Seanan McGuire (seanan_mcguire) wrote,
Seanan McGuire
seanan_mcguire
  • Mood: thoughtful
  • Music: Rachel Sage, "93 Maidens."

Why Scott Pilgrim is important (voting with your dollars).

A movie called Scott Pilgrim vs. the World was released recently. It's a classic "boy meets girl, boy fights girl's seven evil exes to keep girl, boy learns important life lessons through kicking ass" story, told with all the manic intensity of a Nintendo game on Red Bull and speed. Is it perfect? No. There are probably things that could have been done better, or at least differently, without changing the movie into something that it didn't want to be. But it's good. It's quirky and strange and wild and totally new; it's something we've only ever seen before if, say, we ate a dozen Krispie Kreme donuts before challenging our boyfriends to an all-night Super Mario 3 game session that ended with sweaty sugar-buzz groping on the living room couch.

For example. And even then, it was a hallucination, whereas Scott Pilgrim vs. the World is something you can show to other people.

Sadly, when the opening weekend box office for Scott Pilgrim was reported, it was well below industry expectations, and the movie was promptly written off as a flop. It doesn't matter if it makes back its budget and more on DVD; it failed. It didn't bring in big bucks in the theater. The same thing happened to Slither, which has been one of my favorite movies of all time basically since the first commercial aired. Bad box office, great DVD sales, game over. (And yes, opening week matters. It's incredibly rare for something to have sales that climb after the opening rush has passed, which is why, weirdly, it's important to be a part of that initial rush, if you can. That initial rush is what tells the accountants "this is going to be okay.")

A lot of people said a lot of things when the numbers for Scott Pilgrim started coming in, and what a lot of them said boiled down to, "Why do you care?" You are not, after all, involved with writing, producing, marketing, or selling the movie; you're just a consumer. The movie was there to be consumed, you consumed it, now move on. And to a degree, they're right. No one can ever take Slither away from me; all the bad box office in the world can't keep Scott Pilgrim out of my DVD collection once it's released in a purchasable format. So why do I care?

I care because we're not going to get another movie like Scott Pilgrim any time soon. I care because Slither tanking at the box office is why we had to wait five years for Zombieland. I care because all entertainment is profit-driven, and when we don't put our quarters in the plastic pony, it stops bucking.

Why do book series end in the middle? Because not enough people bought the books. Sometimes they can live on, as with tim_pratt's online serialization of his fabulous Marla Mason stories, but for the majority of authors, if the sales aren't there, the story's over. Why do midlist authors disappear? Because their sales weren't good enough to justify their continued publication. Why are TV shows canceled? Because not enough people gave money to their advertisers. All entertainment is profit-driven. We pay to play, and when we stop paying, they stop playing.

Scott Pilgrim is important because it's a weird, wacky, wonderful movie, and it's going to be a long time before we see something else like it. Next time you love something weird, wacky, and wonderful—whether it's a movie, a TV show, or a book—remember the lesson of Scott Pilgrim, and the eighth evil ex: the box office. In this economy, it's more important than ever that we kick its ass.
Tags: at the movies, comic books, contemplation, media addict
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    switch
    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    Help
  • 76 comments

admnaismith

August 24 2010, 18:17:10 UTC 6 years ago

The flip side, of course, is that, after a decade of movies at inflated prices that are barely worth seeing on DVD, what used to be a several times a month ritual is something I do maybe two or three times a year, and then only if it's already popular with geekdom and I need to know about it to write a filk song about it. Since the development of CGI as a substitute for storytelling, I've almost come to associate the very medium of movies and TV as something no longer worth doing, kind of like a former carnivore no longer misses McDonalds after becoming accustomed to vegetarianism.

Advertising and manufactured hype are unreliable, the turkey-to-awesome ratio is at sucker bet levels, and opening weekend tickets now cost enough money that it's not worth taking a chance on being burned. Other than word of mouth from respected people who have already seen and liked it, how would one know whether any given movie is any good?

keristor

August 25 2010, 15:57:56 UTC 6 years ago

Yes, that's a valid point. I see possibly two or three movies a year at the cinema, because (a) I don't go to the cinema on my own and (b) actually getting together with someone else and finding a movie we both want to see and which we find more interesting than doing something else is not frequent. The latter, of course, is also affected by the price. Oh, and (c) I probably don't even hear about them for several weeks, by which time (d) they probably aren't showing locally any more.

So almost all movies I do watch are on DVD (I don't have BluRay or whatever the latest format is), and often several years after release. And usually rented, only a few I like enough that I actually want a copy.

I'm actually more likely to buy boxed sets of TV series. I have all of the series of NCIS released so far in Region 2 (UK) format, for instance, am likely to buy Warehouse 13 and Fringe ones if I see them, and The Middleman if it is ever released (since it hasn't even been shown on UK TV that will likely be a long wait). As well as a number of older and completed series (Firefly, Knight Rider, the original Battlestar Galactica, Buck Rogers, and several others).

Would I like to see more "special interest" films produced? Certainly. But I'm not willing to spend money and time on films I'm pretty certain I would dislike just because they are 'offbeat'. If people don't produce the films I like I can read (and reread) books (the pictures are better in text, just as they are on radio).

(I have a feeling I may get rid of my TV. I'm finding that I prefer watching on the computer -- same resolution, the screen being closer means that there's no difference in visual angle, and if I'm watching on the computer I can't go and look at email or LJ or whatever at the same time. I can always record off-air onto the computer and then watch it later at my convenience.)