Small indie productions generally have more artistic freedom while big productions drops a lot of that to cater to the masses. Personally I think Attack of the Killer Tomatoes is the best movie ever. That film crew just never gave a heck about what anyone thought.
A true classic. I still have the “killer tomato seeds” that came with the VHS somewhere. I never had the courage to plant them and risk that they were real!
Very few people love McDonald’s (Or whatever fast food franchise) food, but hundreds of millions or more like it, at the least like it well enough that they’ll eat it.
Now, pick a place, maybe a local independent owned place that you think has amazing food, or a world class revered chefs place. Ok.
More people on Earth know what McDonald’s tastes like than have or will ever taste the food at your favorite local spot or the top restaurants in the world. Does that mean McDonald’s food is the artistic standard of food? Does that mean that any curriculum teaching future chefs should teach them what is good food by basing their instructions around trying to make food more like McDonald’s?
Or maybe we can say some films go above McDonald’s to “casual dining” like Applebees or TGI Fridays or whatever- but look, Olive Garden is damn good, but the food isn’t art. It’s not fine cuisine or the pinnacle of Italian food culture. These things, like these films, they are formulaic. They are engineered around precise spreadsheets for budgets and markets and appealing to the widest ranging of people and avoiding any real offense or controversy. It’s about more than a single film too- when Disney or Paramount or whoever, when a writer or director or star attaches their name to a film, their image and career are now tied to that film. Not just wether the film is “good” or “bad,” but the message of the film and the mood etc. actors get “type cast” sometimes for life by a single role- they can play a villain so heinous or so well that people can’t see them as a “hero” going forward etc. directors that do well with certain types of film are often offered similar films in the future...
Studios that get a reputation for making “family friendly” films or for films with a certain set of politics or “edgy films” etc. tend to get associates with those films. It impacts their ability to succeed. As an example- for those who don’t know maybe don’t Google it, for those who know:
Imagine if a hit property like “Baby Shark” or “Paw Patrol” was produced by Brazzers, with each episode credits showing a big yellow and black “Brazzers” logo. They aren’t known for making children's entertainment. A lot of people probably would have problems with those shows if all we did was change the parent company and nothing else. So these big budget films tend to, on their own, be large investments that are cultivated for maximum returns- it doesn’t matter if a characters death makes a more powerful film if that death destroys sequel potential, it doesn’t matter if the ending is more artistic and poignant if the good guys lose and the bad guys don’t suffer- if the testing shows more people..
.. will like the film or pay more money if you put a happy ending in. But these films are also part of an even larger, even more complex system of media and branding that has even more money tied up in it. A film is chosen for release in the summer because marketing shows it will be most profitable in summer, but what films show when in the year or even which films are shown the same year is part of a strategy designed around marketing psychology. “Setting the stage” for the next batch of releases, “riding the mood” of the public or the zeitgeist at the time etc. in short- we are talking about a level of complexity in business approaching that of a space mission. NASA does not generally allow crews to “just wing it.” They don’t say: “Let’s take the thing that has always worked and take a risk, change things up for the sake of art and expression..” the film industry is much the same in general. Massive money is at stake, but generally not lives, and unlike space missions; you CAN…
.. make a successful movie without risking millions or more dollars. So movies can allow people to “wing it” sometimes. People can make their own movies and have them be successful. Most of the time, the films that don’t compromise art or vision are the ones which don’t have the reputations of major studios and actors and entire armies of peoples livelyhoods and hundreds of millions or billions of dollars riding on them.
Now- to be fair, many art circles and classes can be.. pretentious. lol. Unnecessarily so. Elitist. Just because a movie is obscure doesn’t make it art. Just because a movie is huge doesn’t mean it is bereft of artistic merit. What’s more, not everyone appreciates art. A “perfect” artistic example of film isn’t necessarily a film any one person would enjoy. Just because a film lacks artistic merit doesn’t mean it isn’t enjoyable or a great film. Just because others don’t see the art in a film, doesn’t mean you can’t. Art to some degree is in the eye of the beholder.
Now, pick a place, maybe a local independent owned place that you think has amazing food, or a world class revered chefs place. Ok.
More people on Earth know what McDonald’s tastes like than have or will ever taste the food at your favorite local spot or the top restaurants in the world. Does that mean McDonald’s food is the artistic standard of food? Does that mean that any curriculum teaching future chefs should teach them what is good food by basing their instructions around trying to make food more like McDonald’s?
Imagine if a hit property like “Baby Shark” or “Paw Patrol” was produced by Brazzers, with each episode credits showing a big yellow and black “Brazzers” logo. They aren’t known for making children's entertainment. A lot of people probably would have problems with those shows if all we did was change the parent company and nothing else. So these big budget films tend to, on their own, be large investments that are cultivated for maximum returns- it doesn’t matter if a characters death makes a more powerful film if that death destroys sequel potential, it doesn’t matter if the ending is more artistic and poignant if the good guys lose and the bad guys don’t suffer- if the testing shows more people..
Now- to be fair, many art circles and classes can be.. pretentious. lol. Unnecessarily so. Elitist. Just because a movie is obscure doesn’t make it art. Just because a movie is huge doesn’t mean it is bereft of artistic merit. What’s more, not everyone appreciates art. A “perfect” artistic example of film isn’t necessarily a film any one person would enjoy. Just because a film lacks artistic merit doesn’t mean it isn’t enjoyable or a great film. Just because others don’t see the art in a film, doesn’t mean you can’t. Art to some degree is in the eye of the beholder.