The “directors' prison” which leaves Hollywood authors unemployed is essential to understanding the risk of panic in today's cinema.

There has been a lot of talk lately about “cancelacin” by artists, that is, creators who are tormented by the industry due to incorrect statements or politically disapproved positions. Many of those who denounce him do so from the stands of prime time television, just like Joaquín Reyes commented jokingly.So the existence of an effective cancel culture is questionable to say the least, but what exists is a “prison of directors” who face, often unwittingly, a power far more formidable than that of correction policies: l he economy of an industry that is examining invoices more than ever.

Fees paid. There director's prisonOh cinema prison, is a term that refers to the professional void that directors find themselves in when they sign a film that doesn't do well at the box office. It's a somewhat unforgiving term because it's generally used to refer to directors who have had triumphant, or at least notorious, careers in the alternative circuits, and who fail in their leap to big budgets. Let us remember the case of Josh Trank, who attracted Hollywood's attention with “Chronicle” and collapsed with “Fantastic Four”, or of Karyn Kusama, who could not overcome the failure of “Jennifer’s Body” after getting noticed with “Girl Fight”. '.

Cinema prison: origins. We are faced with a term that was perhaps born in the 90s in the most paradoxical way: movie buffs. remember an article from 'Premire' magazine that explained how 'They Strike' would help get Tom Hanks out of prison (in this case, not the directors, but the actors) after the box office apocalypse of 'The Vanity Fair' . Others talk about Tarantino when the expression in conversation with Dennis Hopper when talking about how some bad decisions when it comes to killing off the movie's villain should guarantee a stay in prison for the filmmakers.

Damien Chazelle, the paradigmatic example. There's no better example of the current director's prison than Chazelle, who caught the industry's attention with 'Whiplash' (won the Oscar for Best Editing and Best Supporting Actor) and consolidated his career with the bombshell 'La La Land» (30 million budget, nearly five hundred million box office and a record fourteen Oscar nominations, six of which, including best director). Hard times are coming soon.

Ryan Gosling no salute 'First man', his next film, about the life of Neil Armstrong and the first mission to the moon, which had a fair collection. The debacle came with excess and the admirable'Babylon', 189 minutes of footage chronicling the origins of Hollywood, in a star-studded film that raised only $64 million, out of the more than 80 that cost. As save 'The Hollywood ReporterIn a report on the subject, Chazelle acknowledged that the punishment he received was above all financial: “I'm not going to have a budget the size of Babylon in the short term”, and he even considered the possibility of not being able to draw again (even if maybe Paramount produce your next work).

Classics are not saved. You would think that directors like David Lynch or Martin Scorsese have no problem launching their new projects, but the truth is that this is not the case. We were talking about Francis Ford Coppola's financing and distribution difficulties for “Megalpolis” and similar problems currently facing established directors such as Lynch and John Waters. These are authors with their own, certainly uncomfortable, vision, and Hollywood has found a way to keep them connected and well-connected: by not financing their projects.

Less risk. In reality, “directors’ prison” is a very open term and one that also comes up when the directors leave him. For example, Kathryn Bigelow went without a director for several years after the failure of “Strange Days,” but she regained some of her status with the Oscar-winning “On a Hostile Land.” M. Night Shyamalan had a bad season after big-budget films like “After Earth” failed, but later films like “Multiple” and “Glass” brought him back to the majors. In reality, what the term hides is a very paradigmatic type of Hollywood conservatism.

Hollywood today. The ace majors They have never been characterized by their appetite for risk, but for some time now the machinery seems to have become more pronounced these mechanics, and it is clear that there is a fear of failing it increasingly dictates studio decisions. This is the reason why studios rely more and more on franchises, seeking to minimize the possibilities of failure: the main Hollywood players, like Disney or Warner, hardly release films that are not franchises. sequels or remakes. The fact that studies are currently led by groups of investors and boards of directors accentuates this situation.

Punishment for the wicked. The directors' prison is, from this point of view, another way of warning sailors that Hollywood does not take risks. And those who do so or defend different or less profitable visions run the risk of being locked in this metaphorical prison but with very tangible consequences. Has no importance who is at the moment or yes Chazelle will make another film: the important thing is that the imprisonment of leaders is a symptom of a very different Hollywood to that of just a few years ago, and viewers should rebel against that. At least, if they don't want everything to become a copy of a copy of a copy.

In Xataka | 'The Wonders' crashed at the box office, but it leaves some positive lessons for Disney