Terry Gilliam on the death of Hollywood

[vincvinc]

I submitted a very interesting Grantland article a few days ago that goes into exactly that (it failed getting HN attention, unfortunately). Just one look at those lists of upcoming releases and you can see what is happening to Hollwood right now.

http://grantland.com/features/2014-hollywood-blockbusters-fr...

[_broody]

Wow. I just read that article yesterday while browsing for some critiques of The Hobbit Part 3: Alfrid's Quest[sic], and I was nodding furiously all the way through. Brilliant, brilliant framing of the state of Hollywood.

I was ensnared by franchise hype for the last couple of years, and seeing this film was the turning point for me to stop and reflect that not one of the dozen+ franchise movies I saw at the theater in this time managed to remotely live up to my expectations.

I believe all is not lost, though. Other industries have shown the public eventually fatigues from such exhaustive, quality-less milking. Personally I've had my fill of being duped with franchise marketing, and next time I start thinking of wasting my money on one more of these ridiculous plot-less, CGI-bloated rehashes, I'll look for a decent original movie to wash the temptation off.

[walterbell]

Excellent article, thanks.

The list of software tools below is interesting. Has there been research into statistical analysis of "artistic attributes" of movies, as input to decision making algorithms that can augment Visicalc-inspired tools?

"If you asked a bunch of executives without a creative bone in their bodies to craft a movie lineup for which the primary goal is to prevent failure, this is exactly what the defensive result would look like. It’s a bulwark that has been constructed using only those tools with which they feel comfortable — spreadsheets, P&L statements, demographic studies, risk-avoidance principles, and a calendar."

[philwelch]

I, for one, am eagerly anticipating the fallout from this. People will get tired of the franchises eventually and there will be a reckoning. 2020 will not look like what the studios have planned.

[saturdayplace]

Hollywood has already validated its product, and found product-market fit. It's now just stamping out products it's pretty sure people will buy. Anyone claiming Hollywood doesn't make things people want to buy would, given the choice, swap bank accounts with any of a very large number of Hollywood executives. The coffers of which are by definition filled with customers' dollars. You may not like most of what's on offer, but then, like is so often mentioned around here, you are not the target customer.

[rverghes]

Is that true though? Take a look at this: http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/

The number of tickets sold seems to be on a steady decline since the early 2000s. It's only because the average ticket price is increasing that the total gross is increasing, and even that has been relatively stagnant for the past five years.

[CompanyLaser]

Obviously. To anyone who's ever had an authentic encounter with film/art, money and the doctrine of utilitarianism no longer mean anything to you. It's dust.

[Nanzikambe]

    "It’s just — this is crazy. You go to a rock concert and  before the first
    song is finished, the tweets are coming through. It makes me crazy because
    people are not relating to the real world anymore. That’s very worrisome.
    Hunter Thompson predicted America would soon be a nation of panicky sheep,
    and I think it’s adding to the problem."

In a nutshell, I couldn't agree more with the notion

[aswanson]

He's right. People can't live in the moment anymore. They're only able to report it happening.

[aswanson]

One of the informative/funny things that came out of the Sony hack was that the studios themselves, at least at the lower rungs, are sick of the formulaic, Adam Sandler style movies as well. They just keep throwing money at it because they have no creativity. They cited 'The Hunger Games' as the type of stuff they should continue with; I think they just need more wider-read people in charge of the studios.

[vanderZwan]

Thank you for posting this - wonderful interview, and I also wasn't aware of Terry Gilliam's new film yet so that's an added bonus for me!

[Alex3917]

Yeah the new movie was great, and as I usually do after seeing an unexpectedly nuanced movie, I went to look up what Andrew O'Heir had to say about it. And that's how I found this, which was also unexpectedly great, because how many people have ever asked themselves, "I wonder what Terry Gilliam thinks about X." Probably no one, which is probably also why the interview is so good. (That, and the fact that Andrew O'Heir is one of the film critics who seems to actually understand the movies he watches.)

[jacquesm]

Highly recommended: The Zero Theorem if you haven't seen it yet.

[e3pi]

Nice to see billionaires can be creative artists and still have fun:

".. ..I love Matt [Damon] in the film. I think he’s fantastic as that character. I’ve never seen him do that before, and that’s great. I actually said, “Matt, I’ve got a small part. A few days work.” he said “Don’t bother, I’m in.”

[Pyret]

In the olden days there used to be 3 channels on TV max. That's how I see Hollywood. It has maybe 2 and a half concept it keeps selling whereas TV, let alone Internet, wouldn't be able to get away with it these days.