The other night The Hunger Games raked in a whopping seven awards at The Teen Choice Awards, which is fabulous, but (there’s always a but), hate to say it– these awards mean very little in the grand scheme of things. And, when I say grand, I mean toting that a film won awards that were voted in by teenagers on summer break all over America– yeah, doesn’t bring the project much clout or prestige. True, the film made beaucoup bucks, and it still is, and will probably continue to over the remainder of this fiscal year, but in all honesty, I think I’d be more proud of the film if it was being nominated, or winning film critic awards, film festival awards, and/or big name awards like, Golden Globes, Oscars, and Screen Actor’s Guild Awards. Maybe this film wasn’t designed to be that kind of film though, maybe it is just a money-maker that teenagers will vote for for awards shows that air on basic cable, and stroke the ego of cast members until their faces explode? Who the hell knows.
Commercial success is a fickle beast, fortunately The Hunger Games was one– and thus three other films are on their way in succinct succession. This is what confuses me though: While the first film was a juggernaut at the box office, and proved to the studio that continuing the franchise was not a risk, but an asset to them, why plan to release the next three films during what’s come to be the season where by a vast majority, the films that are released are major awards contenders? There are fluke award winners that are amazingly released in the summer in North America. Case in point, the 2010 Best Picture winner The Hurt Locker, which was released June, 2009 in the US, and the film actually made its world debut in late 2008 in Italy at the Venice Film Festival. However, in many places the film wasn’t even viewable, like I said until 2009, because it just wasn’t playing. Actually it wasn’t until it was
nominated for several awards, including multiple Oscars that it got a more wide circulation, if that’s not fickle, I don’t know what is. This would never happen to The Hunger Games though, the film went wide all over the world in a matter of two to three days, and broke records within hours of each of its premiere’s in several countries. Money talks, but I’m still confused by too many things where it comes to this franchise.
The cast is top notch, and the cast members that are slowly being added to the roster are just giving the project more and more clout. The behind the scenes people are reputable, awards nominated, and respected. Why cast these people though, why hire the behind the scenes people who have been critical successes, why not hire Catherine Hardwicke, or
screenplay writers who are known for films like Monte Carlo, or other sweet and unassuming teen flicks? They’d still make money, they’d make lots of money actually– because this franchise has a built in fan following who’ll go see it no matter what. I guess I’m confused mostly, because I don’t know all of the motivations behind making these books into films. In one corner, it’s obviously being done to make money, in another it’s to get the story out there, but is the other corner, of what I’m imagining to be a triangle, are they doing it to receive praise from the few who can deem a film worthy of statuettes that don’t resemble food, or things you can float on in the water? So far, the former is not the case, and only time will tell if those with the voting power will grace this franchise with the praises I can only hope it could, or would get.
Aye, there’s the rub.
Them There Eyes