Franchise Fatigue...Is It Real?

[kguillou]

Ok, someone had to start this discussion. Might as well be me.

So, I think its safe to say that this year has not been kind to sequels from studio franchises. This was a big year with a lot of new installments in pre-existing movie franchises, some were highly anticipated (Civil War, Batman v Superman, Star Trek Beyond, Jason Bourne) and some nobody ever wanted (ID4, Alice 2).

Besides a few exceptions (CW and Star Trek Beyond) this year was rough for studio tentpole films, especially from a critical perspective. Movies like BvS, X-Men Apocalypse, TMNT 2, ID4 2, Alice 2, Jack Reacher 2 got demolished by critics. While some of them were critic proof and still made money, a lot of them fizzled out at the BO as well. I think its safe to say we're not getting another TMNT or ID4, Universal may be hesitant to do another Bourne movie, and although loved by critics, Paramount has got to be disappointed with ST Beyond's BO performance. And although, it did very very well, some are saying Civil War should have done better at the BO given its near unanimous praise as one of Marvel's best films.

Are we reaching a saturation point where a are starting to wear on these big budget franchise tentpoles or does Hollywood simply need to up the ante and produce more compelling films and the audiences will show up? What are your thoughts?

 

[Octoberist]

Yes, it can be real and I think 2016 has evidence of it. That, or the argument is that we just need better movies and less lazy cash-in's. I think it's a column a and column b situation they're both true, and honestly, speaking for myself, I don't mind more original movies with great concepts that aren't made for 150 million. Look at John Wick, Wilderpeople, Ex Machina and Green Room. There definitely needs more of a balance.

 

[Loden Greatstorm]

It's real, all of it.

 

[Octoberist]

Anyone who doesn't think it's real, or even think that it's not remotely possible, really needs to word their argument carefully without looking dismissive or enablers of bad cinema.

 

[David H.]

It's real, all of it.

Says it all, doesn't it?

 

[kguillou]

Speaking of Star Wars, I think Disney's going to see diminishing returns on the franchise launching a new movie every year. That's literally milking the cow dry.

 

[DrCosmic]

I honestly think the bulk of the fatigue is in the production. The quest for the next cash cow has led to an increased amount of cash-in decisions as opposed to the kind of creativity and innovation that gave birth to each of these franchises in the first place. In every case, a more well crafted film would have led to better results and less fatigue for the next big deal that's really just a cash in with money thrown at it. There are a few that would be passed over and never made, I suspect, but all in all, if every film was at Civil War level in terms of quality, I think everyone would be more excited about the next big tentpole, even if it's just two weeks away.

It's the opposite of what's happening on TV. Because TV is on the upswing. No one's scared for Westworld. No one's asking "Is this too many serial drama genre shows?" because the level for 'too much of a good thing' requires a practical limit, like, there aren't enough hours in the week to watch all the good TV shows. You have outliers, like True Detective Season 2 as a sort of cash in to a franchise that lost because it wasn't worthy of existing on its own merit. But then they learned the lesson and we don't have True Detective Season 3, even though they want the franchise, on TV they won't put out tripe to keep a valuable franchise going. Think about that... the quality standard on TV is higher than that of movies now.

Even Marvel's not invincible, because for all of CW's greatness, in most of the conversations I've had, TWS is still regarded as the best Marvel movie to date. Think about that... people liked the first time that it was Cap against the world, even though the latest one had more and more beloved characters and the most fan pleasing fight sequence I've ever even imagined, much less seen. That's kind of the case in point of franchise fatigue. It's not enough to retread and throw money at it. Even for Marvel. So what chance to Universal have with this tactic?

 

[Warhammer]

I prefer TWS to CW. However, that last point would have been great if Civil War didn't gross over 1 billion.

 

[The Batman]

I don't think I'd necessarily call it fatigue, but interest in a franchise does go down over time. Even CW didn't gross as much as the other two movies that starred the Avengers.

The main problem with the underperformers this year is that most of them sucked, and there was no real point to them existing, other than the studio trying to make cash.

 

[Da-Scribe]

I think there's just only so many times you can watch white people in tights blow a city up. Not trying to make this a race thing at all. There's nothing wrong with white leads. There's nothing wrong with blowing the city up. But all these movies just sorta looked the same as each other and they all looked the same as they have for the past decade now.

BvS, the UE specifically, was about the only one that felt any different for me, tonally speaking. I don't feel any need to go back and rewatch the others other than maybe Deadpool.

I think it'll get better though in the coming years. Wonder Woman is on the way, along with Aquaman and Black Panther down the line. Those are all gonna be welcome breathers from all this sameness we've been getting, I hope.

 

[Sundancer]

I don't think I'd necessarily call it fatigue, but interest in a franchise does go down over time.

The exception seems to be the Fast and Furious franchise. I've seen them all but now I'm getting sick of it.

 

[The Batman]

F & F is one of those franchises that starts with a more modest success, before growing and growing with the last 4 or so films.

It was smart of them to cast actors like Charlize Theron in the next movie. That might keep the momentum going.

 

[kguillou]

I think Furious 7 was the apex though. I think Fast 8 will do well but not as well as F7. F & F is a rare exception because the series reinvented itself halfway through and gave itself a new identity with much more mass appeal.

 

[Legendver2]

On the point of CW gross, I firmly believed if it was title as an Avengers film instead of a Cap film, it would've beaten Ultron's gross, even if just by a little bit. As far as fatigue goes, it is a very real thing. For one, factors such as how good a film is does matter as well. But the other major point is how fast these installments come out. Back in the day, sequels came out every 2-3 years.

With the advent of the MCU, this concept has more or less evolved. Although there are other titled franchises in this mega franchise that releases installments every few years, as a whole they are releasing 2 films a year. It also doesn't help that they all look and feel the same tonally, but so far, because of brand recognition, and the continued positive quality of the films, they have been doing very good business as a whole.

But I do believe other cinematic universes can take advantage of being different if they can come out with a quality product. Obvious cash-ins such as ID4 probably doesn't fit the mold. But if say Universal can start their monster universe with a very good film, that can be all the difference it needs to have a successful mega franchise. So far, the DCU is the only other competitor, and even though their films haven't been received well critically, the tone and concept is different enough that it's still bringing in good business all around. And with more diverse options like WW and Black Panther coming along, this "fatigue" can be held at bay for a little bit longer.

IMO, if this happened a couple years back in mid 2000s, the fatigue might happen faster. But with the rise of social media and memes and all these cultural in crowds, everyone is going to want to watch everything in order to keep up with the conversation. Of course, if quality drops, it will eventually reach a breaking point. But as long as quality remains high on average, I'd say the fatigue won't be as detrimental, and these mega franchises can evolve into something else yet again.

 

[Kyle]

Less fatigue, more decline in quality sees a decline in returns. Audiences are smarter. You shoot sequels out constantly with no time given to make sure that it's good if not better than the predecessor you're going to see a decline in returns. You make films that are cash ins that don't live up, you're not going to see money from that either. 2016 is an extremely hard year to look at since really only ONE of the films was universally liked - Civil War - and the rest were seen as lacking to disastrous. Thus the only clear cut thing 2016 shows is lack of quality is starting to equal lack of money.

You could say Star Wars won't equate Force Awakens for quite some time and that's obvious. Force Awakens gave us the original cast returning after over 28+ years and it was universally beloved. It has two things going for it that won't come back for a while.

 

[CJ]

Yes, it's true. I've grown tired of film franchises like Batman, Spider-Man, the MCU, and I'm not looking forward to a 4th Toy Story.

 

[kguillou]

I think another thing is that these blockbusters are no longer seen as "events" because there are so many of them now and they hit the same familiar beats: "giant portal in the sky, alien invasion, destructive 3rd act. etc etc etc." When the first ID4 came out in '97 it was an EVENT. It was that thing you and your friends and family just HAD to see that summer. It was the quintessential summer blockbuster imo and there was nothing else like it. Now the summers are full of "ID4's" and I think people are starting to wear a little and when something off kilter comes along (such as Suicide Squad) people see it as a breath of fresh air and would choose that over something "safe" like Star Trek Beyond.

 

[C. Lee]

Ok, someone had to start this discussion. Might as well be me.

You mean - someone had to start it this month - Been dozens of threads started on the subject.

 

[Kyle]

I think another thing is that these blockbusters are no longer seen as "events" because there are so many of them now and they hit the same familiar beats: "giant portal in the sky, alien invasion, destructive 3rd act. etc etc etc." When the first ID4 came out in '97 it was an EVENT. It was that thing you and your friends and family just HAD to see that summer. It was the quintessential summer blockbuster imo and there was nothing else like it. Now the summers are full of "ID4's" and I think people are starting to wear a little and when something off kilter comes along (such as Suicide Squad) people see it as a breath of fresh air and would choose that over something "safe" like Star Trek Beyond.

That plays somewhat off of it. But the big thing there is self cannibalization. With Hollywood seeing only summer and winter as the prime time to release these films, they're eating each other a part. Without a single doubt, if X Men Apocalypse for example released in September it would have seen higher earnings because it would have had increased opportunities. The more cramped the release dates are = the smaller the window of opportunity due to increased competition as well as decreased potential earning time. If a film doesn't earn back a lot of money in one week, it's dead in the water - one week. That's hardly giving any time at all toward word of mouth. In the past, the gap wasn't that small and as long as they don't start viewing release dates differently it will only get worse as it has the past several years. That's guaranteed. In other words, Hollywood is eating itself apart.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I think another thing is that these blockbusters are no longer seen as "events" because there are so many of them now and they hit the same familiar beats: "giant portal in the sky, alien invasion, destructive 3rd act. etc etc etc." When the first ID4 came out in '97 it was an EVENT. It was that thing you and your friends and family just HAD to see that summer. It was the quintessential summer blockbuster imo and there was nothing else like it. Now the summers are full of "ID4's" and I think people are starting to wear a little and when something off kilter comes along (such as Suicide Squad) people see it as a breath of fresh air and would choose that over something "safe" like Star Trek Beyond.

This is nothing new. Certain blockbusters are seen as events (ex. Jurassic World, TFA) and others are not. That was true two decades ago too. For every ID4 there was a Cutthroat Island or The Postman.

Star Trek underperforming is nothing new. Look at The Final Frontier or Nemesis.

 

[Octoberist]

And I do think TV is hurting movies, but the studios don't want to admit it. It's too much good stuff on TV that's it's crazy - it's like the magic of American cinema of the 70's is being carried over to TV and streaming.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

TV is better for sure, but I think the single biggest difference is the rise of social media.

With sites like Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic, as well as Facebook and Twitter, word of mouth spreads so fast compared to what it used to. So if a movie is substandard, the effect is felt very quickly (ex. BvS and its record drops). I do think quality means more than ever as a result.

 

[Octoberist]

Yeah, it rose fast. I'd say around 2014 and 2016 is the peak of it.

 

[Da-Scribe]

I mean, it's a combination of things. Studios are spending more and more money on more and more of the same. Every film can't make a $1 bil. And there's no real incentive to see these movies when they all play out the same and another will be releasing in a couple weeks anyway. Add to that is that viewers also have the luxury of having access to premium content without leaving their homes. And this is long-form, bingeworthy content that viewers can generally watch on their own schedules. Why do I need to see Civil War opening weekend when I have hours on hours of creative, boundary pushing content that I "need" to finish?

That need is another thing that has cropped up with the rise of content streaming. You can't watch an episode of Luke Cage and jump into a discussion without getting spoiled. You have to watch all 13 hours almost immediately so you can be part of the conversation. These big films need to start fostering that need again. And as long as no one stays dead, as these same people keep saving the day in the same way, as they have nothing actually interesting to say then viewers are going to keep tapering off.

Marvel and WB are on the right track by making their shared universes feel more episodic. But it isn't enough to just have character pop up in other films. They need to actually have some point that resonates with their audiences.

 

[Octoberist]

A lot of pop culture references that trend online are from TV shows now. From memes to fan art.

Most movies are already established IP now but if you hear the Game of Thrones theme or any character from Breaking Bad, you'll know it is. I know that GOT is a book series but prior to the show, it wasn't as well known as it is now.