Vox

Quality, Message...Or Mass Appeal?

Over at Chasing the Wind, Michael posts about the wide gap between movies that appeal to the general public (as evidenced by their high box office takes) and movies that appeal to the 'critics' and Hollywood elite (as evidenced by their award nominations). They have a lively little discussion going in the comments, but I thought I would give my take on it here.

In this case, I believe I agree with both Michael (Hollywood elites dismiss what appeals to the general public) and Jo (the Oscar's aren't about what has mass appeal)

Though box office take is generally a good indicator of the appeal (and success) of a movie, you can also chock up some major numbers to marketing and expectation. Star Wars: Phantom Menace did bang up business right out of the gate, and continued to rake it in, even though it was widely panned by critics and consumers alike. Star Wars fans in large numbers denounced it as craptastic, but they continued to attend (and drive up the numbers) to be part of the SW culture. (It received 3 Oscar© nominations, no wins)

In 1941, Citizen Kane, considered by many to be the greatest filmmaking achievement in the history of movies, was nominated for 9 Oscars, but only managed to take home one (Original Screenplay). Orson Welles lost in acting to Gary Cooper (Sergeant York) and directing to John Ford (How Green Was My Valley), that film also beat Kane in Art Direction (black & white), Cinematography, & Outstanding Motion Picture, Film Editing went to Sergeant York. Music to All That Money Can Buy (The Devil And Daniel Webster). Sound Recording went to That Hamilton Woman.

So, a movie about greed, corruption and redemption lost to movies about a reluctant war hero, the environmental damage caused by coal mining, a man who makes a deal with the devil, and an adulterous woman. Read into that what you will.

The Oscar's were never intended to reflect what movies had the highest attendance or most successful marketing, but instead recognize "excellence in cinema achievement" Whether they have managed that is certainly up for debate, remember that Kim Basinger, Julia Roberts, Gwyneth Paltrow (over Cate Blanchett in Elizabeth!) and Helen Hunt all have Oscars on their mantles. Whoopi Goldberg won hers for Ghost - a public favorite, not exactly a critics darling.

Recognition for what has mass appeal comes in the form of the Peoples Choice Awards (and large profits). Because I don't put much stock in what the general public finds entertaining, I don't often rely on these awards to decide whether or not to see a movie.

Recognition for quality is supposed to come from The Oscars, the Golden Globes, the Screen Actors Guild Awards... Unfortunately, these awards often reflect the voters (Hollywood Elite) leanings rather than the actual quality of the film. Fahrenheit 9/11 winning as a Documentary is proof enough of that, they liked the message so much they dismissed their own rules for the category (and, frankly, did anyone expect different?). As such, I don't often rely on which of these awards a movie wins to decide whether or not it is worth seeing.

Occasionally, I will use box office take as an indicator - but only if it is sustained. A big opening weekend shows me nothing but the success of their advertising campaign. More often I rely on recommendations from friends and/or bloggers

Does the Hollywood elite reward what appeals to their sensibilties rather than the masses? Absolutely!
Does the Hollywood machine have enough sense to make movies that appeal to the masses? Definitely!
Do they produce crap? Oh yeah!

There are 312 eligible movies this year. How many of them have you seen? I've seen 28, so far.

Hollywood has always had an agenda. Unfortunately, where it used to be pro it is now anti (America, family...). Where it used to be anti it is now pro (adultery, promiscuity...). In general, of course

Disclamer: I enjoyed Wedding Crashers and The 40-year Old Virgin - both of which were loaded with crass humor and sex jokes. I loved the razzle-dazzle, let me entertain you movie, King Kong. I liked The Wedding Date - and it was by no means a 'good' movie.

Posted by Vox at January 19, 2006 10:55 AM | TrackBack | movies