Richard Linklater: Hollywood decided ‘to make films where you can stay 13 forever’

Richard Linklater is currently promoting Hit Man, a Netflix film he directed and cowrote with Glen Powell. Powell pitched the story to Linklater and they cowrote the script, and Powell stars as the “hit man.” It’s loosely based on the true story of Gary Johnson, a community college professor who moonlighted as a fake hit man for the Houston police. As in, he would pretend to be a hit man to see who would try to hire him, and the police would move in, etc. The movie is supposed to be a sexy action-drama, with realistic sex scenes which will probably upset the Puriteens. Over the course of the past decade especially, there’s been less and less “sexiness” and intimacy in films. As Linklater promoted Hit Man, he discussed that issue and the modern audience’s prudish sensibilities.

Adult stories in Hollywood movies are “out of fashion” according to five-time Oscar nominee Richard Linklater. He says it was a struggle to get the “traditional” film studios interested in his latest project, Hit Man, despite strong critical and audience reaction when the film premiered last year. The movie is being released by Netflix.

Hit Man stars Glen Powell and Adria Arjona in a romantic thriller comedy about a stuck-in-a-rut professor, Gary, who starts moonlighting as Ron, a fake hitman for a city police department and who falls for a woman who tries to enlist his services.

Linklater says that he and Glen Powell, who co-wrote the script, wanted to make the movie about “passion”.

“I said, it’s gonna have sex, it’ll be passionate, it’ll be carnal, the desire that drives everything,” Linklater tells the BBC. “Glen’s character starts off very dispassionate, but by the end of the movie he’s a different guy, he’s discovered passion, and the movie has this strong chemistry and sexuality. I think what’s out of fashion, people say there’s no sex in movies anymore, but there isn’t ‘adult’ in movies anymore, as sexuality in movies equals adult,” the filmmaker continues.

“When I was 13 years old and looking at movies, I thought the adult world looked pretty interesting, it looked fun and I thought, ‘I can’t wait to get there!’ But it wasn’t just the sex, it was the adult situations they showed. But somewhere along the way Hollywood inverted that. It’s like they said, ‘we’re going to make films where you can stay 13 forever, you stay that little kid with little kid concerns’, so I guess it drifted away as its complexities weren’t the subject matter of mainstream cinema as it had been before.”

[From BBC]

I know I should analyze Linklater’s words more carefully, but broadly, I agree with him. I think this is the very heart of it too: “Somewhere along the way Hollywood inverted that. It’s like they said, ‘we’re going to make films where you can stay 13 forever, you stay that little kid with little kid concerns.’” That’s exactly what it is. In the rare movies where there are actual emotional stakes, it’s usually “violence against women” used as a plot device for the male characters. I grew up in era where there were sexy thrillers and neo-noirs being made with some regularity. And now those kinds of movies just aren’t made anymore.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

14 Responses to “Richard Linklater: Hollywood decided ‘to make films where you can stay 13 forever’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Contrary Mary says:

    So I was one of the lucky ones to see this at TIFF in 2023. The audience went nuts for it because not only is it a fabulous movie with great performances and a killer script….it’s a movie for adults by adults who aren’t afraid of adults. It’s smart, it’s witty, it’s charming, it’s thrilling, it assumes the audience is smart-adult enough to have life experience to get the humor. More movies like this will get butts in seats. Equally (and controversially): weird does not a good movie make, nor does lecturing the audience about an issue, nor does a pair of spandex tights if it isn’t done right. I’m hopeful the lesson of Hit Man sinks in because I’m not paying $50 all-in to see films that try to talk to my inner GenX 13YO: she is still a whatevering-witch and is just as underwhelmed as I am today.

  2. whatever says:

    I could not possibly be less prudish, but I did get really sick of feeling like a romantic storyline had to get shoe-horned into absolutely every movie or TV show, whether it felt like an integral part of the story or not. I’m all for occasionally watching a movie in which “getting the guy” doesn’t even factor into the story.

    • Asdf says:

      Agreed. It doesn’t all have to be about getting the guy. Spy movies where its about political issues/ secrets. Thrillers where its about the a scary serial killer etc. leave the sex scenes for the romantic dramas/comedies where the scene is integral to the plot, not just a shoe in because oh yeah we forgot to add a sex scene.

    • AprilUnderwater says:

      On this topic, I recently watched a movie based on a true story.

      There’s no hint of romance during the film, but the end credits revealed the real life romantic involvement between the characters.

      I remember feeling it was so refreshing that they hadn’t shoehorned in a romantic subplot, even though there was a real life romantic subplot happening during the events!

  3. TN Democrat says:

    The last decade has been eye opening. I stopped paying for cable and watch TV with an antenna when I am not streaming. Shows that aired with no issue decades ago get pixilated for even minor nudity (breast or butt cleavage/nothing actually shown) and gore. The Evangelicals aren’t just bizarre for their freaky devotion to the orange menace. Some sort of strange societal shift also occurred where liberals are deemed snowflakes for objecting to truly objectionable statements and content, but the religious extremists can’t handle the sight of plumber’s crack without shreaking. I haven’t been to the movies right before the pandemic started. I am tired of never ending sequels, interconnected multiverses and content made to appeal to 13 year olds. I am also tired of the dull, redundant lifetime/Hallmark movies that seem to be marketed to women my age.

    • Erin says:

      God I totally agree. I never started watching the marvel stuff because I was in the throws of being a new parent and now there are so many with so many interconnections I don’t even want to start because it would take months of the limited free time I have to get through. I think I’ve seen GotG but at this point I have no interest and that’s all there seems to be. I do love the spider verse movies though, they are so visually gorgeous.

  4. Teddy says:

    Not just 13, but a 13-year-old boy.

    • Mads says:

      This! 100% This!

    • lucy2 says:

      100% correct.

      To an extent I get it, R rated stuff is harder to sell around the world, the superhero stuff prints cash, and we’re all so aware of what a nightmare the world usually is, escapism back to being 13 is kind of appealing. But there should be room for more – adult stories, original stories, etc.

  5. Asdf says:

    The Hitman was terribly boring. My husband and I tried to watch it and it sucked I’m sorry. It seemed so promising but it wasn’t. Then we were like ok we watched half we gotta finish it because maybe it gets better. It didnt

  6. Veronica S. says:

    I think he’s absolutely right, to be honest, and I think it’s intentional. It’s a way of dumbing down audiences, refusing to provoke them to think and confront difficult ideas and grey areas. I think it’s part and partial to the concentrated attacks on the SAG-AFTRA and WGA that led to the strikes, precisions strikes on creatives who are most likely to introduce challenging ideas into the narrative.

    Marvelification of movies isn’t just about removing sex, though that’s where it becomes most obvious in terms of the conservative influence. It’s about the idea of a less adult world in general. You don’t have to think critically about right and wrong because there’s always a static good and bad guy. You don’t have to worry about things not ending well because the good guys always win, and you never have to worry about whether that person actually was good or if morality can have degree and value. When your heroes are flawed, it isn’t complexly. Everything is sanitized, even when it’s dealing with groups whose lives aren’t inherently sanitized (LGBT+, etc).

    The best way to see it is frankly in Marvel films themselves. Go watch the first Iron Man film. Compare the plot and character choices to what you see now. Do you feel how much more adult it is? How complicated a character Tony is? He can be a jerk, a womanizer, a warmonger, etc. and still come out somebody we’re rooting for…because he’s allowed to grow, he’s allowed to admit his flaws, and he’s allowed to be a better person by the end. Where are all those stories now?

  7. sevenblue says:

    If you read the stories about Harvey Weinstein, he was very insistent that every movie he produced had to have sex scenes, female nudity. He forced Salma Hayek to put sex scene in Frida even though she objected to it. I don’t want to see actresses to be forced into sex scenes in order to make it in Hollywood. If the answer is no more sex scenes in movies, I am okay with that. There is a reason almost every actress who makes enough money starts to put “no nudity” in their contracts. They don’t want to do it. Why should they be objectified for our entertainment?

    I am sure some actresses don’t mind it if it makes sense writing wise, but most do. I don’t feel prudish if a known, powerful actress accepts this kind of movies, but it makes me uncomfortable if it is an unknown and most of the time very young actress who probably had to say “yes” to get the part, because she might not have another chance in the industry.

    • lucy2 says:

      This is a very good point, I was thinking that when reading the article too, how much of that is bankable actresses feeling like they have a voice now and declining roles like that?

      • sevenblue says:

        @lucy2, Emilia Clarke (Khaleesi) refused to do nudity after a few seasons of GOT. She wasn’t powerful enough to decline when she first started and was quiet young. I remember male fans were so angry that she “tricked” the fans, they were saying she should have declined the role if she didn’t want to do nudity every season. That is what happens a lot of times when actresses get enough power in the industry. I am sure a lot of established actresses or the ones who get a lot of acting offers refuse to do too explicit sex scenes or demand body double. I have no problem with that. I don’t want anyone to get traumatized for my entertainment.