Creative freedom can be risky for studios

‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ The theory of laissez-faire government is one we all learn about in… ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ The theory of laissez-faire government is one we all learn about in history class ‘mdash; could it be that Hollywood needs a good lesson in it, too? ‘ ‘ ‘ This weekend saw the trailer premiere for ‘The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,’ the latest from ‘Fight Club’ director David Fincher. The trailer for the movie ‘mdash; about a man who is born as a tiny geriatric and ages backward ‘mdash; is as promising as trailers get. ‘ ‘ ‘ A moody, understated tone, near-flawless special effects, positive test-screening reports and the combined star power of Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett suggest that it will be ripe and ready for its awards-season holiday release date. Internet rumors persist, however, that Paramount Pictures wants Fincher to tighten up the running time. ‘ ‘ ‘ It’s a familiar story for Fincher, who faced similar pressure during production of his period crime thriller ‘Zodiac,’ prompting him to re-release the film in a director’s cut earlier this year. It was another Paramount film, shot as the first in a two-picture deal with ‘Benjamin Button’ as the second. ‘ ‘ ‘ Is it fair for Paramount to try calling the shots? Well, yes and no. Unfortunately for Fincher, this is the problem inherent in the high stakes business of filmmaking. While a director deserves creative freedom, the studio is gambling millions on that vision. As is the case with ‘Benjamin Button,’ a $150 million dollar movie can’t just be an artistic endeavor ‘mdash; it needs to be a marketable product. ‘ ‘ ‘ Case in point: Spike Jonze, director and oddball, worked for years on an adaptation of the award-winning children’s book, ‘Where the Wild Things Are.’ Test audiences reported that the film was melancholy with subtle and challenging themes. Warner Brothers, undoubtedly expecting a family-friendly flick populated by characters that would look great as plush toys, saw that it was sitting on an $80 million piece of art house cinema for kids. Whoops! ‘ ‘ ‘ After canceling the release date, it considered massive reshoots (massive to the point of scrapping everything and starting from scratch), recasting, even possibly removing Jonze from the project. When Internet petitions decrying the bastardization of art started popping up, Warner Bros. appeared to quietly cave in and give the film a ‘new’ release date ‘mdash; the same one it had originally occupied, leading speculators to suggest that the reshoots were cancelled. ‘ ‘ ‘ But what of ‘Benjamin Button?’ Will Fincher lose to the studio, or will Paramount back off? Does a swarm of idealistic Internet film nerds need to come to the rescue of every director who may be forced to compromise his artistic vision? ‘ ‘ ‘ That’s a hard judgment to make ‘mdash; again, film is an art, and creative freedom is necessity, but if movies don’t turn a profit, they aren’t made. ‘ ‘ ‘ What I can suggest is this: Hollywood producers need to know what they’re getting into when they hire their directors. If you want vanilla family fare, hire Chris Columbus, not the guy who directed ‘Being John Malkovich.’ Same for Fincher ‘mdash; both he and Jonze are known for their individual styles, and their shared experience as music video directors might have spoiled them on having free artistic reign over their own projects. Don’t hire an unconventional director and expect a predictable product. ‘ ‘ ‘ On the other hand, studios still need to exercise a little caution, even when it comes to reliable directors ‘mdash; after all, Universal Studios let Peter Jackson completely off the leash after the success of the ‘Lord of the Rings’ trilogy, and all he gave them in return was three hours of Naomi Watts juggling for a giant, dinosaur-wrestling monkey.