Echoes of Hollywood

Any industry in any country or region goes through many twists and turns on its way to maturity. Just as Hollywood's film industry did not reach its current scale without challenges, the film industry across the Pacific is also encountering various difficulties.

Some of these difficulties are inherent to the industry's development, while others are artificially created to some extent.

For example, during Murphy's last few years living there, several films sparked significant public debate over the ratings on relevant film websites.

Under some sort of pressure or representing certain capital interests, the national-level official media there openly published articles claiming that "bad reviews harm the film industry" and even wrote sensational pieces like "How can I trust you again with your film ratings?" to steer public opinion.

It's undeniable that these websites indeed have issues with malicious personal attacks. Some self-media and public accounts, to gain attention, followers, and traffic for monetization, publish malicious and irresponsible remarks. However, using such methods to silence the general public is simply baffling.

If a film is bad, not allowing ticket buyers to say it's bad, how can such media be described as anything but arrogant?

In that unique social environment, some film websites, to protect themselves, had to delete some of the lower scores and retain only the higher ratings to align themselves with the perceived correctness.

"Influenced by these low ratings, many viewers lost faith in domestic films and even refused to watch them, seriously harming the domestic film industry."

Such comments might harm the film industry more than bad reviews.

For some films, without bad reviews, would they still be bad films? Eliminating those few film rating websites so that the internet is filled only with praise, does that prove the films aren't bad?

In any film market, viewers' right to "vote with their feet" must be acknowledged, as must their right to rate films. These are choices that should be respected.

Checking ratings online before watching a film and writing reviews and giving ratings afterward has become a common habit for many internet users in both North America and across the Pacific.

Exchanging feelings and sharing opinions on an open platform like the internet not only enriches one's viewing experience but also resolves information asymmetry about films. Countless people give both one-star and five-star ratings, forming the "big data" of film reviews.

There will always be extreme, spiteful, and nitpicking reviewers, but with a large enough sample size, the overall sentiment and majority attitude can be reflected.

Of course, as in any open market and public opinion space, various pressures come with it. For such situations, reasonable guidance and proper solutions are necessary rather than an easy, all-encompassing ban. The saying "Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater" should be a consensus.

However, a film is never truly ruined by "one-star" reviews, nor is the film ecosystem genuinely affected by "bad reviews." Anyone with common sense can see this is impossible.

Otherwise, Hollywood's popcorn commercial blockbusters would have been doomed long ago, and the industry wouldn't be what it is today.

In Murphy's view, watching a film is like eating food. You know if it's good by tasting it, and you shouldn't question others' taste if they say it's bad.

Ultimately, the quality of a film isn't determined by saying it's good when it's not or vice versa.

Imagine if films like "The Dark Knight" or "The Shawshank Redemption" didn't rely on their high-quality content to garner so much "word-of-mouth" and market success. Conversely, how many films relying on "pretty faces," "cheap special effects," or "scandalous publicity" become jokes despite buying thousands of "five-star reviews"?

Instead of fighting online ratings, it's better to reflect on the attitude and improve the quality of the next film.

Some films achieving success and others failing suggest that viewers are becoming more discerning and less likely to be fooled by bad films.

Looking back at China's film market from Murphy's current position, it can only be described as "progressing rapidly." In his last few years there, the growth rates were 27%, 36%, and a record-breaking nearly 50%. The film industry even had the saying "Fools have money, come quickly."

But in the last two years, the growth suddenly slowed down, and the market lost its previous feverish atmosphere.

Many people felt pessimistic, including Murphy at the time. However, from his current perspective, the slowdown in box office growth might not be a bad sign for the film market.

After all, the maturity of a film market requires a group of mature viewers.

Box office revenue is important, but it shouldn't be turned into a vanity project. Annual "substantial growth" should be market-driven.

Like some media and film companies, behaving too embarrassingly, using "voting with their feet" and star ratings are the most basic rights of the audience. Like in the North American market and with Murphy's films, there are marketing tactics involving fake bad reviews or positive reviews. But as long as the platform is large and open enough, it can accommodate and even filter out those impurities.

Of course, platforms should also improve their rating mechanisms to ensure that whether it's "one-star bad reviews" or "five-star positive reviews," whether it's "during the premiere stage" or "public release stage," the ratings truly reflect the audience's opinions.

A country's film industry that can't tolerate "one-star reviews" might as well be abolished.

Instead of cutting everything with a single stroke, creating works that are genuinely well-made, transmissible, and enduring is much more important.

Reflecting on those memories, Murphy realized that what happened to 20th Century Fox and "City of Chaos" was not unique in China. The film market there was similar to the early stages of the North American market, somewhat chaotic and even described as "a dance of demons."

At such times, official organizations like the censors should maintain market order rather than decide film quality for the audience.

As always, many films aren't good just because they're said to be, nor do they improve by forcefully canceling bad reviews.

No film is born or destined to be a classic or a bad film. But every film needs viewers who can understand and enjoy it and filmmakers who can produce excellent works and attract an audience.

Murphy didn't focus too much on what happened to "City of Chaos" in China. These matters could be handled by 20th Century Fox. As a Hollywood director, even if he wanted to do something, he lacked the influence.

Instead, the preparation for "Diego Ross" was his main focus at this stage.

From early September, Murphy, along with key cast members like Robert Downey Jr., Jonah Hill, and James Franco, frequently appeared near Old Chinatown in downtown Los Angeles to make final preparations for the film's shooting.

Margot Robbie also temporarily wrapped up filming "Game of Thrones" in Portsmouth and returned to Los Angeles to rehearse with Robert Downey Jr. and others, preparing for her role.

For such a small-scale project that Murphy had thought about and planned for a long time, aside from initial ideological hesitation, everything proceeded smoothly. By mid-September 2011, all preparations were essentially complete, and filming could begin at any time.

Two days before the start of shooting, Murphy specifically called in Philippe Rousselot and David Roby.

"David, use natural light as much as possible during filming, but many locations will need you to use equipment to block out the light," Murphy gave final instructions to David Roby. "I want the interior scenes and exterior locations to have a dark, oppressive feel."

"I've made all the preparations," David Roby said confidently. "I've done on-site inspections with the lighting team at all the exterior locations."

"That's good." Murphy then turned to Philippe Rousselot and said, "In addition to the usual dark tones, the color palette should have a yellowish tint to evoke the feeling of the 1980s and 1990s."

Philippe Rousselot had no issues with this. The old-style film cameras and 35MM film would help the cinematography team achieve Murphy's vision.

Murphy reviewed the preparations for each department, finding no major issues. Any minor problems could be resolved during filming.

According to his plan, "Diego Ross" would officially start filming on September 11th and wrap up by October 25th at the latest. Post-production would be completed within a month and a half.

To save time, there would be fewer than a hundred special effects shots to handle in post-production. The film's music would not be original but rather selected from existing tracks, much like Murphy did in his early filmmaking days.

_________________________

[Check out my Patreon for +200 additional chapters in all my fanfics! $5 for all!!] 

[w w w . p a t r e o n .com / INNIT]

[+50 PowerStones = +1 Chapter]