quote:
But whereas that kind of appreciation for the material used to be a nice little bonus for audiences, something for a smart interviewer to tease out in a longer conversation, studios now treat the fanboy director as another tool in their marketing kit. Companies used to adapt comic books and television shows and be relatively confident that audiences would follow that property to the movie theater. Now it is possible to go one step further and pitch the filmmaker as being an extension of the audience itself. Duncan Jones isn’t just a talented director looking to break the trend of mediocre video game adaptations; he has become the avatar for fans of Warcraft around the world, the closest that many of them will ever come to directing the movie version of a game that they love. In other words, a film made for fans of the series, but also one made by them. This ensures that the movie will, at worst, exist as a private conversation between the filmmakers and the thousands (millions) of fans who are rooting for the adaptation to succeed.

LINK

While I agree, the point has to be more direct. It's not like Fanboys of film WEREN'T making film, are there bigger Fanboys than Scorcese or Tarantino? It's PROPERTY fanboys that we see today.

That's a completely different approach, not necessarily less successful (and actually even more successful given box office numbers), just, like the author mentions, more of a private conversation. But what does that say about Global phenomenons like LoTR and Avengers? They are able to build fanbases that extend far beyond their initial reach.

5 ...

Report Post

Posted by Jamohn

Das Boot

Member since Mar 2009

13544 posts

Posted on 11/10/15 at 1:21 pm to Freauxzen

quote:
It's not like Fanboys of film WEREN'T making film, are there bigger Fanboys than Scorcese or Tarantino? It's PROPERTY fanboys that we see today.

True, and that's a huge difference. Scorcese and Tarantino are Fanboys of genres, styles, artists, etc. and load their work with homages to their respective muses.

Property Fanboys are narrower in the scope of their fandom and much broader in how they carry it into their work. Their work is not necessarily adapting styles or devices into their movies, it's creating movies as faithfully as possible to their interpretation of source material, which for most properties is a ubiquitous interpretation among the avowed "Fanboys" of any particular property.

That's my really long-winded way of saying: You're right--completely different approach. I think what it boils down to is another tool in the marketing belt. And it's possible that artists who are extra passionate about a topic create better art. I've always thought that to be the case with religious art/architecture. Same principle applies.

quote:
But what does that say about Global phenomenons like LoTR and Avengers? They are able to build fanbases that extend far beyond their initial reach.

Spectacular marketing + Well-Made Product + Fairly low risk

This post was edited on 11/10/15 at 2:02 pm

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Helo

Orlando

Member since Nov 2004

4592 posts

Posted on 11/10/15 at 1:43 pm to Freauxzen

John Ford was a Fanboy of Westerns and natural locations.
Alfred Hitchcock was a Fanboy of Suspense

Pretty much every notable director in history has their own Fanboy niche.

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Pectus

Internet

Member since Apr 2010

67302 posts

Posted on 11/10/15 at 2:22 pm to Freauxzen

That's bull crap. Every filmmaker is a fan of films and nerd out as hard as any nerd when it comes to them and their directors.

Hell, my movie collection is divided by director...

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by genuineLSUtiger

Nashville

Member since Sep 2005

72976 posts

Posted on 11/10/15 at 2:53 pm to Freauxzen

Fanboy is the perfect limp wristed name for Millennial filmmakers.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by musick

the internet

Member since Dec 2008

26125 posts

Posted on 11/10/15 at 3:15 pm to Freauxzen

JJ is the epitome of this, and I couldn't be happier of the outcome so far.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Kafka

I am the moral conscience of TD

Member since Jul 2007

142072 posts

Posted on 11/10/15 at 4:39 pm to Helo

quote:
John Ford was a Fanboy of Westerns and natural locations.
Alfred Hitchcock was a Fanboy of Suspense

You're seriously distorting the word "fanboy"

Ford got started in westerns, didn't make one for almost 15 years until he found a script he liked (Stagecoach), then after WWII returned to the genre as it was having a resurgence in popularity. Also his close friend and frequent collaborator John Wayne became more and more popular, so it made sense for him to work in the genre.

Hitchcock's first big hit (The Lodger) was a thriller, then he worked in other genres but did not have another hit until the first Man Who Knew Too Much. AH made occasional attempts to get out of the thriller genre -- the historical drama Jamaica Inn, the screwball comedy Mr and Mrs Smith, the historical soap opera Under Capricorn, the black comedy The Trouble With Harry, not to mention the stylistic experiments of Lifeboat and Rope, (and his first, never made Hollywood project, Titanic) -- but they were all boxoffice disappointments. So it was quite natural for him to return to the genre that had been most successful for him.

Page 1