For the most part, films are made first for entertainment's sake and secondly to make a statement or comment about life or an opinion of the director. Even back in the films of Harold Lloyd and Charlie Chaplin this was true. These lighthearted comedies were extremely goofy and off the wall, yet still spoke to the public about social standings and the economy etc. But what about films today? While many still seem to have something relevant to say, there appear to be an increasingly large number of "popcorn flicks" coming out of Hollywood.
1) A dumb flick that thinks it's funny: Zookeeper
Not every film needs a lesson or a moral. Not every film needs to take a stance on some important topic. But do movies need to continue being dumbed down so people will buy tickets to them? A film that was recently released to pretty terrible reviews was a movie called "Zookeeper." Seeing the trailers for this film made me shake my head in disgust. It's about a "loveable" zookeeper played by Kevin James who wants to find a woman. The animals he takes care of decide to reveal that they have the ability to talk and proceed to help him discover his true love. Doesn't that sound like it could be written by a five year old? This is what Hollywood puts its money into? What makes a director read that script and think, "yeah, this'll make a great film!" Now, I haven't seen the movie so there very well may be some sweet moments hidden in amongst the talking animal jokes, but if a thirty second trailer can annoy me to the extent that every stupid TV-spot for Zookeeper did, it is so obviously not a film I want to sit through.
2) A superficial effects show: Transformers: Dark of the Moon
Transformers: Dark of the Moon was released recently. It's the third movie in a series that thrives on fast-paced action and incredible special effects. I must admit, when I saw trailers for the film, I was genuinely excited to see it. But I knew from the first teaser exactly what kind of movie it would be. It would be the kind of film where it's best to check your brain at the door, sit down with a bag of popcorn, and let it happen to you. You're not going to leave the theater changed in any sort of way. It's fun, loud, explosive, money-making filmmaking, but as long as you go in expecting that, for the most part you'll enjoy your stay. The characters were very two dimensional, the plot was so bizarre and convoluted that it was hard to follow, and the overtly patriotic "we must fight for freedom" theme was repeatedly shoved at you with no attempt at subtlety. It was a film that knew exactly what demographic it was being made for, and pandered to that crowd perfectly. While it should never be considered for any Oscar other than best CGI, it is what it is: a mindless special effects display with attractive girls, nice cars, and (thankfully) zero talking animals.
3) An action movie in its smartest form: Inception
It's true, I have many friends who would tell me this is not a popcorn flick. I both agree and disagree with that statement. I believe it is a popcorn flick in the sense that most of the characters aren't really that deep and seem to have been put there to simply serve some sort of purpose. It also contains several over-the-top and ultimately unnecessary action sequences with explosions, guns, and car chases. Finally, there is no real moral to the film other than "let go of the past" or something like that. On the other hand, it is not your everyday, mindless romp through CGI locations with superhuman protagonists that the audience never truly care for. When I talk to people who absolutely hate Inception, my main argument is: at least they did something different.
The film's concept is confusing, but at least the director is obviously aware of that and takes the time to attempt to explain it enough for the film to make sense. It took a second or third viewing for me to make all the connections between the different dream levels and how the whole idea of inception works. What this shows me, though, is that the director at least took the time to think of a relatively complex and interesting plot device that the audience wants to understand and involve themselves in. The whole concept of inception feels original enough to involve the people who want a psychological thriller, and the action sequences are cool enough to entertain those who want violence and really cool guns. This way the film works on multiple levels and is appealing to a slightly wider audience than most summer blockbusters.
So basically, all the movies mentioned above I would consider "popcorn flicks" with no real comment on society, the economy, or political points of view. Yet people still buy tickets and enjoy them just as much as a character driven film that has something legitimate to say to the world. These films will no doubt continue to slow forth from Hollywood each year and people will no doubt continue to see them, but as long as well written plots, subtext, themes and fully fleshed out characters are held in higher regard than these shallow, action packed lightshows, I won't have a problem with that.
I think you are selling "popcorn flicks" a little short here. While they do not explicitly try and say something about society (like a social problem film does) they all have similarities that do say something about the culture we live in. For instance, all the stars of the films are white, young, heterosexual males who are on a journey which says something about whose stories we value as a culture. Just the fact that they all have a single protagonist says something about American culture - we highlight the deeds of the individual and do not like to be grouped or thought of collectively.
ReplyDelete- Ruth