Movie Trends: 2024 Top Grossing Films

Most of these “B” titles aren’t screened in advance for the press, or screened too late for most hard copy daily papers and weekly tabloids. The reason behind this: The studio knows it’s releasing a turkey and would rather take a chance not previewing it than screening it, knowing most critics will pan it. The new M. Night Shyamalan crime thriller flick “Trap,” opening on Aug. 2, wasn’t screened for press.
Beginning in early September, all of the studios (major and otherwise) will begin releasing their “prestige” product—movies designed to garner critical acclaim and awards consideration. More often than not, these titles rarely do well at the box office; studios have already made this part of their release strategies.
And there (as Hamlet spoke) is the rub. If you’re a studio president and know (as you should) what brings in the big bucks and what doesn’t, what are you going to green light for that primo summer season?
It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to determine you’re going to go with the tried and true intellectual properties (IP) with proven track records that bring in movie goers. For movies, IP refers mostly to copyrighted franchises owned by particular studios. For example, Marvel is a Disney IP, Harry Potter is a Warner IP, and Star Trek is a Paramount IP.
Modern day sequels began in earnest with “The Godfather Part II” in 1974. With the Stephen Spielberg movies “Jaws” and “Raiders of the Lost Ark,” sequels became the new normal. The logic (“if audiences liked the first installment chances are they’ll like it again and again”) makes complete sense: Don’t take chances when you don’t have to. That’s where we are today.
Of the 12 movies on the 2024 list, I’ve seen all of them but would only recommend “Deadpool & Wolverine,” “A Quiet Place: Day One,” and “Twisters”—a sequel, a prequel, and a standalone remake.
Four of the top 12 titles (“Inside Out 2,” “Despicable Me 4,” “Kung Fu Panda 4,” and “The Garfield Movie”) are animated. With a scant few exceptions, animated features always score big, mostly because parents desire any kind of break and view these flicks as temporary electronic pacifiers. Nothing contained in any of these movies gets close to being original which, again, is fine. They fill a particular need. If for no other reason, Hollywood is adept at providing product to meet audience demands.
The remaining five titles on the top 12 list (“Dune: Part Two,” “Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire,” “Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes,” “Bad Boys: Ride or Die,” and “Ghostbusters: Frozen Empire”) fall into the sci-fi/action genre slot and, once more, serve a particular fan need. Although these movies enjoy some mainstream spill over, the lion’s share of their take comes from self-confessed “movie nerds.”
Like all enterprises big and small, studios are in business to make money. I get it, and anyone who doesn’t hasn’t had to reconcile a balance sheet or balance a check book.
The problem, if you can call it that, with movies, and all other artistic ventures in general, is that the scales of creativity and commerce ultimately have to reach a happy medium. One cannot sustain a business model of creative integrity and progress without the assurance of (mostly) guaranteed, perhaps recycled, product.
Ironically, the 13th top grossing movie of the year so far, and the only original title, “IF,” is an animated/live-action hybrid starring “Deadpool” lead Ryan Reynolds, which was directed by John Krasinski, the filmmaker of the first two “A Quiet Place” movies.
I really hate to admit it, but if I were the head of a major studio, I would continue with the status quo: Make movies that please the masses, and bank coin when the weather is hot. Then, when the days are shorter and cooler, produce others that might lose some money, but increase the chances for awards recognition.
It’s a delicate and perpetually imperfect balance.