Sigh. This movie is going to be a great example of a sad aspect of the industry. It’s not about whether it’s right or wrong that this happens, it’s just common sense, and a perpetuated fact: making a movie that successfully aims at a large target audience will always rake in more profits than a movie that successfully aims at a small target audience.
Last year we had Spread, a movie with Ashton Kutcher and Anne Heche that revolved around graphic sex scenes. Sure, it was a limited release, but even with a big advertising campaign and a wide release it would still be destined for failure. Then there’s next year, where we essentially see the same formula — though a much different story — of “These two attractive stars have lots of sex!” redone in No Strings Attached, with Heche replaced by Natalie Portman. It will no doubt hide every bit of nudity from us in a film that revolves around sex, which will keep it under an R rating, thus allowing it to make lots of cash by disowning the reality of its content. It’s like someone in Hollywood saw the adult themed Spreadand instantly…
Sigh. This movie is going to be a great example of a sad aspect of the industry. It's not about whether it's right or wrong that this happens, it's just common sense, and a perpetuated fact: making a movie that successfully aims at a large target audience will always rake in more profits than a movie that successfully aims at a small target audience.
Last year we had Spread, a movie with Ashton Kutcher and Anne Heche that revolved around graphic sex scenes. Sure, it was a limited release, but even with a big advertising campaign and a wide release it would still be destined for failure. Then there's next year, where we essentially see the same formula — though a much different story — of "These two attractive stars have lots of sex!" redone in No Strings Attached, with Heche replaced by Natalie Portman. It will no doubt hide every bit of nudity from us in a film that revolves around sex, which will keep it under an R rating, thus allowing it to make lots of cash by disowning the reality of its content. It's like someone in Hollywood saw the adult themed Spread and instantly decided to remake it . . . as a movie not for adults.
Culturally there's nothing wrong with this, and it's great to spread things to as many audiences as possible. It just sucks that anything that successfully appeals to large target audiences will inevitably make far more money regardless of its PR budget. This is why I'm glad films like Spread are made; it's good that films get created for small target audiences even though they're destined to fail, because every audience deserves the spotlight now and then.
