It was good, but they don't make like them used to." Such is the famous review of most people over the age of 30. Most commonly used to talk about Westerns, war films, spy films, musicals and epics, it is been bandied around by even more people (myself included) in the wake of Hollywood's objective nose-dive in quality. Quantity of content is the machine of filmmaking in the West, a safe, riskless task that milks successful franchises dry and renders genres mute. Hollywood essentially has two types of films: the mega-budget blockbuster with a $100-250 million budget, and the smaller, independent type of film that becomes well known in awards season but fails to make a splash with general audiences. Granted, there are occasional outliers in this; Oscar-bait biopics often combine established directors, a notable actor and a reasonably hefty budget (Bohemian Rhapsody, for instance) and can go onto success. Because of this production style, many genres have dried out. Comment sections will often find people lamenting the death of the mid-budget thriller, a 1990s trend whereby a decent director will work with one or two popular movie stars to make a solidly entertaining thriller on a budget between $30-90 million. Look at Tony Scott's 90s films, the Bond films before they ballooned in costs, and adaptations of John Grisham novels.
However, it has come to my attention that the films people say they want (non-franchise originals, essentially) are actually getting what they want. The problem though is that people aren't turning up to see them. Or, to put the blame on the usual suspects, studios are simply failing to be bold with risks and, when they do take them, seem scared to properly market and promote them. Below are a variety of film templates that people thought have disappeared but have popped up recently, albeit to often poor results.
The big-budget historical epic
Historical epics have often performed well at the box office and at the Oscars. Biblical epics were all the rage in the 1950s, then the 1960s unleashed David Lean's sweeping 20th century epics. Things fizzled out once sci-fi took over, but there was a resurgence in the 1990s after Braveheart's Oscar success. Titanic revived romantic epics and then Gladiator fully ignited the renewed passion for historical action: Kingdom of Heaven. Troy, Alexander, Master and Commander, 300. In the 2010s this has dried out. Film lengths seemingly got shorter, with three hour films failing to make a splash. Audiences were apparently clamouring for these masculine, bloody historical films. A lot of people look at Gladiator and say that that wouldn't get made today because of its budget and genre- but is that actually true? 2018's Outlaw King went to Netflix and was generally well received. 2021's The Last Duel also married a 2 1/2 hour length with brutal medieval combat (as well as a stellar cast and crew). Yet The Last Duel was a box office bomb, failing to attract audiences who were otherwise engaged with Dune, Venom 2 or No Time to Die. Indeed, its target audience still hadn't properly returned to cinemas in the pandemic era. But the film was appalingly marketed, with only one trailer released. It was a sacrificial lamb, one that hopefully finds an audience. Even more recently, Robert Eggers' The Northman is a $70 million arthouse action revenge epic that has drummed up a lot of online chatter. Historical epics never really came more than once a year, so the recent releases do feel like the genre has not completely gone.
The mid-budget thriller
The mid-budget thriller can be defined as an exciting story (action, adventure, courtroom) that utilises one or two notable stars and a solid director, all within a $30-90 million budget. They are the definition of a 7/10 film or a great popcorn flick. Perhaps the most notable one of these in the 2010s is John Wick, which tapped into Keanu Reeves' committment and likeability and also paved the way for how action films should like. Its sequels grossed more money and thus earned their bigger budgets. Also in 2014 was Denzel Washington's The Equalizer, which also got a sequel. However, this type of filmmaking has waned. Directors like Tony Scott and John McTiernan tried hard to keep it afloat, but once their careers stopped there were few other filmmakers capable of delivering the goods. Michael Bay's Ambulance stars Jake Gyllenhaal and is a decently reviewed (anything over 60% is usually acceptable for this) action picture, just one that has failed to properly make a splash despite literally being what people want. The demise of this escapist filmmaking can be attributed to streaming: if something is not particularly cinematic (no fan base, mid-tier production values) then streaming sites lap it up. Audiences probably saw Ambulance's trailers and thought they would wait for it on Netflix where they can watch it with a takeaway and some beers. Extraction was popular on Netflix but I highly doubt it would have been a box office hit in cinemas.
Big budget originals
Having looked at certain genre formulas, the other massive 'hole' people are crying out to be filled is the lack of original cinema. These are films not based off of existing franchises or established characters, but rely on an original premise, director power, starry casts, and word of mouth. Original cinema really isn't dead- but it is held back. If we look at some of the most high profile 'originals' since 2015, a pattern does emerge: 1917, Dunkirk, Tenet, The Hateful Eight, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Coco, Inside Out, Soul, Moana, Us and Mitchell's vs the Machines. What connects most of these is that they are original films operating within a brand. Tenet and Dunkirk both made over $300 million (Tenet would have made more in a non-Covid world) because they were sold under the Christopher Nolan name. Audiences know his work because of the mainstream appeal of The Dark Knight trilogy and then his other juggernauts like Inception and Interstellar. There is an expectancy for time trickery, big practical effects and a general confidence in the storytelling, therefore his original films sell tickets. Similarly, Quentin Tarantino's two films both had sizeable budgets and sold a fair few tickets because the director is as much a franchise as James Bond. Fans expect snappy dialogue and violence, and they get it. Us was sold under the banner of Jordan Peele following the breakout success of Get Out, whilst Disney and Pixar's films are almost encouraged to be original so that children have a greater chance of loving it and becoming obssessed by it. Mitchell's vs the Machines was also sold as being from the minds of Into the Spider-verse, so a brand connection has begun for Sony Animation too. With 1917's success, the originality of the film was less important. Whilst not a distinguished auteur, Sam Mendes' credentials have created a sense of trust with audiences, whilst the much discussed cinematic nature of the film and its cinematography led to word of mouth telling people to experience it. 1917 works as a pivot point between the brand 'originals' from directors and animation studios to the true originals that manage to break out. Such examples include Knives Out, whose old-school style and dashing cast, not to mention general quality, made it a box office smash. Then there is Ad Astra, a roughly $100 million space film that failed to profit but was well received. Parasite rode a wave of success and frantic online acclaim to breakout internationally. A Quiet Place was marketed more as a cinematic event than a standard horror-thriller, one that had the John Krasinski-Emily Blunt involvement to further carry it to break-out success. There are numerous other mid-budget originals: Logan Lucky, Hostiles, Passengers, The Accountant, La La Land, The Nice Guys, Baby Driver etc. Some of these scored, some failed. But the point remains Hollywood does still make originals, it is just a matter of audiences going out their way to watch and support them.
