As I’m sure many of you are aware, 2016 probably won’t go down in history as a the year that changed the viewing public’s perspective towards the way Blockbusters are marketed and released around the world. Unfortunately we live in age where trailers are so readily available that the mystery that used to surround a movie’s release has become non-existent. Mercifully, this was not the case for every film released this year. Unexpected releases such as 10 Cloverfield Lane proved it was possible to produce an entertaining blockbuster without artificially generating false anticipation.
This absurd exaggeration of exposure has resulted in many films receiving a much higher scale of marketing in relation to far superior efforts by people inexplicably more talented. Films such as Trolls and The Angry Birds Movie received an offensively large amount of marketing for films that fail in every possible way when it comes to entertainment. In contrast, movies such as Hell or High Water and Bone Tomahawk, although arguably larger in budget than other independent features, only began to receive interest once word of mouth was able to fully take effect.
Sure La La Land is probably going to sweep the board at the Oscars for its heartfelt reminiscence of the Golden Age of Cinema thanks in most to the overwhelmingly positive reactions it’s received from critics and movie-goers alike but should this one film have received the plaudits for what has been a year dominated by Indies?
A quick search through the internet and it’s not difficult to research the countless number of “Best Movies of 2016” containing movies such as Paterson, Manchester by the Sea and Moonlight. All films first presented to the world at the Toronto Independent Film Festival in September.
So are we in danger of Independent Movies losing the charm they once held? What defines an Independent Movie in this day and age? And is it possible for Major Studios to generate this same level of hysteria for their films?