紐時賞析／問鼎奧斯卡的電影叫好不叫座 觀眾不捧場

Prestige Films, Made for Oscar, Fail to Impress

叫好不叫座 問鼎奧斯卡的電影觀眾不捧場

A year ago, Hollywood watched in despair as Oscar-oriented films like “Licorice Pizza” and “Nightmare Alley” flatlined at the box office. The day seemed to have finally arrived when prestige films were no longer viable in theaters and streaming had forever altered cinema.

一年前，好萊塢絕望地看著以奧斯卡獎為目標的「甘草糖披薩」和「夜路」處於票房低谷。這一天似乎終於來了，藝術導向的電影無法在電影院存活，串流媒體永遠改變影業。

But studios held out hope, deciding that November 2022 would give a more accurate reading of the marketplace. By then, the coronavirus would not be such a complicating factor. This fall would be a “last stand,” as some put it, a chance to show that more than superheroes and sequels could succeed.

然而，片廠仍抱持希望，認為2022年11月能更準確解讀市場。屆時，新冠疫情就不會是如此複雜的因素。正如一些人所說，今年秋季會是「最後一搏」，是證明不是只有超級英雄和續集能在電影院大賣的機會。

It has been carnage.

結果是場大屠殺。

One after another, films for grown-ups have failed to find an audience big enough to justify their cost. “Armageddon Time” cost roughly $30 million to make and market and collected $1.9 million at the North American box office. “Tár” cost at least $35 million, including marketing; ticket sales total $5.3 million. Universal spent around $55 million to make and market “She Said,” which also took in $5.3 million. “Devotion” cost well over $100 million and has generated $14 million in ticket sales.

一部接一部供成人觀賞的電影未能吸引夠多觀眾，以打平製作成本。10月在美國上映的「世界末日」斥資約3000萬美元製作和行銷，在北美獲190萬美元票房。「Tár塔爾」包含行銷斥資至少3500萬美元，票房收入只有530萬美元。環球影業花費約5500萬元製作和行銷「她有話要說」，票房也只有530萬美元。「決戰38度線」製片成本遠超過1億美元，創造1400萬美元票房。

Even a charmer from box office king Steven Spielberg has gotten off to a humdrum start. “The Fabelmans,” based on Spielberg’s adolescence, has collected $5.7 million in four weeks of limited play. Its budget was $40 million, not including marketing.

即使是票房之王史蒂芬史匹柏的討喜之作，也只落得差強人意的起步。以史蒂芬史匹柏青少年時期為藍本的電影「法貝爾曼」以有限上映方式播放四周，創造570萬美元票房。該片預算為4000萬美元，不包括行銷。

What is going on?

這是怎麼回事？

The problem is not quality; reviews have been exceptional. Rather, “people have grown comfortable watching these movies at home,” said David A. Gross, a film consultant who publishes a newsletter on box office numbers.

問題不在品質，這些電影一直被評為傑出作品。出版票房數據簡報的電影顧問格羅斯表示，原因反是「人們日益習慣在家中觀賞」。

Ever since Oscar-oriented films began showing up on streaming services in the late 2010s, Hollywood has worried that such movies would someday vanish from multiplexes. The diminishing importance of big screens was accentuated in March when, for the first time, a streaming film, “CODA,” from Apple TV+, won the Academy Award for best picture.

2010年代晚期，這些以奧斯卡為目標的電影開始出現在串流媒體，好萊塢就開始擔心這類電影總有一天會從影城消失。大螢幕重要性的式微在3月更明顯，當時Apple TV+推出的「樂動心旋律」獲得奧斯卡最佳影片獎，是串流電影首例。

This is about more than money. Hollywood sees the shift as an affront to its identity. Film power players have long clung to the fantasy that the cultural world revolves around them, as if it were 1940. But that delusion is hard to sustain when their lone measuring stick — bodies in seats — reveals that the masses can’t be bothered to come watch the films that they prize most. Hollywood equates this with cultural irrelevancy.

這不僅是錢的問題。好萊塢認為這種變遷是侮辱其身分。電影製片大廠長久以來抱持文藝界繞著他們轉動的幻想，好像現在還是1940年。但這種錯覺難以維持，因為作為他們唯一衡量標準的觀眾人數顯示，民眾懶得前往電影院觀賞他們最重視的電影。好萊塢卻以不合時宜的觀點看待此事。

文／Brooks Barnes　譯／羅方妤