In the current age of popular culture, films and television series are at the forefront of debates and criticisms. It seems as if every major release has forced audiences to pick a side and broadcast opinions on a worldwide platform. Specifically with big budget blockbusters, debates are never going away. However, there is a growing divisiveness trickling into the entire world of film. It seems as though every release is codependent on an amalgamated score, local reviews, and social media relevance. If it doesn’t have any of those factors, is it still considered a success?
Divisiveness, as it pertains to film, can be summed up by the growing animosity audiences have with one another. In addition to their own personal quarrels, they are now taking to social media via petitions or long-winded posts to share their grievances with filmmakers, studios, and actors firsthand. There has never been such easy access between the audience and creators, and it could be problematic.
However, it can be argued that films themselves are not changing. The presentation of films will always be the same, but audience preconception and the overwhelming negativity in digital spaces continues to brainwash viewers. The warped perception influences the audience’s idea of a film before, during and after seeing the actual work. In addition to perception, there are a variety of factors that explain why such divisiveness exists in the entertainment world today.
Marketing
IFC Films
Unfortunately, one poster and an enticing tagline is not enough to sell tickets in this day and age. We are bludgeoned with trailers (sometimes trailers for trailers, or teasers), TV spots, press junkets, merchandise, and headlines galore. But what is most important is how the film is portrayed in a trailer, and needs to get audiences to fill seats. Sometimes, specifically in the world of horror, liberties have to be taken in order to bring people into a theater.
In 2014, one of the most acclaimed horror films of the decade was released. The Babadook was at the start of a new generation of horror films and helped create a movement that brought independent films to the mainstream. However, the film itself was about suppressed grief and trauma. It was initially marketed as a monster flick with supernatural elements taking center stage. That is not the case with the actual film, as the “monster” is rarely seen and is a metaphorical representation of the protagonist’s emotions rather than a physical being. This did disappoint audiences who were expecting a jump scare-filled extravaganza, which was not this film.
Audiences expect too much from trailers these days. Marketing executives are seeing this problem and now cramming a three act structure into trailers that normally should not surpass two minutes. How often have we heard someone say, “It was in the trailer” or “This wasn’t in the trailer?” This is an issue many of the superhero films of today face. Audiences have this notion and preconception that their predictions or wishful thinking will come true when they watch the film. Nevertheless, the film is what it is, and wronged predictions (or the film simply not doing everything a viewer wants it to do) are the catalyst for animosity.
Social Media
Walt Disney Studios
Social media is a hub for discourse, but the biggest problem with platforms today is the over-reliance on opinion and how those personal opinions inform predictions. In the massively successful Spider-Man: No Way Home, all anyone and everyone was talking about was the potential return of the previous Spider-Men. An infamous set photo of Andrew Garfield was released during production and that was enough to send bloggers and tweeters into a frenzy. Speculation and predictions turned into assurances that Spider-Man: No Way Home was going to be the crossover of the century. But the question arises, what if the crossover did not happen?
We are seeing a sense of entitlement from audiences today after the release of Avengers: Endgame. The film was everything and anything a comic book fan could have asked for. Since that had happened exactly the way audiences have wanted it to happen, fans now seem to be in control of the content. If their speculations are not met, the film automatically alienates the individuals, and the result is that franchises get ruined for the fans by the fans. False hope pins audiences against one another. One group, who are going to see a film for what it is without speculation against another who are going to be right.
Social Media influencers are churning audience preconceptions on the basis of majority opinion. Someone who has ten million subscribers on YouTube not liking a film for whatever reason might sway the opinion of a viewer. The issue is, most critics on YouTube or on various platforms get early access to see films before the public. If someone sees a review before they see the film, and their opinion is swayed by the review, their perception of the film was altered by an external factor and not the film itself.
A growing complaint in the latest Marvel Cinematic Universe installment Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness was the inclusion of the Illuminati. Characters like Reed Richards, Professor Charles Xavier, Captain Carter, and an alternate version of Captain Marvel were included in the second act to oversee Strange and his melding with the multiverse. However, this entire sequence was the largest speculation surrounding the film before its release. Theories of Mr. Fantastic’s inclusion in the MCU and Patrick Stewart’s return as Professor X was more talked about than what Doctor Strange would actually be doing. Nevertheless, the fate of the Illuminati was not prosperous, and one could argue that it was a studio included element to satisfy public perception and nostalgia.
Nostalgia
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
It is more about what you remember than what is new. Debate and divisive nature for film seems to have components that relate to nostalgia. For example, the latest Disney+ original series Obi-Wan Kenobi saw plenty of debate on social media when influencers and YouTube personalities made comments that criticized a lack of flashbacks and callbacks to The Clone Wars and other Star Wars properties. This is problematic because fans are disappointed over elements that they speculated on their own, went into the series with and were disappointed that they were not listened to. Filmmakers are not bound to fan requests and could gear a story however they please to do.
Star Wars as a franchise has an enormous amount of nostalgia built in. Fans of the original trilogy had a hatred for the prequel trilogy upon their release because it was nothing like what they remember. But when The Force Awakens was released in 2015, fans were divided on if it was too much like the original films. The most intense of all Star Wars debates came when The Last Jedi released two years later. This film was the center of the most heated and divisive exchange between fans because it was nothing like the original films and nothing like the prequels. It was the only film in the entire franchise to completely subvert expectations and do something new, which Star Wars fans do not seem to like. The eighth episode was praised by critics, but demolished by audiences. The more intellectual property that is out there, the more people will latch onto it and push away from the idea of anything new. The issue with The Last Jedi was it was too new and unexpected. In time, it might grow with its target audience and be accepted as a part of the franchise.
The idea that arguments and debates are becoming a part of film culture is disappointing. The access the public has to any and all opinions on a daily basis constantly grows. But the films themselves are not what divide audiences. It is their false expectations, social media headlines and discourse, and their reliance on what they once knew that influences their experience and tarnishes the film altogether.
