Good movies make money. A rule quoted verbatim.
Definition: There is no such thing as a good movie losing money.
History: After Hollywood’s Golden Age, the idea percolated that if bad movies could make money, good movies could lose it. Many directors and producers, especially those like Billy Wilder rooted in the studio system, rejected this idea. The last major debate was occasioned by the critically acclaimed box office loser “The Age of Innocence” (1993), a film based on a novel by Edith Wharton in which an 1870s New York lawyer (Daniel Day Lewis) is torn between his love for a married countess (Michelle Pfeiffer) and his social duty to remain true to his cousin and fiancé (Winona Ryder).
“The Age of Innocence” was director Martin Scorcese’s one and only chick flick. It was nominated for five Oscars, but only and tellingly won the award for best costuming. Detractors labeled the film a “snoozer” while partisans claimed the movie went over the heads of most audiences. Scorcese’s response: make his next movie one that couldn’t go over the heads of pins—i.e., “Casino” (1995).
The debate finally fizzled in the mid-1990s when the earning power of movies, good or bad, went steroid thanks to home videos and cable television. Now about every movie makes money eventually. Perhaps even “The Age of Innocence.”
Related Topics: above-the-line, film historian production value Ulmer Scale
Classic Movie Metric star system
|