The actress gets candid about her superhero film flopping: "It's not nice to be a part of something that's ripped to shreds, but I can't say that I don't understand."
“It’s so hard to get movies made, and in these big movies that get made — and it’s even starting to happen with the little ones, which is what’s really freaking me out — decisions are being made by committees, and art does not do well when it’s made by committee,” she added. “Films are made by a filmmaker and a team of artists around them. You cannot make art based on numbers and algorithms. My feeling has been for a long time that audiences are extremely smart, and executives have started to believe that they’re not. Audiences will always be able to sniff out bullshit. Even if films start to be made with AI, humans aren’t going to fucking want to see those.”
This is often over looked when people wonder why someone might sign up to something that is a trainwreck, and it usually comes down to the final film being far different than the original vision. Hell, a movie can be destroyed during script rewrites, bad scenes, and even during the editing process! Bladerunner has multiple versions based on editing the same filmed scenes. The theatrical version was ruined by insistence on a voiceover and the final cut is the best version due to what they cut out or left in.
This one sounds like the Bladerunner theatrical cut being ruined by execs, and that does suck.
The best known opposite example is Star Wars (A New Hope). When George Lucas screened it for Spielberg, Spielberg didn't know how to tell George how terrible it was without ruining their friendship. George gave his steaming pile of shit to his wife and she and her editing partner literally built the classic we know today from it. George learned his lesson and gave Empire to someone else to direct and his wife to edit.
And then they ruin it. They should understand their limits and realize they're hurting the bottom line by not trusting the people who know this stuff better than them.
I attended a conference where a former 20th Century-Fox executive talked about the way she meddled in the trailer process with technology. It's all about numbers and metrics -- if enough people, in the right demographics, didn't watch the whole trailer on YouTube, they'd cut the next trailer to cater to that group. Even if it wasn't a great representation of the movie; her bonus depended on people watching the trailer.
I can't remember the last time I saw a movie trailer that made me more excited to see a movie than less, I generally try to avoid them at this point like most advertising and feel better for it.
Yep. If you watched madam web you will clearly know how bad the movie looks. The spider lotus fan film is better than madam web. That's how bad it is. Morbius atleast had decent visuals.
In my mind it was great because it was an animation and execs think anime is dumb, so they won't meddle with it. If they ever make a live action Miles Morales story it's going to suck.
I was originally thinking about this while looking up some background actor.
Like, for many of these folks, these shitty movies pay bills. Many aren't living a life of luxury. And if you get chosen for a Sony superhero film, And the pay is good, why not take it?
Well, making a good superhero movie is harder than people think. At the end of the day, studios are risk adverse, and making a woman focused superhero movie is seen as riskier as it is more niche, which means they are more prone to interventions and design by committee, so it is a self perpetuating problem.
Speaking of which, Lemmy plug "Birds of Prey" (also starring some crazy clown woman) here today, in my humble and totally unbiased opinion, it's a pretty fun superhero movie that more people should watch.
I thought it was insultingly boring. Sometimes very bad. None of it made sense and the editing/pacing was trash. HQ had some good moments though, and her performance was fun-ish. The Suicide Squad was better by a country mile IMO.
While we're on the topic of female driven action movies. This one got lost at the box office because it was released in early 2020. Shame, because it's smart and exciting and doesn't follow all the 'revenge' tropes people are used to.
I like that one, too! It's no dramatic piece, like Dark Knight or Winter Soldier, but it's a rocking good time. It knows what it's trying to be, a silly Harley Quinn and company movie. I wish the little kid was less annoying in the movie, though lol.
More accurate would be to say she died on the way to the box office. I highly doubt these statements are going to negatively affect DJ in any way since there’s zero chance the story will continue.
I worked on that movie. I can tell you that the crew knew it was going to be a stinker for the entire time it was being made.
It was GREAT money while it lasted even though Sony was unbelievably stingy at times. We (the crew) quickly came to look at it as a box office writeoff.
It also brought in a handsome box office. Does not mean it is a good movie (it was properly horrible in my view, could not watch it, but some of the reviews were fun!), just that people with tastes different to mine exist in numbers. From what I can see about the new release, we won't be able to use this defence here.
I never saw 50 shades (though if the premise appeals to anyone they should read some stjepan sejic, he did graphic novels in response to it that are informed by actual knowledge of the topic), but folding ideas’s reviews of them made them sound like a competently made piece of trash followed by two pieces of trash ruined by an artist and committee.
It's a shame, because it's very easy to be typecast as an actor when you repeatedly star in flops, and while few directly criticise her performance in either movie, I imagine she'd be concerned that she'll be the first name on the list for lazy cash-grabs, and bottom of the list for anything she'd like to do.
It's why I question those that criticise her for criticising the movie. After all, this is her career, and if there were shenanigans that resulted in a poor movie that wasn't what she expected to come out, she should call it out.
As she’s previously hinted during the movie’s publicity tour, Johnson said the project’s script about a paramedic with psychic powers was radically changed from what she originally read.
But sometimes in this industry, you sign on to something, and it’s one thing and then as you’re making it, it becomes a completely different thing, and you’re like, ‘Wait, what?’ But it was a real learning experience, and of course it’s not nice to be a part of something that’s ripped to shreds, but I can’t say that I don’t understand.
My feeling has been for a long time that audiences are extremely smart, and executives have started to believe that they’re not.
Even if films start to be made with AI, humans aren’t going to fucking want to see those.”
“Like, ‘Dakota Johnson Breaks Her Silence On Madame Web’s Fucking Box Office Failure,’” the actress said with a laugh.
Over the weekend, Johnson’s co-star Sydney Sweeney likewise commented about the film’s reaction while hosting NBC’s Saturday Night Live, quipping in her monologue, “You have seen me in Anyone but You and Euphoria.
The original article contains 426 words, the summary contains 179 words. Saved 58%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
My feeling has been for a long time that audiences are extremely smart
Wow that's funny because my feeling has always been exactly the opposite. It's why quippy, vapid bullshit like the Avengers and star wars is so popular.
I love art but sometimes art is bullshit I can watch once and that’s ok. Other times art is shit like avatar that I’ll watch over and over as comfort tv for life because it’s good enough to be worth it. And then other times I’ll gladly spend 4 hours watching the first 2 hours of a 3 hour video on twilight because it’s very artistically dense and my wife and I need to keep discussing the bits of it. Not everything I watch can be the latter, some of the stuff will need to be the former.
I think there's different audiences. You're referring to a general, mainstream audience, while I think she's referring to an audience that would be interested in an artsy film going into it.
Yeah sorry I'm not gonna feel bad about criticizing Hollywood's least charismatic nepo-baby whose presence is taking job opportunities away from actors who pursued the career the right way rather than merely having the right parents and connections.
I think it's important to make the distinction that not wishing fame, fortune, and incredible opportunities for somebody is not the same as wishing ill on them. I don't want her to suffer some poor fate, I don't want her to get in any way harmed, I don't her to be miserable. I just don't want undeserving stiff acting being rewarded with fame and wealth when other vastly more deserving people could be taking those roles. I hope she has a wonderful life as a regional manager at In & Out, for example.
And yes, I feel this way about all nepo babies.
And frankly, actors in general; once you've made your mark on the industry and secured a comfortable wealth for you and your family, retire and allow those opportunities to go to others, but obviously that's vastly less egregious than people being raised to pinnacle of culture just for coming out of the right vagina.
Sad to say but she's wrong. The general populace doesn't give a shit about authenticity in film. They want brainless films with lame, repetitive jokes and Minions and/or Groots.
People will trip over eachother to watch a film by their favorite superhero company before even considering whether the last one they saw was worth watching or not.
Just like car enthusiasts, keyboard enthusiasts, FOSS enthisiasts, et al. mainstream films are not made for the enthusiasts—they are made for the average consumer to make a profit.