Prestige Films, Made for Oscar, Fail to Impress

叫好不叫座 问鼎奥斯卡的电影观众不捧场

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，好莱坞绝望地看著以奥斯卡奖为目标的「甘草糖披萨」和「夜路」处于票房低谷。这一天似乎终于来了，艺术导向的电影无法在电影院存活，串流媒体永远改变影业。

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，片厂仍抱持希望，认为2022年11月能更准确解读市场。届时，新冠疫情就不会是如此复杂的因素。正如一些人所说，今年秋季会是「最后一搏」，是证明不是只有超级英雄和续集能在电影院大卖的机会。

It has been carnage.

结果是场大屠杀。

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.

一部接一部供成人观赏的电影未能吸引够多观众，以打平制作成本。10月在美国上映的「世界末日」斥资约3000万美元制作和行销，在北美获190万美元票房。「Tár塔尔」包含行销斥资至少3500万美元，票房收入只有530万美元。环球影业花费约5500万元制作和行销「她有话要说」，票房也只有530万美元。「决战38度线」制片成本远超过1亿美元，创造1400万美元票房。

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讨喜之作，也只落得差强人意的起步。以史蒂芬史匹柏青少年时期为蓝本的电影「法贝尔曼」以有限上映方式播放四周，创造570万美元票房。该片预算为4000万美元，不包括行销。

What is going on?

这是怎么回事？

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.

问题不在品质，这些电影一直被评为杰出作品。出版票房数据简报的电影顾问格罗斯表示，原因反是「人们日益习惯在家中观赏」。

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，这些以奥斯卡为目标的电影开始出现在串流媒体，好莱坞就开始担心这类电影总有一天会从影城消失。大萤幕重要性的式微在3月更明显，当时Apple TV+推出的「乐动心旋律」获得奥斯卡最佳影片奖，是串流电影首例。

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.

这不仅是钱的问题。好莱坞认为这种变迁是侮辱其身分。电影制片大厂长久以来抱持文艺界绕著他们转动的幻想，好像现在还是1940年。但这种错觉难以维持，因为作为他们唯一衡量标准的观众人数显示，民众懒得前往电影院观赏他们最重视的电影。好莱坞却以不合时宜的观点看待此事。

文／Brooks Barnes　译／罗方妤