DominicCobb said:
They have nothing to do with the fact that Marvel’s movies are to an extent formulaic, for instance. I mean seriously, what’s the prerogative for that?
Exactly the same as the reason McDonald’s food is the same everywhere: People like consuming the same shit over and over again. When you go into a Marvel movie, you know exactly what to expect. A lot of people like this. As for the business end, they found a formula that works so they’re going to keep using it until it stops working rather than deviate from it and potentially risk a bomb. It’s just basic business.
There’s literally no reason why a studio would want everyone of their movies to have the same plot, despite what many people here have convinced themselves.
You think only people here think this? That’s not the case, at all, but whatever. It’s just basic logic and business like I explained above.
If two Marvel films have similar plots it’s because of lazy writers (or ones with not enough time), it’s not because some devious studio exec walked into the writer’s room and said hey make sure to copy the plot note for note or whatever.
You’re trying to make it sound like some kind of conspiracy theory but it’s not. It’s just business strategy. It’s not some kind of secret or anything. They don’t literally stand over the shoulders of the writers, but in a number of ways they do ensure that the films do not stray too far from the formula. Big blockbusters cost shit loads of money, and the people investing that money want to make sure it will return a profit. So they go with the tried and true, in terms of the tone they set, who they hire to direct and write the script, post-production decisions, etc. These are assembly line films, essentially. It’s business more than it is art. Nothing inherently wrong with that, it’s just how it is.
All the studios have the same shit. Look at Fox’s recent and upcoming slate and you’ll find all the same stuff - sequels, reboots, adaptations, etc. You can cherry pick two recent “different” films to show their range, but you could just as easily point out X-Men: Apocalypse, one of the laziest superhero films I’ve seen recently that probably deserves the critique of “same old shit” more than any recent Marvel film; and then of course there’s Fant4stic which speaks for itself.
I didn’t say Disney was alone in this. They certainly aren’t. The DC shit for example is the same except it’s a ripoff of inferior quality, making it much worse. And yeah, Apocalypse sucks and I didn’t even see F4ntastic, but even going back as far as, say, X-Men First Class, I think they’ve on the whole done more different and interesting things with their blockbuster properties than Disney has with Marvel despite being hit-or-miss. I’ll take hit-or-miss with the hits being real gems over a higher batting average but everything is just OK and samey.
Disney’s obviously on a recent kick of remaking their animated classics because surprise! they make a lot of money. But they’re not all mindless fan service. Pete’s Dragon is very different from the original and also happened to be one of the best films last year.
Did I say I blamed them for doing this to make money? No, in fact I said the exact opposite. You’re arguing just to argue here. I also didn’t say it’s all mindless fan service. I said some of it can be fun, just tiresome after a while and not particularly original. Being original or not is not inherently good or bad. It just is. Something unique can suck, something derivative can be great. But if you do nothing but derivative stuff, even if it’s all pretty good, it melts together.
As for the stupid South Park member berry bullshit, I don’t know what to say but that yeah people like seeing things they like? There’s nothing wrong with nostalgia if done properly. Obviously sometimes it works better than others but the idea that ~nostalgia~ is this brain numbing intoxicant that studio execs mix up and spit out to the mindless masses is just tiresome.
I thought it was a pretty unique idea actually, not tiresome at all. Now the movies themselves, they’re tiresome.
Are you really not sick of remake after reboot after soft reboot after sequel after prequel and on and on it goes? You know they’re making a fucking Baywatch movie right? Baywatch. That’s a thing that will exist. They’re really scraping the bottom of the barrel now. No that’s not Disney; like I said they’re not the only offenders but they’re some of the worst. The occasional nostalgia flick is fine, but Hollywood’s fixation in recent years on practically nothing but either a member berry movie or a sequel to an ongoing franchise has grown beyond tiresome. Even if one of these movies is great and not just pointless and stupid like the majority of them are, it’s still just appealing to the lowest common denominator. It’s still potentially keeping an original film from being made in its place. It’s possible Star Wars would never have existed if in 1977 the studios followed the same play it safe mentality they do today, so Fox wouldn’t have taken a chance on George.
Basically, too long didn’t read version: ALL studios like using existing properties because they know people like them and will give moneys. The quality of the end product, however, is ultimately up to the filmmakers. If they can’t find a way to work with the nostalgia in a way that satisfies you, blame them.
Did I not say pretty much the exact same thing? Pretty sure I did. Though you are wrong as to how much control the filmmakers have. The production companies trust some with much more than others, and many are just yes men who see themselves as employees doing a job rather than auteurs making art. Others have gotten upset when the studio changes their vision. Don’t kid yourself into thinking it’s all on the filmmakers. The formula is specifically designed so that their films are indistinguishable from one another. Quick, without cheating, who directed Captain America: Civil War? You don’t know and you don’t care because it doesn’t matter. It’s a product first and a film second.