Ashleigh Heaton   
Editor-in-Chief   

Let me start this off by saying this is not a movie review – rather, it is a look at the future of movies in general. I’ve been a little disappointed with the quality of movies that have been coming out in the past years, but the Scott Pilgrim incident has made me reach my breaking point.   

What is the Scott Pilgrim incident? Here’s the gist of it: Scott Pilgrim vs. the World is, hands-down, the best movie to come out this year – the storyline, cinematography and general homage to the current generation make it irresistible to any moviegoer. As a viewer, it was refreshing to see such a vast amount of creativity pouring through every frame and, as a fan of the original comic series, it was fantastic to see an adaptation done so right.   

However, Scott Pilgrim suffered one of the worst opening weekend box offices of the summer – and the entire year.   

That’s not even the bad part. The bad part is that it debuted third behind two other movies that premiered that weekend. Those movies: The Expendables (two hours of explosions and big names) and Eat Pray Love (two hours of inspirational, soul-searching re-hash.)   

All I have to say is…um. No.   

It’s not like Scott Pilgrim hasn’t been well-received. Almost everyone who saw the film gave it great reviews and acclaim – it got an 81 percentage rating on Rotten Tomatoes, which is a fantastic score for a non-independent film (or anything not from Pixar). So how is it that a movie filled with such talent and innovative filmmaking was beaten by two lukewarm films?   

I don’t think the problem is with the movie. The problem is with the audience: us.   

Let me explain. Each time you go to a movie, you pay for a ticket; the payment for that ticket tells the production companies that you are interested in that film. Essentially, your payment is a vote for what movies you want to see and, therefore, what movies you want to see made in the future. So if a movie does poorly in the box office, there’s a slim chance others like it will be made.   

Since The Expendables and Eat Pray Love are doing so well in the box office, Hollywood decides that they should make more movies like it – that means more mindless action films and more sappy novel adaptations.   

Why is everyone “voting” for these movies? Probably because they’re not original, because they’re “safe”. People are creatures of habit, and usually don’t like venturing into new areas – so a film exploring new cinematic territory (i.e. Scott Pilgrim) isn’t going to get them to the theater as quickly. Taking risks and seeing something – dare I say it? – different has become an unnecessary leap of faith.
Also, people have gotten to a point that they would rather turn their minds off when watching a movie, making action films like The Expendables appealing. You sit down and don’t think for two hours – truly escaping your worries.   

This last point is the part that really concerns me. Nowadays, people don’t seem to care about the actual quality of a film; creative films with better quality are always lost amidst those with big-name actors and less cinematic quality. If this continues, chances are that there won’t be a whole lot of diversity in Hollywood in the next ten years.   

Isn’t that sad? That mass media is beating out artistic expression?
Granted, it’s not like people shouldn’t be allowed to see and enjoy these mass media films – that’s your opinion, and it’s perfectly valid (in fact, I’m a big fan of anything James Bond.) I understand that not everyone can love Edgar Wright and Tim Burton films, and that doesn’t mean that anything that isn’t artsy is bad.   

But I don’t think that moviegoers should be deprived of brilliant filmmaking, either. Is that really such a bad wish, after all?