|
|
MOVIE ARTICLES - Movies in 2004
2004 Poor for Movies
by Ryan Parsons
Here is a case in point- 2004 was a strange, if not bad,
year for movies. Now, I'm not talking about the quality
of films, they were probably right on par. But, Hollywood
has been growing scared. Scared to create films that fall
away from standard conventions and afraid to try films
that may tilt a couple heads or raise a few brows. If
it wasn't for a few HUGE films in 2004, including some
that distributors were afraid of, everybody may have felt
that Hollywood was losing us. However, it seems that Hollywood
is willing to turn a cheek and come stronger than it ever
has this century [never mind Lord of the Rings] with the
bringing in of 2005.
2004 Poor for Movies
I can understand how it may be hard to fathom that Hollywood
did not have one of its best years during 2004. Sure,
the film companies were still able to pull in film revenues
with a little over nine billion, but ticket sales were
actually DOWN by a startling two percent. Now, I know
this doesn't sound like much, but it is! For the year
of 2004, distributors were planning on conquering the
box offices with films such as Troy, Alexander, The Whole
Ten Yards, The Village and Van Helsing. However, all of
these films flopped [Van Helsing is doing great with DVD
though]. No matter how impressive the battles or sequences,
audiences left the theatres feeling unsatisfied. So what
was wrong with the films? And who saved 2004?
Four of the biggest hitters of 2004 came out of either
CG animation or children's tales. Shrek 2 began with a
bang and was able to gross somewhere just under $450 million
in ticket sales. Then we had Pixar's The Incredibles,
which proved that animated films with adult-style action
and subject matter can still be successful [~$275 million
gross]. Last of the animations was Spider-Man 2 [the fights
were almost entirely animated]. I can call this an animation
as the fight scenes were well animated and the film seemed
to run like a perfect animated comic [~$370 million gross].
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban, based of the
'childrens' book [I beg to differ], couldn't lose with
a darker atmosphere set up by Alfonso Cuaron [pulled in
$250 million]. Obviously, the four listed films were expected
to do well in the theatres and all three performed gracefully.
But what about the films that nobody wanted or were afraid
to touch?
The two films that were handled like boiling water were
Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ and Michael Moore's
Fahrenheit 9/11. Even though these films caused a lot
of tension amidst their distributors [Einstein was pissed!],
the two films managed to pull just under a combined $500
million in ticket sales. So that would make five big blockbusters
for the year; not nearly enough. While Passion and Fahrenheit
were more than plesent surprises, what about the other
films?
The best thing to come out of 2004 is the amount of surprise
hits that were able to maintain some theatre presence
longer than just opening weekend. The only thing that
hurt most the surprise hits for 2004 was the invisible
barrier that would not allow a lot of films to break the
$100 million mark. Here are some of the films that were
able to break that mark [with a brief thought on how they
were]:
Shark Tale- I would hope this out of a high cast CGI animation
I, Robot- I still don't know if I liked this film or not.
Seemed a little rushed.
National Treasure- One of the best surprise films all
year.
The Village- Only got passed $100 million thanks to hype.
Luckily, Hollywood did not have to rely on only these
films. Even though the industry hoped to have at least
double the number of films to get passed the $100 million
mark, there were some other sleeper films that helped
maintain high 2004 numbers. Some of these films include
Mean Girls [a teenie bopper that anybody could like],
Man on Fire, and The Notebook, Friday Night Lights and
Napoleon Dynamite.
What's Wrong with Movies in 2004?
Eternal Sunshine takes you on a journey through love and
the mind. The best example to give for what happened to
movies in 2004 is the upcoming Academy Awards. Take a
close look at the nominated films, what we have are dramas
and bio-pics. People are losing interest; our top rated
films are the ones that few people saw. We don't have
a Lord of the Rings this year, or any other film that
people want to sit down and root for. Want further proof?
Why do you think Chris Rock is stepping in as host in
order to atract a younger crowd?
Also, where the hell is Eternal Sunshine for the Spotless
Mind? I know it has a few nominations, but it deserves
a few more. The film, starring Jim Carrey, only grossed
$34 million in ticket sales [domestically] and was probably
one of the most unique and plain out cool films of the
year. Forget the biographies and the straight forward
dramas, Spotless offers up an extremely unique outlook
on love and the new ways to handle it. And, mind you,
it falls entirely away from the simple conventions overly
used in films during 2004.
In conclusion-- Hollywood needs to get people back in
the theatres and buying tickets for films that deserve
hyped attention. The best way to do this is by creating
blockbusters that can actually remain in theatres longer
than an opening weekend or two. Viewers are tired of films
that just go through the motions and are now seeking something
extremely polished or unique. Films of 2004 had lost the
ability of 'word of mouth', but I expect that 2005 should
regain all of this-- as Hollywood now seems ready to take
some chances.
About The Author
Ryan Parsons is the owner of the Movie Entertainment Site
CanMag.Com. All articles can be reposted by permission
with a link back to CanMag.Com. |
|
