters that have been tried and tested with audiences before. The characters are already able to hook people -- it's your job to create an entertaining ride with them. The success of franchises has very little to do with pre-awareness in itself. Success or failure is all in the script, stupid! :)

granted I was not in the best of moods but for the first time since I started going to movies, five minutes in asked for a refund and got it. Well got a ticket to use later anyway. Dead bird hat? Zzzzz.

It ain't easy being powerful and famous :-)

Well basically the whole cop/action genre is an extension of the western. There are hints of film noir but these movies owe a lot more to the western - and westerns were considered the action genre in the 30s-50s. It started when Clint Eastwood turned his western persona into Dirty Harry. Die Hard is just a western in an office building. Bank robbers, damsel in distress, good guy sheriff, and little help from the outside world. If it were made in the 1950s it would be a western set in a small Texas town.