The focus on numbers is detracting from the quality of art.
Zendaya in Challengers. Credit: Amazon MGM Pictures.
The quality of art can be seen in the impact it has on its audience. Often that translates to views and profit, but the emotional impact from engaging with art cannot be quantified. The feelings that are evoked from good art, it is priceless. Recently, the increasing focus on numbers in art has led to a much more concerning figure: the decrease in quality art.
Studio executives continuously misunderstand that you cannot go into the creation of art with the intention of gaining mass profit. That intention immediately poisons the art, the artist will fall at the first hurdle. Quality art being a commercial success is not a rarity, yet the numerous examples we’ve seen in recent years are not enough to show studio executives what works for artists and audiences. They hold too much power in an industry that they don’t care about.
Studio executives claim that profit is the driving force behind the decreasing priority in art. But artists and audiences have proven time and time again that success and the profits that will follow, come from quality art that resonates with an audience. Studio executives are clawing for the numbers without making any effort. Art produced from digits is fruitless. If studio executives really cared about numbers and maximising profit, they would look to more original films with smaller budgets, something a great number of artists and audiences wish for. This desire is seen in the success of these films each and every time but it is ignored by studio executives. Art is nothing without risk and executives wish to force a soulless, cheaper alternative onto us for their own selfish interests.
This perceptual blindness is seen with Disney’s recent decisions. Company executives announced that they would be moving away autobiographical stories and focusing more on sequels and spinoffs of their existing films. Disney executives said they came to this conclusion after Lightyear lost millions of dollars and Elemental’s poor opening weekend, the worst ever. Immediately we can see that this decision is a cop-out. Both the spinoff and original autobiographical film did poorly but Disney believes the best decision for them is to discard originality. It’s the age-old excuse: Reuse the same IP to mitigate risk. But as Lightyear has shown, audiences will not show up for old characters in new stories when it’s clear that the studio just wants to wrangle money from them and not offer them a quality piece of art to enjoy. Studio executives can’t rely on the numbers of fans of original films because the audience can’t rely on them to offer artists the opportunity to do something genuine with these beloved characters.
Ember and Wade in Elemental. Credit: Walt Disney Studios.
Disney executives named films Luca and Turning Red as examples of the types of films they wish to avoid in the future. But Disney didn’t give them the chance to thrive. They were both released on Disney + instead of theatres due to the pandemic. It may be more economically viable to release films straight onto streaming but the film may not reach as far. If studio executives want to cut costs with limited or no cinema releases, then they cut the profit of cultural impact. Despite their streaming releases, Luca and Turning Red were very well received and most importantly, audiences connected with these stories. Disney does little work to promote its autobiographical films and even when their sabotage is foiled by word of mouth, they still insist in ignoring the audience’s desires for original art. They do not want to tell these stories or rather, they don’t want certain people telling these stories. Inside Out 2, Disney’s latest film, follows Riley as she grapples with puberty and new emotions. This is very similar to the plot of Turning Red but Mei, the protagonist of the film, is an Asian girl. The focus on projects with “clear mass appeal” spells a decrease in efforts for diversity within film. Numbers are a front for many sinister agendas within the film industry.
Mei and her friends in Turning Red. Credit: Walt Disney Studios.
The convenience of streaming has led executives to forget how much they lend to the audience’s connection to a film and therefore its success. Films are art and cinema releases allow that art to be exhibited. The increase of films going straight to streaming has led to a decrease in efforts from studio executives, so naturally those numbers will not match those of a cinema release. Access to a film at home signals the end of a film’s exhibition. While many films have done well on streaming services, there is that tinge of loss that such a great film didn’t get the fanfare of an event that it deserved.
Challengers is a recent example of the films that the numbers demand but studio executives choose to ignore. Written by Justin Kuritzkes, directed by Luca Guadagnino and starring Zendaya, Josh O’Connor and Mike Faist, Challengers made over $90 million dollars in just a few short weeks at the cinema. Its cultural and emotional impact among the audience cannot be numbered and can still be seen in great strength. This is the film that executives avoid supporting because it’s supposedly a financial risk. Challengers is a great success story for artists but it’s unfortunately easy to recall the pressure studio executives place on films to earn a huge profit in its opening weekend, another act of sabotage.
Mike Faist and Josh O’Connor in Challengers. Credit: Amazon MGM Studios.
The insistence of numbers in art has led to audiences having little choice but to play into studio executives’ nefarious intentions. The viewing experience is no longer a pleasure, it is a fight. Fans of TV shows watch as many hours of the series as possible and work as marketers to ensure it progresses past its first season, often to no avail. Audiences are even electing not to invest their time with new shows altogether, because what’s the point, when some studio executive will decide they need to bolster their already undeserving salary and cancel the show? Executives are encouraging anti-intellectualism among audiences; quality art is no longer recognised unless it’s made billions of dollars. Most recently, audiences are now questioning the value of films being exhibited in cinemas. People who enjoy less popular films, especially those made in the 20th century, are deemed as snobbish. People are becoming less curious about art because studios have highlighted numbers as the main thing, instead of the priceless emotional connection that can be gained from art.
Studio executives only care about the numbers in their bank accounts. Yet this avarice is contradicted by their consistently poor business decisions. They refuse to understand what sells, what resonates with audiences and everyone who truly cares about arts suffers from their greed. The focus on numbers within art is an effort to devalue them. Art is at its best when the process doesn’t involve numbers. Numbers are becoming the process. It is not a revolution, it is an increasing dismissal of art’s role in our culture, in our society and in our humanity.
