In the last thirty years, the production budgets for Hollywood movies have been steadily rising – the 1990s saw two James Cameron movies, True Lies and Titanic, break the $100 and $200 million barrier respectively. But this has now spiralled out of control. It’s not uncommon for Hollywood to invest $300 million in the latest must-see product. In fact, out of the ten most expensive movies ever released, eight were made within the last decade.

The most recent Marvel film serves as an example. Despite having a $270 million budget, The Marvels – which has been called the worst MCU film ever made – had the worst opening weekend ever for an MCU film. This budget-busting approach to filmmaking creates problems – the kind that grow and have an impact on the entire entertainment sector.

I don’t consider myself a staunch libertarian, but if they choose to invest the GDP of a small country in a project, by all means, let a thousand flowers bloom. They are free to do so. No political point is being made here. So what’s the problem?

I’m making an aesthetic argument. This approach to filmmaking creates problems – the kind that grow and have an impact on the entire entertainment sector.

Economic issues are the most prominent ones. The success of a movie is heavily reliant on marketing and promotion. To break even, the average movie needs to earn roughly three times its production budget. Even for relatively small ‘cheap’ movies, this is a Herculean task. For those at the top of the financial food chain, it gets harder and harder. If your movie is one of the increasing number that cost more than $300 million to make, you’ll need to anticipate it making $1 billion before it turns a profit. Few achieve this golden level. In 2023, only Barbie and The Super Mario Bros. Movie have accomplished this.

This logically leads me to my next issue, which is failure. Specifically, the price of failure. Financial losses suffered by studios increase in proportion to the production budget. A $40-million flop will undoubtedly be embarrassing and draw criticism, but a $300-million dud will end your career.

Hollywood finds it safer to look for predictable and tried and true formulas than to take a big risk on a smaller, more creative project because there is such a huge amount of money at stake. But that’s not how it operates. Studios will literally throw money at whatever is currently popular right now, latching on to the latest trend or wave of nostalgia. Sadly, that means lavish special effects courtesy of computer-generated imagery, known as CGI – heavy superhero flicks or the tenth installment of a franchise that started in 1980.

The executives lining the venerable halls of Hollywood appear to hold the mistaken belief that bigger always equates to better. It resembles a cultural contest to see who can produce the most visually stunning film. But this poses a challenge. The more money you spend on cutting-edge effects, the more you neglect the important things. No matter how fancy you make it, a glitzy product is not always a sign of quality. Even when covered in glitter, a dog turd is still a dog turd.

Overuse of spectacle serves as a cover for poor writing and a lack of creativity. Can you genuinely say that Avatar 2’s story had you on the edge of your seat? Thought so. Personally, I hardly recall any of the movie’s scenes. As opposed to Puss in Boots: The Last Wish (budget $90 million) which made me cry and laugh simultaneously.

The majority of big-budget films are the creative equivalent of a father jangling his keys at a toddler – they temporarily distract you but don’t provide long-term gratification or emotional release. These movies may be eye candy, but just like anything sweet, they rot the brain. After a while, fans lose interest in what Hollywood has to offer due to disillusionment.

The loss of freedom of expression is the last issue, and it may be the most damaging. This results from the studio interfering with the director’s creative choices. Because there is so much money at stake, it is common for films to be postponed and often shelved for years because the studio is concerned about the director’s creative vision. Executives frequently conduct numerous test screenings, in addition to expensive rewrites and reshoots to make something more ‘commercially viable’ – industry parlance for politically correct.

Despite how well-intentioned this may seem, Hollywood executives are not writers and are not hired to create a sophisticated and nuanced story; rather, they are driven by the profit motive. They are purely motivated by whatever brings in money for their shareholders, so narrative structure and creativity don’t matter much to them.

Making a profit is very challenging with all these adjustments and changes. So what do you do when movies cost a fortune and the writers’ room is devoid of creativity? Hollywood has been reviving classic movies and franchises for years because it knows that die-hard fans will always show up to watch them. Brand recognition and sentimentality have financial value. It explains why recent years have seen so many Indiana Jones and Star Wars movies. Not to mention how obsessed Disney are with raiding the back catalogue and butchering its beloved animated classics.

It is pervasive within the industry. Seven of the top ten films so far this year are sequels or remakes. Obviously, this wasn’t always the case. Between 40 and 75 per cent of all movies in the 1980s were based on original material.

Going with what’s popular is much safer for Hollywood than taking a chance on something new. So instead, we get countless bland superhero movies with the same sloppy writing and formulaic plot. Now that the absurd idea of the multiverse has been added, any dead character can be brought back – logic be damned! But don’t worry, at least it looks good! All of this leads to creative inertia, like a Jeep stuck in the mud spraying crap on everyone.

I hope we have reached the limit of how expensive movies can get. However, I believe that Hollywood only speaks the language of money. Although capitalism shouldn’t be a zero-sum game, perhaps in this particular case they must lose for the benefit of all the fans.

Hollywood must return to the golden age of cinema, when people were willing to take a chance and be bold and daring.