Quality vs. commercialism an epic battle

loading...

Right now in Hollywood, the continuing struggle between art and commerce is having its biggest battle to date.

With public tastes changing and more big-budget “blockbusters” becoming big-budget bombs, the dilemma is this: Should the film industry follow a trend established 10 years ago by the publishing world? Or should it look to the music industry for continued commercial inspiration and carry on with its increasingly costly, 2-decade-old plan?

Not surprisingly, it’s proving a tough call; Hollywood hates change almost as much as it hates internal audits. But recently, it’s become clear that those in control of the larger studios are beginning to tap into a trend that has paid off big for publishing: Realize the commercial within the artistically uncommercial, market the hell out of it, ride the buzz — and turn the project into commercial pop art.

In the past year, it has happened several times. Just as the book world scored huge profits with the seemingly uncommercial books “Bridget Jones Diary,” “Snow Falling on Cedars” and “Tuesdays with Morrie,” so too has Hollywood scored with films that, five years ago, would have found it nearly impossible to find their way into theaters: “Magnolia,” “American Beauty,” “Being John Malkovich,” “The Blair Witch Project” and “The Talented Mr. Ripley.”

What Hollywood is learning is this: Getting behind those projects that stand apart from the pack in their blatant shunning of formula, their willingness to try something different or their effort to say something meaningful about the human experience can be good business. Audiences are hungry for something new and, as the above films prove, financing quality over big-budget crap can lead to a phenomenally sweet bottom line.

But don’t think for a minute that Hollywood will continue financing better films out of the goodness of its heart or out of any sort of artistic renaissance. Just as the publishing industry learned in the late 1980s, when huge sums were thrown at writers whose projects never shot onto best-seller lists as planned, the film industry is experiencing something of a wake-up call.

The problem is audience reaction — or nonreaction — to the blockbuster.

After a slew of hugely expensive films — “Wild, Wild West,” “The Beach,” “The Haunting,” “The 13th Warrior,” “Mission to Mars,” “Reindeer Games,” “The Ninth Gate” — became box office duds, Hollywood is finally understanding that all the money in the world can’t turn dreck into a smash hit.

They’re learning that, in today’s culture, encouraging “creativity” among the mediocre isn’t leading to yesterday’s box office gold, but to mediocre box office receipts.

The blockbuster isn’t dead — “The Phantom Menace” proved that. But what’s changed in recent months is that films once considered uncommercial now have a fighting chance at the larger studios, which have the power to distribute those films to mass audiences in ways that independent studios simply can’t. And that’s big news for anyone seeking better cinematic fare.

Still, there’s a catch — there always is — and the catch here is the music industry, which competes directly with Hollywood for the all-important teen dollar.

With teen favorites such as Britney Spears, ‘N Sync, Christina Aguilera, Mariah Carey, Jessica Simpson and the Backstreet Boys all moving millions of CDs, Hollywood — by its very reactionary nature — has countered with such dogs as “Here on Earth,” “Ready to Rumble,” “Snow Day” and “Deuce Bigalow: Male Gigolo.”

Their thinking is this: If teens will spend billions on this sort of light, uninteresting, formulaic pop music, certainly they’ll line up for whatever light, uninteresting, formulaic films they can slap together in their studios.

But after these failures — and especially after the success of “The Blair Witch Project” and “The Sixth Sense” — they should know it no longer works that way.

“The Blair Witch Project” wasn’t a great movie, but it did well because it took something old and made it new — cinema verite. Its core audience of teens had never seen anything like it and couldn’t get enough. As for “The Sixth Sense,” that film simply had it all — a good story, a strong cast, quality writing, a fantastic twist. Teens — and adults — flocked to it in spite of its modest budget and initial lack of industry push. So far, the film has made nearly $300,000,000 domestically.

In the battle between art and commerce, that’s one figure Hollywood can’t ignore.

On video

“The Insider” — Directed by Michael Mann. Written by Mann and Erich Roth. Running time: 155 minutes. Rated R.

With all of its back-stabbing and back-biting, sudden betrayals and terrific plot twists, Michael Mann’s “The Insider” hits audiences hard with a sharply written story that’s so well acted, one can almost overlook the film’s inflated running time.

What’s not so easy to ignore is the film’s epic air of self-importance, which would have run thin had the film not been quite this gripping.

Based on a 1996 Vanity Fair article called “The Man Who Knew Too Much,” “The Insider” is a big, nasty melodrama that pits corporate whistle-blower Jeffrey Wigand (Russell Crowe) and producer Lowell Bergman (Al Pacino) of “60 Minutes” against the formidable powers of Big Tobacco.

The film is fueled by twin barrels of rage — that which it feels toward tobacco companies for spiking their cigarettes with added nicotine, and that which it directs at the suits of CBS for pulling Mike Wallace’s interview with Wigand at the last minute because a crippling lawsuit was feared.

Mann approaches “The Insider” as if it’s an “All the President’s Men” for our time, but it doesn’t deserve that epic treatment; it’s not as if people aren’t aware that tobacco companies will do anything to keep people smoking. Still, the film’s pace is strong, it’s beautifully shot, and the performances are terrific, particularly Crowe’s, who strikes a nice balance between rage and fear as he goes public with his damning knowledge — and is issued death threats because of it.

Grade: B+

Christopher Smith is the Bangor Daily News film critic. His reviews appear Monday and Thursday in the NEWS, Tuesday and Thursday on WLBZ’s “NEWSCENTER 5:30 Today” and “NEWS CENTER Tonight,” and Saturday and Sunday on NEWS CENTER’s statewide “Morning Report.”

THE VIDEO CORNER

Renting a video? NEWS film critic Christopher Smith can help. Below are his grades of recent releases.

The Insider B+ Superstar B+ Three Kings A- Three to Tango D- Boys Don’t Cry A For Love of the Game B The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Ark C- Star Wars: The Phantom Menace B Jacob the Liar D Last Night B- The Sixth Sense A- The Omega Code F Pokemon: The First Movie C- Crazy in Alabama C Drive me Crazy C+ Guinevere A- The Limey A Outside Providence C+ Eyes Wide Shut B+ Buena Vista Social Club B+ The Bone Collector C+ Twin Falls Idaho A The Best Man B Random Hearts C- Stigmata C- Bats C Brokedown Palace C+ Double Jeopardy B- An Ideal Husband A- The Story of Us D The Astronaut’s Wife D- The Winslow Boy A- Runaway Bride C- Stir of Echoes A- Tarzan B+