News
Garber Announces Advisory Committee for Harvard Law School Dean Search
News
First Harvard Prize Book in Kosovo Established by Harvard Alumni
News
Ryan Murdock ’25 Remembered as Dedicated Advocate and Caring Friend
News
Harvard Faculty Appeal Temporary Suspensions From Widener Library
News
Man Who Managed Clients for High-End Cambridge Brothel Network Pleads Guilty
Long, long ago, blockbusters ruled the earth. They were gargantuan
compared to the productions of today; they featured casts of thousands,
budgets in the hundreds of millions of dollars, and they attracted
droves of eager audience members.
Sadly, their reign did not last long. Wintry economic
conditions rendered their bloated budgets unwieldy, and each year
audiences arrived in smaller and smaller numbers until they were
insufficient to justify the spectacles orchestrated for their
consumption.
Even worse, a new breed of smarter and faster films crashed
the scene: the independents. Their pint-sized budgets and rapid
production cycles made them worthy competition for the lumbering
blockbusters. As quickly as it began, the age of the blockbusters came
to an end. Or so Hollywood’s prophets of doom and gloom would have you
believe.
These industry analysts are not entirely incorrect; according
to The Hollywood Reporter, attendance slid from 1.54 to 1. 4 billion
moviegoers between 2004 and 2005—an 8.7% drop. Unsurprisingly, revenue
is down as well: the Motion Picture Association of America reports a 6%
drop in domestic ticket sales and a 7.9% decline internationally.
Ironically, the direst predictions about the fate of the
blockbuster come from the man whose mega-grossing films helped coin the
term, George Lucas. In a recent interview with New York Daily News, the
“Star Wars” mogul predicted that by 2025 the average budget of a studio
film would be $15 million—less than most A-list stars’ asking salaries.
The most recent Academy Awards ceremony surely marked the
ascendancy of independent filmmaking; four of the five best picture
nominees were indies, and the lone big-budget picture—Spielberg’s
“Munich”—yielded anemic box office results and failed to snag the top
prize.
Likewise, the runaway success of niche films has been a
source of consternation for major studios. “Madea’s Family
Reunion”—Tyler Perry’s follow-up to his 2005 cult hit “Diary of a Mad
Black Woman”—topped the box office for two weeks despite being targeted
almost exclusively at African-Americans familiar with Perry’s stage
productions.
Mel Gibson’s controversial 2004 film, “The Passion of the
Christ,” enjoyed even greater success by casting itself as an
anti-Hollywood production, and concentrating its publicity campaign in
churches and other Christian-friendly venues. Seemingly, Hollywood has
lost its hold on the imaginations of large segments of the film-going
public.
High profile disappointments—like “Munich”—and slumping
ticket sales are bound to send studio executives searching for
unconventional movie concepts, but they are unlikely to entirely
abandon the business of blockbuster film-making.
Consider the films currently in development: Warner Brothers
is anticipating huge returns on their $250 million investment in the
new “Superman” movie; Fox has high hopes for the third installment of
its “X-Men” franchise; Disney is banking on “Cars” to justify the
incredible expense of their Pixar acquisition; and Paramount is betting
Tom Cruise’s tabloid antics won’t sink “Mission Impossible 3.”
The risks of blockbuster moviemaking are great, but they are
offset by the potential for enormous profits. As long as big movies
carry with them the possibility—however remote—of significant returns,
someone will venture to make them.
And deep down, audiences want blockbusters. They are unique
in their ability to unite vast numbers of individuals through a common
cultural experience. The fanboys who camped outside of theaters to be
first in line for the “Star Wars” prequels, the teenaged girls who
watched and re-watched “Titanic” with their friends, and the office
workers gathered around the water cooler all illustrate the social
importance of the blockbuster; though the form may fall in and out of
favor, it is too socially vital to ever go extinct.
—Staff writer Bernard L. Parham can be reached at parham@fas.harvard.edu.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.