Has Hollywood killed the event movie? | Little White Lies

Has Hol­ly­wood killed the event movie?

12 Aug 2017

A red-costumed superhero holding a circular shield with a star on it, standing on a rooftop.
A red-costumed superhero holding a circular shield with a star on it, standing on a rooftop.
In an age of increas­ing­ly famil­iar extend­ed uni­vers­es, indi­vid­ual films sim­ply don’t have the same cul­tur­al impact as they did 20 years ago.

Twen­ty years ago few would have pre­dict­ed that super­hero fran­chis­es would become the dom­i­nant force in main­stream cin­e­ma, much less that a new Star Wars film would be a year­ly tra­di­tion. But one upshot of this is that few­er and few­er indi­vid­ual releas­es cap­ture the col­lec­tive pub­lic imag­i­na­tion in the same way that movies like Juras­sic Park, Inde­pen­dence Day and Titan­ic once did.

The move towards shared uni­vers­es may have opened up the pos­si­bil­i­ties of seri­alised sto­ry­telling, but the con­vey­or-belt pro­duc­tion of sequels, spin-offs and reboots has undoubt­ed­ly had a homogenis­ing effect on Hol­ly­wood. Audi­ences have become atom­ised through tar­get­ed con­tent mar­ket­ing and online dis­tri­b­u­tion, and as a result, the film indus­try has reshaped itself with a com­bi­na­tion of niche releas­es and cross-media shared uni­vers­es. In the cur­rent cli­mate, the notion of the era-defin­ing event movie feels increas­ing­ly obsolete.

This sum­mer has seen the likes of Spi­der-Man: Home­com­ing, Trans­form­ers: The Last Knight and War for The Plan­et of the Apes vying for box office suprema­cy – action-dri­ven block­busters with broad appeal whose large bud­gets were split fair­ly even­ly across pro­duc­tion and mar­ket­ing. Com­plaints of super­hero fatigue’ are more com­mon than ever, and sum­mer tent­poles still make enor­mous sums of cash, which sug­gests that movies as events’ are indeed in decline.

Cru­cial­ly, this sense of fatigue isn’t lim­it­ed to super­hero fran­chis­es. Juras­sic World made crazy mon­ey at the glob­al box office, but its cul­tur­al impact is hard­ly com­pa­ra­ble to the orig­i­nal. Two years on from its release, no one is prais­ing its CGI, yet Spielberg’s for­bear con­tin­ues to be held up as a bench­mark of dig­i­tal and prac­ti­cal effects. Per­haps it’s sim­ply that Col­in Trevorrow’s belat­ed sequel relied too heav­i­ly on nos­tal­gia to tru­ly feel original.

In his 2003 essay, Hol­ly­wood Block­busters: His­tor­i­cal Dimen­sions’, Steve Neale sug­gests that the most obvi­ous fea­tures” of block­busters are spe­cial­ness and spec­ta­cle”. Juras­sic World cer­tain­ly doesn’t lack for spec­ta­cle, but spe­cial­ness? A mar­ket­ing cam­paign built around remix­ing John Williams’ icon­ic theme and a famil­iar fam­i­ly-friend­ly adven­ture plot clear­ly piqued the inter­est of the film’s tar­get audi­ence, but for a bona fide event movie to occur there needs to be sub­stance, too.

Where Spielberg’s tra­di­tion­al fam­i­ly dynam­ics con­nect­ed with audi­ences in 1993, Juras­sic World’s ret­ro­grade gen­der pol­i­tics drew scorn in 2015. Ulti­mate­ly, with­out offer­ing any­thing par­tic­u­lar­ly new, the weight of expec­ta­tion and nos­tal­gia made Trevorrow’s film feel less like an event in its own right and more of an elab­o­rate reminder of how great Spielberg’s orig­i­nal was and still is.

Famil­iar­i­ty plays a big role in mod­ern block­busters, with vir­tu­al­ly every major new release being a sequel, reboot or remake. There are a few notable excep­tions: Logan, and Won­der Woman are among the most crit­i­cal­ly-acclaimed releas­es of 2017 – but even these films’ sense of occa­sion felt sig­nif­i­cant­ly dimin­ished by the famil­iar­i­ty on which they were sold.

Even the advent of a new Star Wars film feels less spe­cial now that the saga is being added to on an annu­al basis. Includ­ing the The Last Jedi, the last three Star Wars films have been released in Decem­ber. Indeed, the vast slates of stu­dios like Dis­ney and Mar­vel have turned the tra­di­tion­al sum­mer block­buster into an ever-present fix­ture on the­atri­cal release cal­en­dar. As well as dilut­ing the sense of occa­sion that sea­son­al release win­dows fos­ter, a con­stant stream of spec­ta­cle serves only to aug­ment the feel­ing of super­hero fatigue.

In addi­tion, the 247 media cycle cer­tain­ly means that the teas­er for the trail­er for the movie typ­i­cal­ly sur­faces months ahead of release. Pro­mo­tion­al con­tent is pored over and strip-mined for clues and so-called East­er Eggs, incit­ing count­less spec­u­la­tive break­downs from all cor­ners of the inter­net. It’s a rit­u­al that has become so ingrained in main­stream movie cul­ture that watch­ing the films them­selves almost feels like a for­mal­i­ty, a prod­uct to be hun­gri­ly con­sumed and then for­got­ten about as soon as the next big release beck­ons. Arguably one the biggest shifts in mod­ern cin­e­ma has been the steady decline of event movies in favour event fran­chise’, with Marvel’s all-con­quer­ing, ever-expand­ing Cin­e­mat­ic Uni­verse at the van­guard of this movement.

Of the few film­mak­ers cur­rent­ly buck­ing this trend, Christo­pher Nolan is per­haps the most inter­est­ing. The artis­tic scope and com­mer­cial suc­cess of 2008’s The Dark Knight – at the time his biggest and most ambi­tious work – legit­imised super­hero movies on a mass mar­ket scale. Two of his next three films, Incep­tion and Inter­stel­lar, chal­lenged the idea of what audi­ences want­ed from a main­stream block­buster, while his lat­est, Dunkirk, has already exceed­ed box office pro­jec­tions. There is no doubt­ing the spec­ta­cle and spe­cial­ness of Nolan’s films, but his cere­bral, mature approach to film­mak­ing feels some­how dimin­ished by the block­buster’ label. Nev­er­the­less, the arrival of a new Christo­pher Nolan film tru­ly does feel like an event.

His resis­tance of 3D and shared uni­vers­es is also worth not­ing. Nolan has insist­ed that his Dark Knight Tril­o­gy exist­ed in its own real­i­ty, wrap­ping up his sto­ry just as Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s pro­to-Robin arrived on the scene. And it’s impor­tant to remem­ber that although Nolan pro­duced Man of Steel, he did so as a stand­alone film, qui­et­ly depart­ing the series as it retooled itself as part of the DC Extend­ed Uni­verse. Sim­i­lar­ly, Nolan has nev­er made a film in 3D, nor is he ever like­ly to – his favour­ing of IMAX not only feels like an authen­tic cre­ative deci­sion but a fun­da­men­tal­ly cin­e­mat­ic one.

Nolan is also one of a tiny minor­i­ty of major film­mak­ers pub­licly advo­cat­ing the con­tin­u­a­tion of phys­i­cal film over dig­i­tal. All of this mat­ters, but the bot­tom line is that peo­ple watch Christo­pher Nolan films because they are Christo­pher Nolan films, just as Marvel’s legions of fans are moti­vat­ed to see the lat­est MCU cut par­tial­ly out of a sense of loy­al­ty to the brand. In Nolan’s case, his auteurism is the event’; each time you buy a tick­et to see one of his films you are par­tic­i­pat­ing in the unfold­ing nar­ra­tive of Christo­pher Nolan as a star direc­tor. The event movie is dead. Long live the event movie.

You might like