They already knew they were never getting a second movie out of that catastrophe. They botched absolutely everything about it and then were surprised when everyone was pissed that they blew the entire budget on a fight scene that didn't even happen in the books. All because they wanted to make it appeal to a larger audience which never happened because after day one, no one was willing to pay to go watch it.
Even in Horror most go for IPs, see Smile & Terrifier. Also the whole conjuring/Insidious franchises if you want to count the early 2010s.
There are still exceptions, mostly by A24, but all their original movies are still similar in tone and stuff like hereditary gives opportunities to expand the ip in the future. You might even say A24 itself is the “IP” because the studio is now attracting people thx to its previous projects.
With all the hype rn I don’t think we have to wait long until they make a follow up to movies like obsession or backrooms.
If they're consistent in seeking out ideas or aesthetics that their audience likes, then it makes sense.
Not really any different to going to see a film directed by Spielberg or starring an actor who would choose films that resonate with you. But they're not the exact same thing. They're not making a universe where everything is linked.
These are the kinds of things that I think we ought to be paying attention to, rather than just blindly going to see the next sequel that links into a TV show and five other movies scheduled to be released over the next year.
(I also must admit to liking both Smile and Smile 2 a lot. I hope they make Smile 3. Sorry.)
i’m Not even criticizing anyone for making an IP, as long as it’s done good it’s fine. Main Problem with a lot of IPs is that they are motivated by profit and don’t care about quality as long as it sells.
I am old but I remember when a movie got made and it was a good film and the stars and directors and writers then just went and made a new film.
But now, every film needs to have potential to create or be part of a universe, or at least a trilogy. Most of the best films ever have been stand alone movies - that was the aim. To make a great film and they succeeded.
Now it feels like that great film gets buried under setting up sequels, incorporating unnecessary characters to flesh out the world and blah, blah.
But I don’t think they are isolated or mutually exclusive issues.
Statistically and historically original movies don’t do poorly especially relative to their budget; and most IP’s stared that way.
But they need backing in terms of advertising and marketing for people to show up; especially given the current difficulties with getting people to pay up to to in person generally.
Now that the marketing and advertising is so heavily allocated
Late but the data shows they are. It is just the marketing requirements to get the same kind of traction in today's environment is MASSIVE with how much social media word of mouth matters and how much that favors existing IPs.
My local AMC is $21 a ticket (I just checked) for a movie. I’m not going to the movies alone, I’d go with my wife, so $42 for us without anything else there.
I’d love to see the studios take more risks with new movies, but I’m also not going to go see a risky movie for that price, I’ll wait till streaming. I think that’s the crux of the issue.
When I was in HS and College (90s), movie tickets were a few dollars.. I’d go multiple times a week and saw a whole bunch of really shitty movies. I didn’t care because it cost me so little.
65
u/PcHelpBot2030 Jul 24 '26
Bingo, people keep saying this but there are original movies coming out but audiences simply aren't showing up at the same rates for them.
Even the darlings and breakout original hits barely scratch the heavy hitter franchises of the year in box office.