by A couple weeks ago on Twitter, LAT’s Rebecca Keegan posted the following question:
How would you define ‘event movie?’ Is it just about how a movie is marketed or is it something more?
— Rebecca Keegan (@ThatRebecca) August 24, 2015
I initially responded that I felt it was about a 60/40 mix of studio hype and actual audience anticipation. Meaning that there are movies that people are genuinely looking forward to but that a lot of that is fueled to some extent by studio marketing. There are also movies that there’s almost no grassroots demand for but which become “event movies” by sheer force of studio will, who create such a sense of “you all must see this” that it becomes a touchstone of some sort. I’ve rethought my initial position slightly. I still think the basic definition holds, but I think there’s a broader point to be made.
Essentially an “event movie” is one that, through whatever mix of real audience demand and studio pushing, has become some form of cultural mile marker. It is, for better or worse, something you should have an opinion on whether or not you wind up seeing it or not. It’s one that the studio wants you to see not just opening weekend but opening day. It’s almost like they treat it like the county fair: You either show up during a very limited window of availability or you miss out completely. Everyone is going to be talking about it and you’ll be left out, loser.
But I have to wonder if the “event movie” idea is one that’s being solely propped up by the Hollywood publicity machine? Events are, at their core, based to a great extent by the idea of either scarcity or urgency. It’s an event because it’s somewhat limited in availability or in some other way. Movies, though, aren’t. And anything that the studio has labeled as an “event movie” is them creating to create a false sense of urgency about it. That’s where you get into them trying to make it so people feel they’re missing out on something important if they don’t see it the moment it hits theaters.
Going back from esoteric discussions about intent and such, it’s easy to tell what movies are being sold as “events.” They’re the ones with multiple trailers and TV spots, with a site that’s full of GIFs, with loads of consumer products tie-ins and more less any advertising. They’re the franchises, either current or potential. They’re the ones directed by people you’ve kind of heard of. They’re the ones with lots of hype around them, very little of which deals with acting or direction. There’s nothing wrong with this. It’s just an easy way to identify them.
