It’s undeniable that there’s been a noticeable change from the days when fantasy and science fiction were beloved by a niche group of fans to now, where big corporations dominate the genre with a flood of never-ending franchises and confusing sequels. Many analysts are trying to pinpoint the exact moment when things started to go downhill. Spoiler alert: The Lord of the Rings and Game of Thrones are partly to blame.
When fantasy was just for a few. In a recent X post, critic Eckharts Ladder discussed the “dominating effect” of Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings films on the audience’s perception of the saga. He also pointed out that due to the films’ immense success, it’s challenging to envision the saga in any other way than Jackson’s interpretation. However, Ladder also highlighted alternative, and in some cases superior, artistic visions of J.R.R. Tolkien’s work.
In its X post, other users mention creators such as the Hildebrandt Brothers, Frank Frazetta, and Rodney Matthews. This discussion has prompted reflection on how overwhelming success can elevate certain interpretations while overshadowing others, despite the extensive and often divergent descriptions provided by Tolkien himself.
The empire of fans. The Lord of the Rings trilogy isn’t just a crucial example of fandom's relationship with adaptations. More importantly, it shows how production companies shifted their approach to adaptations by prioritizing fidelity to the source material. Jackson’s careful adherence to Tolkien’s work, while making necessary adjustments, led to the trilogy’s immense success. This marked a significant change in how major studios viewed their relationship with fandoms, realizing the importance of catering to fans who demanded faithfulness to the original content, especially in superhero and fantasy adaptations.
The tremendous success of The Lord of the Rings (let’s not forget that the movies were so highly regarded that they won multiple Oscars, an unprecedented achievement for an adventure blockbuster based on a classic book) also had negative consequences. Practices like director’s cuts and special editions started to become more common. Although they had been around before, in this case, they took on a new scale (re-releasing in theaters, repeating the original blockbusters) that changed the way studios approached things for the worse. Fandom became a relentless source of profit to be exploited.
The Game of Thrones chapter. A few weeks ago, The Verge highlighted the mass impact of Game of Thrones, originally a fan product. In an article titled “Winter of Content,” editor Kevin Nguyen discussed how the show’s widespread popularity led to a surge in media coverage. Nguyen stated, “Game of Thrones was one of those things that people couldn’t get enough of.”
The author noted how the media began generating similar content, regardless of the quality, to capitalize on the show’s popularity. This fixation spanned a decade, and Game of Thrones became a go-to topic for media outlets seeking web traffic, particularly on Mondays when recaps of the latest episodes were published across various platforms.
A vicious cycle. Nguyen likened the Game of Thrones coverage to a dead end: There was nothing else to read, but everybody read it. The side effect was that the media became homogenized due to the success of the HBO show and the articles that talked about it. Regardless of the negative impact that Game of Thrones had on the quality of the press at the time, as described in detail by Nguyen, people became accustomed to receiving continuous information about what they liked, and in far greater numbers than ever before.
The franchise effect. The medium-term result of this is clear: The media now prefers to talk about movies and series in bite-sized pieces. The recaps, which fortunately have fallen out of fashion, epitomize this trend: no reflection, no substance, just a mere summary of something the audience has already seen. The mass of fans has become uncritical and in need of continuous, easily digestible information.
The phenomenon of sagas. As a result, big corporations are taking over characters and stories that used to only interest a few fans, and are dividing these stories into as many parts as possible. Now, they also use a system of releasing information in small doses with things like trailers, leaks, and embargoes. This strategy has led to a lack of surprise, as everything is promoted in the same way, from big apocalyptic films to superhero franchises to smaller horror productions.
Risk aversion. A collateral effect of all this is that big movies are even bigger while independent films are becoming more marginalized. The fear of failure and the homogenization of fantasy has led big franchises to play it safe. It remains to be seen whether this trend will completely eliminate the surprise factor in these genres.
This article was written by John Tones and originally published in Spanish on Xataka.
Image | Warner Bros. Pictures
View 0 comments