Toronto Fest Lands World Preem Of Godfrey Reggio’s … 
Hot Trailer: ‘Man Of Steel’ 
Former Digital Domain CEO & Auditors Sued For Fraud By … 
Fox Acquires ‘Narc’; Zac Efron Attached To Play … 
ABC’s ‘Nashville’ Undergoes Production … 
CBS Wins Season & Ties Sweep In Demo; ABC Tops Adults … 
Mike Lobell Adds Cast To ‘Eisner,’ Plots … 
Sony Shares Rise On Report That It Will Consider … 
Alki David Agrees To End Name Games With Aereo And Barry … 
Next-Gen Xbox One Unveiled With Content Including … 
UPDATE: Apple CEO Challenged For Moving “Crown … 
ESPN Layoffs Could Reach 400 As Part Of Latest Disney Cuts 
Cannes: Weinstein Co Acquires Keanu-Reese Sci-Fi Pic … 
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘Dancing With The Stars’ Up … 
Hot Trailer: ‘The Wolverine’ 
Ang Lee Departs FX Pilot ‘Tyrant’ 
How Many Times Does Seth MacFarlane Have To Say No To The … 
Cannes: Stanley Weiser To Script ‘Three Graves … 
Cannes: Deadline Crashes Palais Forum With Costa Gavras, … 
‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ $164.5M Global: Lower … 
‘The Great Gatsby’ Starts With $5.4M … 
I love these kinds of reports because they confirm for us what we already suspect. According to research firm SNL Kagan, a film must hit 1.75 on its Kagan Profitability Index to become a moneymaker. But the dozen March releases will average 1.03 — down from the 1.78 average from a year ago (which included hits Disney’s Alice In Wonderland and DreamWorks’ How To Train Your Dragon.) Analyst Wade Holden writes that certain money losers will be Relativity’s Take Me Home Tonight and Warner Bros’ Red Riding Hood. But Holden expects Disney’s Mars Needs Moms from Robert Zemeckis’ ImageMovers Digital to be the biggest bomb, projected to generate just $81.3 million in revenues, although it cost $264.8 million to produce, distribute, and market. The Kagan report says Sony’s Battle: Los Angeles, Relativity’s Limitless, and Paramount’s Rango may come close “if [the studios] have a favorable distribution agreement” with theaters.
KAGAN: March Was Dismal for Movie Profits
-
Marketplace
News/Opinion Poll
Loading ...Box Office Poll
Loading ...
Our industry has been collectively making horrendous choices lately so this news shouldn’t surprise anyone. I can’t believe the stuff being greenlit right now — and yet there are great scripts that remain unmade. It’s depressing….
Another related problem: as film revenues decline, this year additional outside capital is available to encourange film production, creating a potential glut of low, medium, and high budget movies. These films will have difficulty in securing adequate distribution, consumer awareness and interest, and may never return their costs and investor funds. It looks like a replay of the years before the 2007-10 recession.
Sorry to be somewhat gloomy, but the facts seem to indicate this pattern.
Does anyone know how they take into account Hollywood accounting? Mars Needs Moms is an obvious flop, but when it comes to actual dollars being spent at a vertically integrated studio…
If you polled 100 people and asked them if any film coming out this year genuinely excited them, how many of them do you think would be able to name one that wasn’t franchise based (POTC) or comic book based? It’s depressing and you see all these films going in the pipeline (random Sparks movie, other random book adaptation, random Ashton Kutcher and/or Katie Heigl rom/com, random classic/foreign movie remake etc etc ad infinitum) and you just wonder what exactly is happening to the industry as the number of original films out there is just pitiful. People can hardly blame the movie going public for being apathetic when the filmakers themselves continually produce such uninspiring movies.
What’s a Sparks movie?
A movie adapted from a Nicholas Sparks book (THE NOTEBOOK, NIGHTS IN RODANTHE, etc.)
WELL!!! I hate you’re opinion. I personally love some of the movies coming out this year. One for the Money (I love those books, and yes, I do know it is starring Katherine Heigl), most of the Marvel stuff (Except Thor… Will still watch it, but never got into it), Super 8 (JJ Abrams rocks my socks). This year is going to be EPIC in movies, especially compared to last year.
@ Ria: Well, said, Ria. It’s interesting that you actually mention Ashton Kutcher.
He is the bastard child of what the industry has become: It’s all based on marketing. Kutcher, with his ordinary and boring ability as an actor, is only, along with his wife, still relevant because of his interest in social media outlet, Twitter. Without this site, he would have long ago ,and deservedly, disappeared into the wilderness. It’s actually farcical to see such a no-name actor still headline films. But 5 million Twitter followers counts for 5 million paying customers when casting him comes into thought.
All that needs to be looked at is the amount of money that studios are spending these days on advertising. The famous saying ‘A good product sells itself’ has long been forgotten, as has the power of word of mouth. I would be a millionaire if I got a dollar for every time I avoided a film this year because somebody told me it sucked.
Then Hollywood gets an adult smash like Haynes “Mildred Pierce” and it’s trapped in premium cable, never to realize its full potential.
I agree with Ria.The film business has been making some pretty uninteresting movies.Studio executives have been giving the green light to quite a few inconsequential projects….why?This weekend a sequel scare picture and yet another animated feature film will dominate the boxoffice.This is Hollywood at its best?
Man, this is great for all the whiners…
The 2nd Q will be better. And REAL STEEL, which is apparently so good it’s already spawned a sequel, is an example of original thinking. As in SUPER 8.
Things will be a’ight. We just came out of a very dark period where getting a bank loan was next to impossible.
More posts like these please!
I have some free passes and I can’t find anything that I am even interested in watching for FREE. Make better movies with original scripts.
Go see “Rango” or “Hanna”.
I think right now there is a lack of talent in Hollywood. The issuse is Hollywood has always received talent, but now there are all the theses fame-money hungry talents making their way to tinsel town, and the artist with true integrity have fallen short. However I feel were gonna see a change in how Hollywood functions, because the public is tired of being force feed what they’re pooping out.
I don’t know about you guys but I’m waiting for “Snooki vs Martians”.
And calling it edible. Grab the audience, grab control. All empires fall in time.
So, to sum up: for the next couple of years it’s going to be sequels/remakes and rabbits pooping jelly beans.
Ya know, since I posted earlier I thought about this problem. The one piece of good news is that SOME of the a-list directors have gone the lower-budget route, like Fincher did with Social Network and Aronofsky did with Black Swan. Or Duncan Jones did with Moon and Source Code. Seems to me like the real creativity is happening at the low-budget level right now because of misguided micro-managing at the mid-to-high budget range.
Maybe we’ll get a return to gritty realism in the vein of 70s film out of this financing crisis? If you are an exec and you read this, DO IT. Forget the tentpoles. Greenlit our generation’s French Connection instead….
Just a thought, but maybe some films would turn in better numbers if they weren’t foisted onto audiences in 3D with higher admission prices. On the other hand, that’s no reason to produce 2D suckfests like Robin Hood either. I’m with Ben (first post): something is wrong at the greenlighting stage. There are great scripts out there, but woe to any that aren’t sequels, prequels, franchises, based on graphic novels or YouTube etc.
I know this won’t be a popular opinion, as it’s not a bash the studio POV, but does anyone think $4 gasoline, and low consumer confidence has anything to do with it? During the initial stages of a “recession” people often flock to theaters, and consume entertainment in general as a way to get away from reality. When you hit “dips” during any recovery, historically people act a bit differently, as we are currently witnessing.
Normally I’d send you a bill for this, but seeing as it’s Friday… Consumer confidence plays a role, of course: it always does. But if people really want to go see a film then they will. It’s about value and perceived value. Far too many films these days are offering too little, even none, of both. Just do the basic math: family of, say, four, plus snacks, or a date (factor in a meal, a drink, perhaps babysitter), travel, transport, parking costs, time spent doing this and not something else and whatever other personal factors enter into it. Then there is the actual theatrical experience itself; commercials, trailers, less than ideal sound and projection, the ‘joy’ of sharing this experience with audience members who prefer to talk, kick your seat, rustle wrappings, text, make calls etc. Cinema has to compete with other calls on our wallets, apart from the cost of living life in general.
That said, now ask yourself how many films recently, or coming up, are ones you gotta just must have to see when they are released. Or would you prefer to wait till they come out on Blu-ray and DVD?
I’m not a basher or hater. I work in this business and these are everyday and very real factors that apply the whole time. I fear too many people at the studio executive level have lost sight of them and also the core business value of actually offering something new and interesting for people’s hard-earned money.
I was just joking about the bill. But if you want to donate…
Excellent post, Ripsnorter. Very well articulated. Black Swan, True Grit, Inception, Avatar, Tron: Legacy, Social Network are examples of recent movies worth going through the potential hassles to see.
Well the only version of Avatar that was interesting was the Imax version. That’s probably the only movie I really cared about seeing in 3D (And I was lucky enough to see it on IMAX, which was bitchin’ btw). And more that I plan on seeing at theaters is Harry Potter 7 pt. 2 (because it IS the last part, and I thought part 1 was good). I plan on seeing Super 8, which will be epic. X-Men First Class looks good. Maybe Hangover pt. 2 (I know, a lot of sequel/series’ here…) One for the Money because I love the Janet Evanivitch (Spelling?) series… More probably, but those are the only ones I can think of off the top of my head.
Ripsnorter, the answer – at least one very big answer – is cell phones. Once mobile phones became cheap and widespread, the “shared experience” of the cinema became very frustrating and disappointing due to all the people who aren’t actually there to watch the film. We have met the enemy, and it is us.
The studios used to be able to sell crap to gullible audiences but with more information and entertainment choices, they’re floundering. Universal is still retrenching and Fox is in the toilet so that leaves 4 functioning studios that are still susceptible to the big bomb. So glad I can download whatever I want for pennies.
cool figures. who knows how accurate it is. too bad not accessible to “score” other movies we’ve discussed on these boards. I think a gross into the 80s for mars is pretty optimistic.
also, I don’t think mildred was a smash. more like mehldrid pierce.
People have been saying all this same stuff since the beginning of the movie industry, costs are too high, too much executive fear, talent is greedy, etc., and yet the industry rolls on. Seriously, read the first Goldman book, written in the early 80s. It’s the exact same stuff. The reality is that we’re in a business of flops and hits.
I have a young daughter who’s a great kid film success indicator. For about a year, going to a new kid and/or animated film was a surefire way to make her happy on a weekend.
This spring, it seems as if the studios did a poor job of marketing to her. She had no interest in Rango, even though she loves Pirates of the Caribbean. She had a tiny bit of interest in Hop and a little more in Gnomeo and Juliet, but not enough for us to actually go to Gnomeo in a theater.
Gnomeo was the only movie she’d heard about on her own, and she told me that she now expects kid movies to be too loud and scary for her to want to watch them in a theater. She also hates it when we download movies. What she really wants to do is have us buy her movies on DVD.
people still watch these “crap” movies. only now, they get to steal them and do it for free – that’s a huge loss of revenue.
and, yeah, tons of crap is getting inexplicably greenlit — Arthur (why?), Your Highness (a 1 million dollar idea at best, they put 50+ into it), Suckerpunch (that script was incoherent), Gullivers Travels, Red Riding Hood — these all failed in the CONCEPT STAGE.
And not to hate on all remakes. Oceans Eleven, the Karate Kid – it can work when the story is done well.
I’m excited for Bad Teacher – looks fresh and original. And I hope Bridemaids does well too. Because there have to be better movies for us ladies — the Something Borrowed trailer makes me embarrassed to have ovaries.
Well Arthur actually looks kinda funny, in a “well I’m stupid, don’t blame me” kind of way. I plan on seeing it (not necessarily in theaters, but still. It will be seen).
I agree that the studio development and greenlighting processes are not serving the movie-going public (and studio profits) particularly well. Uninspired and bad decisions are made every day that result in too many uninspired and bad movies. But can we please stop perpetrating the myth that there are all of these great unproduced screenplays just waiting for recognition by the studio suits? The real problem is that the studio executives’ obsession with keeping their jobs leads to timid decisionmaking–keep the agents happy (buy what they are selling) and don’t take creative risks. That results in an unwillingness to back the creative inspiration of writers (and directors and producers) in the development process. The studio execs’ over-reliance on spec scripts with already-attached creative elements often means that new and different ideas rarely get an opportunity to develop into fully developed screenplays. Creativity needs an environment that nurtures its development. Until the studios make a real commitment to the development of ideas, and I don’t mean paying for another rewrite of Scream 5, this creative malaise will continue. The studios must provide writers and their creative collaborators the means and the space to nurture and develop their ideas into movies, and a safe place to fail, as well. We don’t have that, and it shows in our movie houses every weekend; for the most part, recycled blandness marketed for its familiarity. Ugh. Was a remake of Arthur the best we could come up with for the talents of Russell Brand, Helen Mirren and Greta Gerwig? Why even bother? Because it was a relatively safe (risk-adverse) decision for the studio execs. The knew (more or less) what the picture would be, and they could envision how it should be marketed. And guess what? They got the schlock they deserved. As a movie making community, and movie lovers, we have to demand more of them and ourselves.
Quit trying to pass these Apatow dorks off as real leading men for starters. Seth Rogen, Jonah Hill and/or Russell Brand are good reasons for me to NOT see a movie. More Clooneys, Pitts, Damons, Cheadles, Afflecks (2.0) please. These gentlemen know how to open a movie, or even if it flops they look good doing it.
As the famous saying goes…”it’s the economy stupid!” Factor that with bad movies that are flooing theaters, more cheaper options then ever before against theaters that are WAY to expensive, and you have the perfect storm of declining ticket sales.
I used to go to movies every weekend with my friends and spend $10 to $15 for admission, a snack and drink to see at least B quality movies. To me it was worth it, knowing that if I chose not to I didn’t get to see the movie for a long time until it came out on VHS. But not anymore. Now general admission is $10 bucks alone. Throw in parking for $2, popcorn, a soda and a sweet treat for $15 and I’m spending almost $30 for a two hour movie! That’s crazy. Factor in that most of the movies I have seen lately are at the C and D level, plus all the publicity whore pre-madonna actors that make me not want to support their films, and I’ve decided to give the theater going process up. No movie is that important. I’d rather just wait until it comes out in a few months on iTunes or hits netflix or redbox where I can pay $1 to $2 for it and pop my own damn popcorn. In this economy, if I have an extra $30 to spend I’d rather put that money to a nice dinner out with friends, get some new clothes, or hit up a live concert.
The industry is killing itself. And just like the music industry failed to adjust to the changing times once mp3′s hit it bit, the movie industry is failing at the same levels. Another 5 to 10 years and theaters will be dead.
It will NOT go dead. I would bet you $1 million.
I do believe that we are looking at the winding down of a long creative cycle in the movie business, oh heck with popular culture as a whole.It seems that what the movies offer generally looks like a derivative of a derivative of a derivative. A whole lot of films look like and FEEL like something you’ve seen before so the movies are generating a movie ennui.You know,I’d like to see it but I’ll catch it later. So now films have two lives, one at the boxoffice and then another life with sales and RENTALS.Perhaps that latter life is the most significant one these days.An example of a film that did fine at the boxoffice but did even better with sales and rentals is 3:10 to Yuma.Yuma did approximately 69 millions wwboxoffice but then went on to be a great selling DVD in 2008 and a good renter,which is still renting in the top 25 of Netflix’s top 100 renters.So that film has made much more than 100 millions after a theater showing. That is the second life of the film and this film is having a good second run.Also the studio executives green light a sequel to almost anything that appears to be profitable and I do mean anything.Lots of films get made that should not ever ever ever have been made, but there was that chance for a second big win for the studio so they go for it. It appears as if a lot of work time is spent on lining up prestige projects like Your Highness or Killers or Due Date etc;etc;.Now that is truly unfortunate for the film business overall,because that has affected the credability of the enterprise.Afterall what will the next generation of film executives be rebooting?Jackass Five or a couple of hours of pretentious cinematography masquerading as an arthouse genius film? By the way I happened to like Robin Hood…it was one of the few big films I wanted to see.
You DO realize, it take less than a half second to press the space-bar right after a period, right?
“The industry is killing itself. And just like the music industry failed to adjust to the changing times once mp3?s hit it bit, the movie industry is failing at the same levels. Another 5 to 10 years and theaters will be dead.”
——————————————————————
What could Hollywood do that they aren’t already doing in order to “adjust for the changing times”?
And just to preclude any of the usual web 2.0 generic nonsense “they should like, totally update their business model maaaaaaaan” is not an acceptable answer.