Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Joost van Dreunen's avatar

I enjoyed this analysis. And not just because it rhymes with my own. The core issue to resolve is synchronizing video game development with film production. Both are very different processes, and getting them to line up remains the core challenge. Even without that, it's proven to resonate with audiences and deliver outsized financial results.

Amazon's release of Fallout did wonders for its publisher, Xbox. https://superjoost.substack.com/i/47825083/big-read-uncharted-the-movie-breaks-no-new-ground-for-games-biz, not to mention Nintendo's success with the two Mario movies.

Anyway, great write-up.

The Dumb Okie's avatar

Upon reflection, I think we may be prone to overstate just how many successful "original" movies that there *ever* were. Maybe because the movies that stand the test of time are often, but not always, originals. But the box office often tells a different story.

Take 1939, widely considered the greatest movie year in Hollywood history. It was topped by two book adaptations: "Gone with the Wind" and "The Wizard of Oz." The former is still the biggest ticket seller in film history.

Other massive hits throughout Hollywood history: "Sound of Music" (Broadway adaptation), "The Ten Commandments" (Bible), "Doctor Zhivago" (novel). Even some of the most popular films during the New Hollywood of the 1970s were adaptations of popular books: "The Godfather," "The Exorcist," and "Jaws."

And let's be honest: How "original" is "Star Wars" or "Avatar?"

So it's not so much that there was once a "Golden Age of Original Blockbusters." More like, the source material for said blockbusters has shifted.

This shouldn't be surprising. Less Americans go to plays or read novels, so the source material has transitioned to hybrid visual-written media (comics) and now purely visual (video games, YouTube series).

1 more comment...

No posts

Ready for more?