ahalpert
Major Contributor
Do you think the Dark Knight would have been made exactly the same or in some ways differently if it had been produced by netflix? Honest question
AMC Says ‘Almost All’ U.S. Theaters Will Reopen in July
- Thread starter groveChuck
- Start date
Do you think the Dark Knight would have been made exactly the same or in some ways differently if it had been produced by netflix? Honest question
Run&Gun
Veteran
My comment was made about streaming in general.
Run&Gun
Veteran
Re-read my comment.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Which part? I don't think your last paragraph was in there when I responded.
I agree that a lot of the most original stuff is being made for streamers (Fincher, Roma, etc). But I feel like theatrical releases set the gold standard of Production values, and I still think that's true. Even some of these Marvel movies are gorgeously crafted.
And dudes like Nolan and Tarantino and Spielberg want to keep going theatrical.
Can you clarify what I'm missing?
Even something like that dreadful JJ Abrams movie that dropped on Netflix right after the super bowl... I totally believe it would have been grander and less limited in scope if it had been destined for theatrical release.
I think the Irishman is the exception of theatrical-level grandeur for streaming, not the rule. And Scorsese is an old hand
ahalpert
Major Contributor
I'm joking. But the point stands. No HBO Max subscription, no WW1984
Run&Gun
Veteran
You’re making the presumption that JUST because the movie is not going to have an initial theatrical release that corners will be cut. And I never said anything about the streamers studios producing all of the content. There is nothing that says the “big boy” movie studios can’t keep making their movies and just distribute them for release on streaming services, download, disc, etc. INSTEAD of an initial theatrical run.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
I guess I believe in something ethereal and inspiring about knowing your stuff will go on the big screen. Filmmakers talk about it all the time.
But otherwise you're right.
Except that I think that DLD is right about the economics and that budgets (at least in the long-run) will trend down and there may be less need to pump out blockbusters.
Basically, it's the same as made-for-TV movies. How many grand slam made for TV movies have there been?
Run&Gun
Veteran
I think we were leapfrogging each other... Post #226 kind of sums up where I was going. If they “dial it back”(production, scope, grandeur), it’s a choice, not an automatic function of it not being a theatrical release.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
I can't put my finger on it, but I think theres a difference, if only due to the economics.
For example - how many stand-up comic specials have had theatrical releases? None that I can think of. Although most of them are not-quite feature-length.
But they are catnip to streamers because of the excellent price/performance ratio.
In some ways, I think that legacy institutions like theatrical cinema cost money (or forego profit) to maintain. But that little bit of wastefulness is where the magic is created.
I think that Wall Street has already transformed Hollywood for the worse by getting it to focus on tentpoles and nothing else. It's a short-termist thinking of profit maximizing without sustaining the long-term health of the movie buff fanbase. And I think that if you essentially kill theaters, it's more of the same.
Or maybe I'm just overreacting and nostalgic
Run&Gun
Veteran
We do agree here. Wall Street business practices, long term, are unsustainable. Companies can't double, triple and quadruple their profits year over year. Wall street only cares about short term(instant total gratification) profits, everything else be damned. They force these companies to do everything they can to make every penny they can, regardless of the negative effects to the consumers, employees and larger overall industry.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0084597/
Now to the budgets and "grandeur". "Casablanca" was shot on the lot. And, in the original "Godfather", there were really no grand scenes. Two major outdoor/exterior scenes were Jack Woltz's mansion and the Sicilian sequence. Both can be shot on a drone these days (presuming that the drone operator isn't in quarantine).
Likewise, I was watching some uber expensive animated flick on some cable channel recently and thinking that, even though the film's budget was way over $100M, I would be just as easily satisfied with it being Simpson's/Family Guy quality.
And "Godfather"'s budget was around $4.5M in 1971.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Maybe the difference is purely due to the inspiration of the filmmaker to have their work on the big screen. You wont convince me that streamed stuff is not more TV-esque in general (although TV has gotten way more refined). Although for sure there is great stuff, even masterpieces, released online. But one difference is simply the scale you frame for. The size of details you expect will be ascertained. The DOF differences between screen sizes.
But it occurs to me that if the Americans abandon the theatrical space, it will simply become the domain of the Chinese or the Indians. Maybe the French will up the ante or the Mexicans. Hollywood became dominant only after WWII because its competitors had been leveled and unable to crank out films for the better part of a decade.
Columbia has emerged as a force in tv in the America’s. They had a big push a few years ago to get more International productions to shoot in Medellin. It obviously doesn’t have the population of China or India but is interesting and often overlooked (3-4 hr flight from Miami , some low humidity regions, good crews). I doubt it will rival major producing regions but I do hope more of the smaller countries thrive going forward.
CharlesPapert
Director of Photography
Maybe I'm mis-reading but there have been a number of successful stand-up comedy theatrical features--Eddie Murphy had Delirious, and Raw; Richard Pryor's Live on the Sunset Strip, all quite successful. More recently Kevin Hart had a couple of theatrical release concert films.
Films are more "leisurely" paced because they need time for the exposition, the character development and, at the end, resolution, whereas in TV, you pretty much get right into the conflict/story line and leave with a brief comment on the "meaning".
Narration-wise, streaming tends to be free of the TV constraints of needing to be structured around the commercial breaks. (on the other hand, a plot twist every ten minutes/pages is pretty standard anyway).
As to cinematography, a lot of the US crime related episodic has been on the "shaky handheld footage" bend for the last thirty years for a grittier look. Blame Bochco and Wolff. Deaking don't do that.
The US allows European imports too. And, yet, aside of "Das Boot", "Les Parapluies de Cherbourg" and "La vita è bella", no one can name any European movies. Not even those with Louis de Funès or Pierre Richard. And no one's even heard of Fantômas.
Run&Gun
Veteran
Eddie Murphy was the first thing that popped into my head when I read Abe’s post, but I think I forgot to respond specifically to it. And yes, I would say they were successful. And absolutely hilarious.
ahalpert
Major Contributor
I stand corrected
ahalpert
Major Contributor
ahalpert
Major Contributor
Yeah that's gorgeous. Although things seem locally softened in an annoying way in places.
I suppose my fear is that you'll get a wave of old-timers who carry over their ethos from cinema to streaming but that the aesthetics will devolve during an increasingly phone-centric distribution regime
Mank definitely wants me to fire up my netflix account again though...if I ever finish my star trek rewatch
I suppose my fear is that you'll get a wave of old-timers who carry over their ethos from cinema to streaming but that the aesthetics will devolve during an increasingly phone-centric distribution regime
Mank definitely wants me to fire up my netflix account again though...if I ever finish my star trek rewatch