Block buster films have changed the way films are marketed, produced and received. Marketing has changed because film makers realized that they could make more money off of block buster films by selling toys related to the film and creating sequels. I think block buster films have taken originality out of films; most of the movies we see now are sequels. They didn’t just create one sequel and stop they kept making sequels because if the previous film was good then people wanted to see the sequel hoping that it would be just as good. To me, some movies would have been better if sequels were not made of them; some movies are great but the sequel of them brings down the reputation of the original.
Movies like Ironman attract large audiences because of the fact that he is a superhero, the movie is based on a comic book and the special effects and technology in the film are amazing. Children want all the toys that come out so more and more are made. When the sales of toys and the interest start to fade a sequel is released with new characters introduced so new toys can be made. When there is a chance for additional sales and more money then usually the chance is taken and with movie sequels and toys there has been a lot of money made.
Of course after seeing how well American film sequels are doing foreign film makers begin to think that it is a good idea and start making sequels of their own. Sequels for the most part are easy they can stick with pretty much the same storyline and characters and just add some new stuff and make it interesting. Since audiences have already seen and liked the first film it wouldn’t be too difficult to get them to watch the sequel. The downside with sequels is that movies tend to make too many sequels.
After making so many sequels the audiences start to get bored of the movies. Saw ended up having six sequels and after the first one the others didn’t seem very good. The acting isn’t as good and the storyline becomes predictable; I think the only reason it was still getting audiences to watch was because of the gore in the film. Another movie that, to me, got ruined by sequels was The Matrix. The first Matrix was good, there was a lot of action and a good storyline but the sequels ruined it.
I think Hollywood needs to stay away from sequels, maybe one or two sequels is okay but when there starts to be six sequels the movie just gets ruined and people start to lose interest. I personally like to see new movies and new techniques like film makers used to do with films not sequel after sequel. Sequels are making Hollywood repetitive and movies are losing originality. Movies are starting to get boring and predictable and audiences want to go see a movie that they love that’s something new not the same thing that came out last year with better effects.
I like the idea of the post, and I like the opinions. I agree with the Saw movies. The first had an amazing twist, then the next were just made to keep people interested and continuously pay money to see the next ones, as the acting is terrible.
ReplyDeleteI liked how you referenced "Iron Man" in your post. It had unusually strong characters for an action movie, and that's what made it connect with audiences and become so popular amongst the public and critics. "Iron Man 2" seemed to be more concerned with the explosions and fights sequences (which were still pretty cool), but lacked the depth of the first movie. I also agree with your statement that the presence of sequels harms the reputation of the original, as "Iron Man" was changed from "a really good movie" to "part of a franchise".
ReplyDelete