Success of Star Wars explained

G

greatatlantic

It Wandered In From the Wastes
No, not really. But I read this article from Slate and thought it made a pretty good argument. Namely, Hollywood studios try to create mega films that reap a ton of money, and what sort of common elements these mega films have in common. There are nine of them total.

1) They are based on children's fare—stories, comic books, serials, cartoons, or, as in the case of Pirates of the Caribbean, a theme-park ride.

2) They feature a child or adolescent protagonist (at least in the establishing episode of the franchise).

3) They have a fairy-talelike plot in which a weak or ineffectual youth is transformed into a powerful and purposeful hero.

4) They contain only chaste, if not strictly platonic, relationships between the sexes, with no suggestive nudity, sexual foreplay, provocative language, or even hints of consummated passion. (This ensures the movie gets the PG-13 or better rating necessary for merchandising tie-ins and for placing ads on children's TV programming.)

5) They include characters for toy and game licensing.

6) They depict only stylized conflict—though it may be dazzling, large-scale, and noisy in ways that are sufficiently nonrealistic and bloodless (again allowing for a rating no more restrictive than PG-13).

7) They end happily, with the hero prevailing over powerful villains and supernatural forces (and thus lend themselves to sequels).

8) They use conventional or digital animation to artificially create action sequences, supernatural forces, and elaborate settings.

9) They cast actors who are not ranking stars—at least in the sense that they do not command gross-revenue shares. (For his role in Spider-Man, Tobey Maguire received only $4 million and a share of "net profits," which do not divert from the revenues flowing into the studios' coffers.)
Click to expand...

I found myself agreeing with a lot of it, and it goes a long way to explain the highly formulistic approach hollywood seems to take. Furthermore, a lot of those ideas are easily transferred to games. I guess I'm just getting a little cynical in my old age. Anyone else find this interesting?

Link: http://www.slate.com/id/2119701/
 
So that explains this garbage.

It seems to use all of the same formula, but not even bother to try. I think it was best said as:

"Based on characters created by Rodriguez's then-seven-year-old son, Racer Max, the film doesn't belong in wide release. It belongs on a refrigerator door, alongside '100%' spelling tests, old lunch menus, and notices from the PTA."
-- Ben Kenigsberg, VILLAGE VOICE

No shit, the kid's name is "Racer Max".
 
Thats a perfect explanation. The thing is they all garner to a large crowd...though one must assume they are all done properly as Roshambo pointed out they arent always.

I think the big thing is marketing and theme. All movies sell tickets, but not all sell posters, toys, collectibles, etc. Also certain movies appeal to only a few where's huge epic fantasy's are love/action/adventure/comedy/drama story's.

Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller
 
Another point...

If a film grabs you and is totally absorbing you're also much less likely to notice when a car explodes and a benz logo flies out and cuts down one of the bad guys, or that the hero is wearing Nike. Lets face it, masterpieces are much less effective at pushing product - SFX (which get less and less special every time we watch an entire movie of nothing else) are a handy way to cover up a films flaws - like too much makeup on an old and scabrous hooker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top