MovieChat Forums > Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991) Discussion > Why Hollywood stopped making films like ...

Why Hollywood stopped making films like 'Terminator 2' (article):

posted 8 years ago by gogoschka-1
12 replies | jump to latest

I had been wondering for some time why pretty much all of the big budget studio tentpoles have stopped to provide a thrilling experience for me. For a while I thought: Well, I’m just getting old; I’m becoming more and more cynical and I’m also not as easily excitable anymore as I used to be. In a word, I’m turning into the typical grumpy old geezer who complains how everything used to be so much better in the past and that we don't get gritty, thrilling sci-fi/action films like Terminator I&II anymore.

But, being a film geek, through reading and watching hundreds of interviews over the years with studio heads, directors, producers and screenwriters as well as watching making-ofs and documentaries and reading countless articles about all things Hollywood, a very clear picture started to emerge, as to why so many of those blockbusters have become so formulaic - and that in fact we DON'T GET films like 'Terminator 2' anymore: for very specific reasons.

If you're interested in those topics, you can read it here for yourself (but be warned: it's a lengthy read and it could make you angry):

http://www.the-fanboy-perspective.com/a-rant-against-modern-tentpole-film-making.html

"The complication had a little complication."

reply

[–] Arvin-G-Borkar 8 years ago

Because people complain about how CGI is HORRIBLE. They should have made an actual T-1000 that kills. NOW THAT would be amazing.

THERE IS NOTHING TO FEAR. COLLEGE FOOTBALL IS HERE!!!

reply

[–] bigpapapumpct 8 years ago

The CGI in T2 s better than the CGI in any of the three subsequent films.

reply

[–] gogoschka-1 8 years ago

The CGI in T2 s better than the CGI in any of the three subsequent films.

I very much agree with that statement. More importantly, it's used much more sparingly and efficiently because most of the effects were still practical.

http://www.the-fanboy-perspective.com/a-rant-against-modern-tentpole-film-making.html

reply

[–] Bad_Puns_and_Machine_Guns 8 years ago

An excellent read. We have had some discussions about tentpole/franchise changes since the 90s action movie days on the podcast. This is much more in depth and interesting.

We are very disappointed in movies like The Nice Guys not getting the push it deserves, as we fear that those movies may disappear and they really can be great.

https://soundcloud.com/bad-puns-podcast/

http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/bad-puns-and-machine-guns

https://twitter.com/badpunspodcast

reply

[–] gogoschka-1 8 years ago

Cheers, mate. I tried to make it as comprehensive as possible (it's gotten a little too long though). You might also like to read this recent interview with Lorenzo di Bonaventura form The Hollywood Reporter:

THR: As a former studio head, what's right and wrong with studios now?

Di Bonaventura: As an industry, we've weathered the collapse of DVD. We've weathered the onslaught of video games and really quality television. The disappointment I have is that the response to those challenges has been a narrowing of choice. And I don't think that's the right thing. We've abandoned young males largely in our business. They like R-rated movies. They were the most dependable audience of my 25 years in this business. They've become less dependable because we are not making product for them. That's a big mistake.

THR: And a movie like The Magnificent Seven is made for a PG-13 rating.

Di Bonaventura: That's a perfect example of the mentality. It makes no sense to me. It makes me not want to see it. The notion that polarization and controversy is unprofitable is something I absolutely reject. The fear of that has the corporate masters of the business — and I don't mean the people running the studios, I mean their bosses — [becoming] increasingly safe. I've had personal experience where controversy has made movies widely profitable. Three Kings, Training Day, Falling Down, Matrix in its own way — not exactly controversial, but it was in your face. With Three Kings, every single time we tested the movie, when the woman got shot in the head during the milk truck scene, 10 percent of the audience stood up and walked out. And we kept it in. Today they would take it out.

THR: Given your history at Warner Bros., what are your thoughts on the studio?

Di Bonaventura: If I were Warners, I wouldn't worry about Marvel. I'd be worried about being authentic to ourselves. DC Comics is a really vibrant universe. Let it be what it's going to be.

The whole interview: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/lorenzo-di-bonaventura-interview-shooter-930893

http://www.the-fanboy-perspective.com/a-rant-against-modern-tentpole-film-making.html

reply

[–] alanake 8 years ago

A very thought-provoking interview, thank you for that.

Tosca isn't for everyone.

reply

[–] gogoschka-1 8 years ago

You're very welcome! 

http://www.the-fanboy-perspective.com/a-rant-against-modern-tentpole-film-making.html

reply

[–] ZakkWyldeMyLittlePony 8 years ago

I'm still grateful we got both the first two Terminator films.

Metallica, Iron Maiden and My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic fan

reply

[–] gogoschka-1 8 years ago

I'm still grateful we got both the first two Terminator films.

So am I, mate, so am I.

http://www.the-fanboy-perspective.com/a-rant-against-modern-tentpole-film-making.html

reply

[–] OmegaWolf747 8 years ago

Wouldn't the solution simply be to do away with enforced movie ratings and leave it on parents to prevent their kids from seeing movies?

---
House. My room. Cant walk. My medal. My father. Father, dont!

reply

[–] gogoschka-1 8 years ago

Oh absolutely. At the very least though, there should be a rating between PG-13 and R, like a PG-15 rating (which they do have in the UK).

http://www.the-fanboy-perspective.com/a-rant-against-modern-tentpole-film-making.html

reply

[–] damazywlodarczyk 8 years ago

In wider sense, it's about the economy, specificaly socialism and taxes. The taxes slowly grew throughout 90s and 2000s, so the studios started subliminally investing in less risky products(also the mental degradation of screenwriters and directors which can be attributed to the economy/culture). People started to pay more taxes, working harder, because a lot more of their money was given to the state, so where there's risk of losing the money(because you lost a lot more money in producing the movie/the costs were higher, taxes!), the attitude is to play it safe - this is basically what i'm talking about. It's also because of the change in culture(to more politically correct and liberal(intolerant to radical ideas and views), also tightly linked to the economy.

Two generations ago or even one generation ago there was motivation to invest big money into interesting movies, now interesting daring ideas are only in indies, because they're cheap, so if there's risk of losing the money, it's not a lot of money.

reply