After spending a chunk of the morning wading through treatises on the socio-political implications of Bruce Willis blowing up a skyscraper, I got to thinking about franchises. I don't think they're a bad thing, in theory (and, if you want to get theoretical, definitely check out this post from David Bordwell's blog, in which the legendary film academic solicits thoughts on sequels from a roundtable of colleagues). You could certainly accuse the sequel-happy studios of laziness--I always mentally cut to a shot of a Disney executive furiously trying to find a summer tentpole to greenlight so he can go on vacation: "Eh. They bought Johnny Depp as a pirate before--maybe they'll do it again." But it's hard to complain about any of this when the audience continues to turn out for franchise films.
So the question becomes, "What do people like about sequels? What are they hoping to see?" If the lure is in large part one of wish fulfillment--if any significant segment of the audience goes to see X-Men 12 because there's something that X-Men 1-11 didn't accomplish that they're still hoping to see--then won't the success of sequels as a genre fall in direct proportion to the rise in user-generated video? Basically, if fans live in a world in which they can appropriate, manipulate, and juxtapose characters, images and ideas from their favorite films in order to meet any desires left unsatisfied by the original films, why would they then bother to leave the house and pay $12 in order to see an authorized sequel?
Think about that while you watch this Rambo vs. Predator mashup. If a dude with iMovie can pit Stallone against the ultimate opponent, what else is there for John Rambo to accomplish?
Originally posted on:
SpoutBlog