Audience versus Filmmakers: Creative Confrontation and Collaboration
What’s the common thread that weaves the Justice League, Sonic: The Hedgehog and The Lego Movie together? It’s the silk touch of the audience that played a pivotal role in bringing these movies to life. Audiences have always been the crux of filmmaking and form an important part of how stories are brought to life. Whether it’s casting, production, test screenings or public reception, audience response paves every step of the way. Viewer endorsement and engagement is one approach that enables filmmakers to craft a movie. It helps to break the expectation barrier and provides a close and intimate film experience for the audience. However, it’s not all rosy, as this does kill the art of filmmaking when the filmmaker is held back by the audience, limiting his freedom of creativity to their desires.
A movie is not a monolith; it comprises several intricate parts, painting every scene to life. An epic score, coupled with stunning visuals where each element tells a story, not to mention exceptional performance by the cast, makes a scene more than just a series of frames in a movie. When any aspect is changed, it alters the significance of the scene entirely. Several elements require technical and cinematographic expertise, which most audiences cannot directly contribute towards. The filmmaking crew carefully hand-picked professionals to sculpt the movie to perfection. They curate the score, the background, and so much more.
Then the question arises, where does the audience play a role in creating a movie? The audience gives the filmmakers a green flag regarding which direction to proceed. Their views are gauged through teasers, trailers, movie release conferences, etc. Be it admiration or brutal criticism, all of their reactions alter the trajectory of the film. Like operant conditioning, movies are shaped by actions that maximise rewards and minimise loss. A prime example of this would be the Sonic movie, whose initial reception was met with unanimous criticism for the lead character’s design which was too life-like and strayed from the video game’s depiction. Quickly realising this, the creative team got to rework and completely revamp the design. The delay was fruitful, and the new design was well received and prevented it from ending up at the Razzies.
Though rare, the audience, too, plays a role in deciding the direction in which a story should go. In Batman’s “A Death in the Family”, the readers were allowed to vote and determine whether Jason Todd should live or die. The result ultimately changed the character as we know it, gave birth to the Red Hood, and steered the course of his character to an entirely new arc.
Sometimes movies need a second chance, too, with the Justice League movie redeeming itself in fans’ hearts through the extended Snyder Cut. After Snyder stepped away, with the inclusion of Joss Whedon, the film tried to imitate the success of the Avengers, straying afar from the original, darker vision that Snyder had. The original film received backlash for its underwhelming plot, out-of-place humour, incomplete VFX and reliance on Superman undermining the other Justice League characters. However, upon the announcement of a Snyder Cut to bring his definitive vision to life, the fans received it with open hands, and their continued support led to the production of this true-to-origin version of the movie, ultimately leading to the release of the Snyder Cut.
Films also run the risk of being burdened with audience expectations. More doesn’t necessarily mean better, as in the case of the Fantastic Beasts franchise, which had the colossal task of living up to the Harry Potter fame. Despite having the same creative team, WB struggled to replicate the magic and could not get the audiences invested in the story of Newt Scamander when all they wanted was more of the Boy Who Lived. After two poorly received sequels, the franchise has been discontinued in favour of a Harry Potter reboot. We can only imagine how that would work out, considering the original movies live on as fan favourites.
We shouldn’t be quick to judge a movie by its performance at the box office. They may dive into themes ahead of their time when avant-garde becomes the norm and serves as the foundation for other movies. However, it is not easy to justify the risk without solid support that the idea might work. Here is where the audience role comes into play. When there is ample support for these underdogs, they develop the status of being cult classics. Movies like The Fight Club, a box office flop, inspired box hits like American Psycho and The Machinist.
However, the audience isn’t right all the time. In the internet era, the casting process is heavily influenced and critiqued by the audience. Fans and trolls alike are quick to judge an actor before he has brought his performance to light. One of the most hotly debated castings of our time has been for the role of Batman. Playing the facade of a millionaire playboy underneath the mask while being Gotham’s Knight is no easy task. Ben Affleck’s portrayal was met with intense backlash on social media but has since been regarded as one of the more unique, darker takes on the superhero. Similarly, with Robert Pattinson’s casting, the fan base resented this decision as it was contrary to the broody and brutal caped crusader. It even resulted in an online petition to reverse his casting decision. Amidst the hate, Pattison wore the cowl and was revered for his performance as Gotham’s greatest detective.
Another movie that suffered initial scepticism was Spiderman: Into the Spider-verse. With a completely new animation and art style not witnessed in any animated superhero movie before, fans wondered whether this risk was worth it. With several web slingers tied in, it felt like the movie would be diluted and might lack the depth that a solo movie might have. Fans were exhausted with the overwhelming amount of Spiderman-related content being released (the game, the Venom movie, rebooted MCU movie with a sequel along the way); it felt like another cash grab. What came out was a piece of art with jaw-dropping scenes and a breakthrough in the animation industry. The support and widespread acclaim this movie received led it to inspire other movies and flourish an entirely new style of animation, such as the Puss in Boots movie.
Conceptualising abstract ideas and the ability to materialise whatever the director sees is the pinnacle of creative freedom, but it carries its own caveats as well. The idea sounds good on paper, but execution and expectation make it risky. Nolan is no stranger to time-based plots such as Interstellar and Inception. However, his recent movie Tenet takes this to another level. His vision to deliver a film with a focus on active engagement with the audience to create an intricate plot that deals with time manipulation is ambitious. However, the execution could have gone better, with audiences criticising the convoluted plot and the poor execution of a sequence of events and the weak character development, leading to a mixed reception overall.
The amalgamation of these ideas leads us to the conclusion, as cliche as this sounds, that both sides play a role in making a good movie. From the filmmaker’s expertise to the audience’s inclination, every aspect of a film is interconnected and ultimately shapes the course of filmmaking.
This piece is written by Harisankar VS and Sanjaikumar Mani.
