re: Hollywood lost almost $1bn this summer

quote:

---

Seems like it is getting to the point that movies are costing more to make than they can realistically recover at the box office.

---

yeah hollywood has drastically slashed the mid-budget movies in favor of big gambles

that plays into why you see so many remakes, reboots, etc, b/c they're seen as "Safer" properties

now that they're failing, you'll probably see a shift...somewhere

Warn Bros. way in the black for putting out shite movies

quote:

---

Really surprised pete's dragon did poorly. We took the kids see it labor day weekend and all thought it was decent and will add the dvd to the collection when it comes out. Seems like it is getting to the point that movies are costing more to make than they can realistically recover at the box office. With the price of a movie outing for a family of five (normally $60-70 with popcorn and a drink or two) we maybe see two movies a year. It is much cheaper to buy the dvd/Blu-ray as a Christmas present for the kids.

---

Still haven't seen it (hope to this weekend), but Disney went for broke, I honestly think that was fatigue with family films. Jungle Book. Finding Dory. Pete's Dragon. Alice. The BFG. Those from Disney alone just kills enthusiasm. I'd wonder what the average count of Disney films per summer would be, maybe I'm wrong, but that seems like a lot aiming for the same audience, and it's near impossible with that many to avoid overlap.

quote:

---

I don't know if there was much demand for Petes Dragon. I remember it from being a kid, but it was never that big of a thing. Kids now would have no idea what Petes dragon is. And I guess it just didn't look compelling enough to make them curious. Probably same thing with BFG, which I saw and thought was boring.

---

Which, in theory since everyone hates remakes, would make these seem less "Sequel" and less "Remake-ish" and should work for them, not against them.

quote:

---

With the price of a movie outing for a family of five (normally $60-70 with popcorn and a drink or two)

---

It can get very expensive, and there's a lot of competition for a person's entertainment dollar.

Can someone explain why CGI movies are so expensive? It seems counterintuitive. I'd have thought those movies would be cheaper to make.

Too much overproduced, gaudy crap with actors who I don't care for starring in the blockbusters. I swear they must spend money like it has a 12 hour shelf life.


One of my favorite movies of the year was Midnight Special, which received next to no marketing and only took in roughly 6 million on an 18 million dollar budget. They must have spent half the budget on the last scene cause it seemed like a pretty low-budget flick until the craziness starts.

quote:

---

bad ecosystem that we see theatrically

---

LOL

It's not a bad ecosystem, it's bad movies.

Stop churning out endless expensive comic book movies and remakes and CGI-fests.

Start producing original content based on good writing. Some of the best movies I have seen in the past few years like The Way Way Back and The Drop couldn't have cost very much to make at all and were based on characters interacting with each other, not 'splosions and superpowers.

And for crying out loud, if you spend what they pent to make Star Trek, promote it! Most people had no idea there was a new Star Trek movie out. I've never seen a worse marketing effort for a movie THAT expensive.

quote:

---

Can someone explain why CGI movies are so expensive? It seems counterintuitive. I'd have thought those movies would be cheaper to make.

---

You ever stay to watch the credits after a Marvel movie or any effects heavy movie? There's about a thousand people just working on cgi. They don't work for cheap either.

quote:

---

Here's a good article about the Conran brothers (who created Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow). Basically, they wanted to make low-budget special effects action/fantasy films. They asked for 3 Mill to make their movie, were told they needed 20 Mill, then somehow the budget inflated to 70 Mill (making their movie a flop once the box office came in)

---

I remember reading that when Neil Blomkamp was shopping District 9 around Hollywood he said he had a few studios offer him $100 million budgets but the studios wanted to make changes. He finally found a studio to give him creative control but only a $30 million budget and he took it. Studios are hiring inexperienced directors or corporate yes men and making movies as bland as possible to appeal to as many people as possible. They need to let the creative people be creative and let the business people handle the business. If that means smaller budgets then so be it. Good directors will find ways to make it work.

I call bullshite.

There is no way Hollywood lost $1 billion this summer and not a single studio went out of business. They are lying. A lot of this is paper losses so they won't have to pay taxes.

Though I do think we should move away from so many huge event films and look at that Warner model of one or two tentpoles supported by lots of smaller, successful films. They made a lot of money on cheap horror films. There's something to be said for the modestly budgeted film.