I’m sick of hearing about how Hollywood is out of ideas. They aren’t. That’s not why you have so many sequels, remakes of older films and nostalgic revivals of older media (see: Transformers). It isn’t because writers are lazy and out of ideas. If that were true, no new books would ever be published. There are always more ideas, it’s just that the movie companies don’t want to take a chance on your unique idea.
Why? Simple. Name recognition. Never heard of The Darjeeling Limited? But you’ve definitely heard of oh, any novel written by Jane Austen. Simply by making a movie that has name recognition, you are more likely to draw in a crowd, even if the only people filling the theaters are fans of the original/book/first ten movies/original trilogy/whatever.
Granted, Juno was up for a couple of Oscars and it was an indie film and a comedy, but I am still a little shocked that the Academy even nominated the film. Sure, I enjoyed the film and perhaps the Academy is looking for some more street cred, but was it a Gone With The Wind experience? Not in the least. So, for the Academy to nominate Juno seems almost like they were simply trying to fill an empty spot in their five-movie nomination schema, but couldn’t decide upon the fifth spot because there were too many “not-going-to-win, but damned-if-it-wasn’t-Oscar-nom-with-enough-sappiness-worthy”. Harry Potter would’ve made just as much sense.
Music. The same can be said. Let’s start with the Grammy’s. How many has Madonna been up for? How many has Death Cab For Cutie been up for? And why isn’t Death Cab up for more even though they’ve written just as many great songs as Madonna? Simple, name recognition . . . but of a different sort. For a Grammy you must be a) a prior winner and/or b) a current popular, maintream-ish artist. Who won the Best New Artist last year? Paramore, I believe. Now I don’t have anything against Paramore, but there are much more deserving bands out there, but those bands didn’t make it big on MTV. Most not-nominated-but-way-better-bands/artists didn’t crack the top 50 on the Billboard charts, whereas Madonna is primed to sell millions of records even if it sucks (see: Michael Jackson’s career in the past decade).
Now, this turned into a rant more about awards than the industry, but the award shows just typify what the business already does. They put forth movies and artists who sell. And subsequently, they only fund artists and movies that are more or less guaranteed to sell. Yes, it’s a smart and safe model, but don’t complain to me about piracy or that there is a lack of ideas. They’re companies. They’re in it for the money. Case and point. To delude yourself otherwise is, well, delusional.
So, rent indie films. Go see indie bands. Hell, steal their stuff online so you can fall in love with them and then go out and support them. All the cries of “the sky is falling” and the “end of the movie/music industry” is a perpetuation of an outdated model of business. The quality of music and movies have not suffered over the years, in fact, I would argue that with each passing year that both art forms are growing. You just have to dig a little to find them . . . and stop listening to the media and the companies who are crying about their diminishing profit margins, which in no way correlates to the decline in releases they put out. No, that just wouldn’t make sense.