I'm not convinced of the blockbuster theory because the first blockbuster that I know of was The Exorcist, though I think Bonnie and Clyde, Planet of the Apes (the original) and Butch Cassidy were also blockbusters, very popular in their time. Jaws is quoted as such because it was the first Summer blockbuster, or so they say. Prior to Jaws, the Summer months were allegedly dead, similar to t.v. in the Summer.
well, it doesn't really matter what the particular movies were. only that there was some kind of change in the dynamic.
arguing from a different perspective, we know that hollywood and big business have always exploited and replicated whatever they can. and when star wars came along it conducted the kind of crossover marketing campaign that had never before been seen in film history. this meant tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars made in toy sales, fast food products, even things like linens and alarm clocks.
i mean, what were the chances that such a massively-successful formula was not going to be imitated somewhere by someone? probably close to zero, eh?
so yes, we can argue about how much of an effect such things had, but is there any doubt that something significant changed in 1977 or thereabouts?
As for Tron, I think the kids chose to spend their money at the arcades playing the games instead. The games like Pac Man/Ms. Pac Man, Donkey Kong, and the arcade version of Tron were new and very exciting to play at that time, and Tron the Movie was "just a movie about it".
part of this was probably due to disney releasing it. if you were a fan of regular disney movies then this would have looked like the oddball film to skip, not unlike "the black hole" with bruce dern. and if you -weren't- a fan of disney, then this would easily have looked like another schlocky piece of schlock, the kind of thing they've been producing ever since "the jungle book" or thereabouts.
with those kind of odds, who was going to go out of their way to see it? especially with the marketing campaign in place at the time which would beckon to you from the fronts of cereal boxes. i mean, WTF... ugh.
Like any other film, art films and cult films need to cut across to the public and relate with urgency and at the same time not be a substitute for desirable direct involvement, but when they do they are considered to be pop films. As intriguing as Blade Runner is, it did not have the immediacy as, say, "Alien", though both films are from Ridley Scott, or at least one and a half of them are....
well said.
On the other hand, most people don't realize the esoteric nature of a film such as "Total Recall" and its teasing implication on the matter of existence/perception of one's reality or the illusion of social dependencies perpetuated by one's self-appointed "Masters", which comes into play in the scene where Ah-nold determines by action the authenticity of "the authoritarian".
this is the standard challenge of turning any PKD story into a film- minimise the parts that challenge the psyche and add enough feel-good elements so that the audience can remain comfortable. no PKD tale is ever going to be told in movie form with all of its inherant challenges to sanity and civilisation. bladerunner, for example, was merely a nice compromise, cutting out the fascinating subplots of the mood organ, mercerism, androids completely taking over govt agencies, and man's desperate attachment to other lifeforms, even if they're artificial. WHILE still retaining just enough to be a provocative film. but you wouldn't know that unless you had read "do androids dream of electric sheep?"
total recall was a really fun and enjoyable movie IMO, more harmonius with it's original short story than bladerunner was with its source. i'm glad you enjoyed it and were able to appreciate some of PKD's questions about reality.
