The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Why doesn't Hollywood focus on making blockbusters for less than $20M?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: June 3rd, 2024 11:05 PM Author: buff sound barrier That new japanese Godzilla movie on Netflix looks 100X better than any Marvel movie in the last 5+ years and they made it for 5-10% of the budget. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5536544&forum_id=2#47718173) |
Date: June 3rd, 2024 11:09 PM Author: hairraiser property for a megastudio it actually takes effort to figure out how to minimize costs, and maximize output on minimum costs
easier just to employ a fuckton of bureaucracy and cgi engineers and marketable movie stars to guarantee a $600m+ box office gross after an all-out forcememe campaign |
 |
Date: June 3rd, 2024 11:13 PM Author: buff sound barrier But they can't even guarantee moderately successful box office results anymore. A $600M movie would be a massive success in this market. The biggest movie this summer is a Garfield cartoon. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5536544&forum_id=2#47718189) |
|
Date: June 4th, 2024 12:40 AM Author: concupiscible judgmental faggot firefighter roommate No one has ever been able to guarantee box office success. But imagine a young movie exec who dreams of getting rich and having a long career doing cool shit. You can work on some little $20M movie where the range of outcomes looks like:
significant chance of grossing less than $20M and ending your career over a low-ambition movie that nobody saw.
significant chance of grossing $40M where your friends are like "hey nice job!" and your boss puts you on the list of people to fire the next time there's a round of cuts.
modest chance of grossing $80M where your boss is mildly pleased but still passes you over in favor of the guy who made more money shepherding the seventh installment of a series about cars going fast and shit exploding.
0.1% chance you stumble on something like the King's Speech that can be a hit with two actors in a room, cobble together a budget without giving away all the upside, persuade marketable actors to do this project, and get lucky that someone actually sees the movie rather than landing in the realm of #9 on the critics lists, nominated for 2 Oscars, 5-year gap before you get to do another movie because you have no track record of box office success. |
|
Date: June 4th, 2024 2:47 AM Author: impressive arousing place of business your question amounts to "why can't hamburger joints find a way to generate consistent 20% margins instead of 2% margins" and the answer is that they would if it wasn't super unlikely or hard as fuck. the status quo market outcome itself is answering your question.
someone could maybe figure this out but it would take a constant creative effort to squeeze gems out of tiny budgets. movie studios are big bureaucratic behemoths that are designed to crank out hamburgers for 2% profit pretty dependably. they probably have a budget allocated for “indie” moonshots but they can’t and don’t focus their business on those because the moonshot is by definition not expected to be a success. this godzilla shit would be the exception (and even then they are relying on and paying for franchise rights).
one really good up-and-coming director could maybe pull it off a couple times in a row but by that time he becomes an industry star, he's demanding higher pay and higher budgets, and there goes the studio's engine for 20% returns.
studios are businesses designed to serve you marvel slop from the griddle without too much strenuous creativity or brainpower and they’ll keep doing so as long as it works. |
|
Date: June 4th, 2024 1:43 PM Author: hairraiser property (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5536544&forum_id=2#47719573) |
|
Date: June 3rd, 2024 11:10 PM Author: Yellow psychic for some reason the money jews think you need to spend 100 million on marketing, idk why it seems like every movie gets plenty of free press, but they think they have to (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5536544&forum_id=2#47718182) |
|
Date: June 4th, 2024 12:02 AM Author: concupiscible judgmental faggot firefighter roommate All the "free" press is paid for. Newspapers review movies because studios buy ads. Any YT channel with significant viewership is monetized. They even pay people to go on message boards and create engagement about whatever movie needs to be force-memed. Then normal people amplify like "OMG Barbie blah blah blah." But normal people weren't walking around in 2022 thinking "god damn I would love to see a live action Barbie movie directed by Greta Gerwig." This is a thought that like 8 awkward girls in Bushwick had and the rest was marketing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5536544&forum_id=2#47718250) |
|
Date: June 4th, 2024 12:06 AM Author: Yellow psychic I can see going all in occasionally, but I have never been in the mood to go see a movie and not been aware of what is available, just send the actors out to do a few interviews and you should be fine, a thousand ads aren't moving the needle (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5536544&forum_id=2#47718253) |
|
Date: June 4th, 2024 3:09 AM Author: heady son of senegal A lot of big tv ad buys now are not actually about trying to sell anyone a particular product, but rather a form of fealty or kickbacks/payments for loyalty. Pfizer is not constantly advertising AIDS drugs on CNN in hopes of winning the homo market. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5536544&forum_id=2#47718417) |
|
Date: June 4th, 2024 12:37 AM Author: Sticky fishy piazza feces Cuz that would require a lot of creativity and brainpower (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5536544&forum_id=2#47718280) |
|
Date: June 4th, 2024 12:39 AM Author: Brindle half-breed turdskin (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5536544&forum_id=2#47718282) |