I am approaching the end of my 10th year as a film critic. The goal here is to sum-up a decade of (as it’s stated on my website) movie news, reviews and views. I could go through lots of movie industry statistics and break down the quality of films by genre, but that would be kind of predictable – an adjective I can easily use to describe about half of the nearly 700 new releases I’ve seen and reviewed since I began doing this in 2006. Instead, I’ve decided to spotlight some of things that interested me most during this time and why looking at it from the outside in is so fascinating and fun.
MONEY MATTERS
The box office has been on an unprecedented rollercoaster, while ticket prices themselves have skyrocketed. This is part of the reason why in 2006 only 19 movies grossed more than $100 million in the US, and in 2013 there were a record 35. An adult admission to an IMAX movie (2D or 3D and at any time of the day) is now up $19 in some parts of the country, almost double what it was in ’06. This is based on a number of reasons, one being the 3D technology – a gimmick from the 50s and 80s revived yet again thanks to James Cameron’s blockbuster “Avatar” in 2009.
The next few years saw every action movie either shot or quickly converted to 3D simply as a money grab. Animation remains the only genre that has consistently gotten 3D right. But there are exceptions to that as well (I know how much I was blasted for giving “The Lion King 3D” a C-, and I’ll make this point…again: the 3D presentation of the film received a C- because it was a poor conversion. “The Lion King” is an excellent Disney animated movie.) Today, 3D versions of movies are still shown in theaters, though they don’t have nearly as much impact, and reports have shown that audiences care less and less about this feature.
AT THE CINEMA
So what have theaters turned to to keep audiences flocking to the movies? The answer is the actual theaters. The big guys (Regal and AMC) realize that building new multiplexes means having as many screens as possible. New theater complexes with fewer than 10 screens are rare. Ultra-sharp images and amazing sound quality, plus all the sweet extras such as reclining, specific seating options and food delivered to your chair have all played a part. In a time when sitting on your couch and watching movies via VOD, PPV and Netflix on your big screen TV has become a viable alternative for many, these are just some of the ways chains and independent moviehouses are attempting to stay afloat. It’s similar to the NFL’s strategy of adding fancy, high-tech features in their stadiums to improve and enhance the fan experience and keep people coming to games. Movie going has become an event.
NOT-SO “SUPER”
Unfortunately, the industry’s plan for keeping people interested in heading to a movie theater hasn’t been as creative. Instead, studios have been producing, basically, the same content, over and over. For every original idea Hollywood actually delivers, there are a dozen other retreads – prequels, sequels and threequels, novel adaptations (some with two-part finales), remakes and concert movies. And let’s not leave-out the true granddaddy of them all: the superhero blockbusters. Marvel and DC Comics’ film divisions are responsible for some the most successful movies of this decade, with multiple releases each year for comic book fans to embrace with such open arms, hands filled with ticket-buying cash.
Even though the “X-Men” and “Spider-Man” franchises were still swinging high, there is one gentleman to credit for the superhero revitalization on the silver screen. The casting of Robert Downey, Jr. as Tony Stark for 2008’s “Iron Man” was a stroke of genius on many levels, including bringing Downey, Jr. back to the movie star A-list, with “Avengers” and “Sherlock Holmes” franchises to follow.
ACTING THE PARTS
While Downey, Jr.’s career exploded over the past decade, the opposite can be said for former Hollywood heavyweights Johnny Depp, Adam Sandler and Jim Carrey. The recent collective films of this trio have been critical and box office disasters. As for the most influential actors of the last 10 years, Meryl Streep would be right at the top. Mamma Mia! – she’s had quite a range of roles. Streep, of course, has the most career acting Oscar nominations, with 19 (including five nods and a win between ’07 and ’15).
GOING FOR GOLD
The last 10 years have proven that The Oscars are no longer the only game in town. Awards Season has grown significantly based on two factors: an increase in movies and an even greater increase in the number of organizations and associations that take part in televised and streaming awards shows. Industry insiders care about them all: whether it’s awards based in the US, the UK or elsewhere around the globe, or those solely honoring achievements in acting, directing, producing, animation, and even the WORST movies of the year. The Awards business has gotten quite crowded, which makes the November-February period so interesting and fun for movie fans (and critics), and a nightmare for studios and publicists. Earning a nomination has become more competitive than ever, and there truly are no longer any “locks” (Exhibit A: Ben Affleck and “Argo”).
A FEW TIDBITS
Just like The Academy, The MPAA has gotten itself into some hot water with ratings controversies. The Weinstein Company made waves a couple of times as the studio protested R-ratings for both “The King’s Speech” and the documentary “Bully” because of some brief language. Weinstein was able to release PG-13 versions of both, but they were altered and edited to please the MPAA, which was completely unfair.
Remember when only two or three trailers would play before a film began? That’s the way it was 10 years ago. That number is now up to 7-8. And studios are also showing more in-theater preview features of their films (which give away too many plot details,) and unveiling them DAYS before release dates.
Comedies and dramas are no longer two separate genres. The term “dramedy” can apply to just about every movie out there. The Golden Globes and other awards groups need to seriously re-think their categorization policies.
A PERSONAL STORY
I attended a preview screening of “Frozen” on a chilly November Sunday afternoon in New York City, with the Disney animated film not set to open for two weeks. As I watched Elsa sing “Let it Go” for the very first time, with 30 or 40 kids around me in the theater, chills literally went through my body. I knew then that this movie (and song) would have a lasting impression on audiences, Disney fans and the movie industry, though I didn’t predict it would go on to define the decade.
AS FOR FILM CRITICISM…
Print journalism is on its death bed. Magazines and newspapers have been letting go of their longtime movie critics due to shrinking budgets and the public’s transition to online consumption of content. When I began reviewing films the “interweb” was a baby, Facebook was a infant and Twitter was a newborn. And over these past 10 years we’ve lost giants of the film criticism industry: led by Joel Siegel, Richard Corliss and the legendary Roger Ebert.
Today, a majority of moviegoers have been trained to simply look at percentage scores, grades and star-ratings to judge whether or not a film is worth seeing. And the phrase “Everyone’s a critic” has never been more true. Social media allows anyone to post their opinions whenever and however they want, even in only 140 characters or 7 seconds of grainy, handheld video. Sadly, society is accepting this as the way to acquire honest and reliable opinions on films. The importance of movie reviews, and why I’ve enjoyed doing them for the past 10 years, is that they allow the writer to develop thoughts, explore deeper themes and allow readers to immerse themselves into both the text and the movie being examined.
If honest, structured, film criticism goes away, so does a high standard for movies and moviemaking in general. My goal has always been to provide honest opinions about every movie I review (without being mean), while not allowing anyone else’s opinions or any pre-judgments to interfere in the process. I want people to know why a movie is a success or failure, and therefore why it is or isn’t worth their time and money. I always try to state my points clearly and fairly (without giving away key story details). If I’m able to get one person to see a film I recommended based on a positive review (even if they end-up disagreeing with my take), or skip a clunker based on a negative review, then I feel I’ve done my job.
I never dreamed, with my first review (“Hoodwinked!” in January 2006), that it would turn-out to be such a great ride. Thanks to all those who have read and watched my reviews and commentary over the years. Here’s to another fantastic 10 years at the movies!