Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Finally, a voice of reason about the "slump"

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Community » Film-Yak » Finally, a voice of reason about the "slump" (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Author

Topic: Finally, a voice of reason about the "slump"

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 17775
From: Plano, TX (36.2 miles NW of Rockwall)
Registered: May 99

posted 12-28-2005 04:54 PM

quote: Greg Mueller
Boy I couldn't agree more. Remake after remake, it's like the "writers" forgot how to be creative. Or maybe the creative writers have all died or retired or something.

Agreed, but I think the problem is moreso the suits than the writers. Odds are that there ARE writers out there churning out good scripts, but it's those damned suits saying "oh no it doesn't match our stupid golden formula!!! You need to change this and have that person die and have these two get together at the end and totally kill all originality because it's our formula." [Roll Eyes]

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-28-2005 05:16 PM

Mark J.: The reason "Passion" is singled out as a "boost" is because it got a lot of people into theatres that never (or very rarely) go to movies. "Shrek" brought out the same people that all popular animated movies bring out, so there was nothing unusual about it.

| IP: Logged

Benjamin J. Kepner
Film Handler

Posts: 15
From: Muskegon, MI, USA
Registered: May 2002

posted 12-28-2005 05:31 PM

I think the reason that the exhibitors have been getting hit harder than anything is this... Somehow Hollywood has gotten ahold of some magical "Golden marketing formula of self-destruction" that causes movies to go all balls for the first two weeks (when they get the biggest cut) and then they fall flat off the face of the earth (or straight to video) before the 2nd runs can even make a single red cent off of em.

| IP: Logged

Mike Spaeth
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1129
From: Marietta, GA
Registered: Jul 2000

posted 12-28-2005 11:52 PM

Life goes on. Find ways to maximize profits and move on. The way business is done is not going to change.

| IP: Logged

Greg Anderson
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 766
From: Ogden Valley, Utah
Registered: Nov 1999

posted 12-29-2005 02:21 AM

Once again, it seems like the Oscar race will be all about movies which won't be popular. I expect headlines about the "lowest TV ratings" in the past however-many years, etc.. Average Americans won't care who wins. It's no wonder that Chris Rock and Billy Crystal have already said "No, thank you" to hosting the party in March 2006. (The press tends to write articles blaming the host for low ratings or praising the host for high ratings. [Roll Eyes]

) I'll be surprised if anybody can "rescue" the telecast this time around.

| IP: Logged

Mark Gulbrandsen
Resident Trollmaster

Posts: 16657
From: Music City
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-29-2005 10:07 AM

Well said Greg! I am one of those out there who could care less.

Mark

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 12-29-2005 12:39 PM

I can see the headlines now: "Movie industry has bad year, now low TV Oscar Ratings spell beginning of end"

| IP: Logged

Jesse Skeen
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1517
From: Sacramento, CA
Registered: Aug 2000

posted 12-29-2005 01:11 PM

They should do a live Razzie Awards show- I'd watch that. Sounds like there'll be a lot of competition there this year.

| IP: Logged

Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."

Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001

posted 12-29-2005 07:28 PM

It is a point of debate whether the movie industry is in a slump or not.

However, it is an absolute fact multi-national corporations are deliberately blocking originality, purposefully making the same derivative product. That level of same old sameness extends to the movie posters, trailers and DVD cases. There's good movies out there, but not many releases from major distributors are very remarkable at all.

You can't really corporatize creativity into a dependably predictable commodity. The film distributors and major production companies can try to apply their formulas, and release a larger percentage of sequels, remakes and TV series converts. It's not going to get them very far. My movie going and DVD buying habits have trailed off a great deal.

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Oh Matt... come on! There are thousands upon thousands of extremely talented people working in the film industry.... I can vouch for that since I spent alot of time working in it.

As Brad stated, the talented creative peoplea are not calling the shots. The corporate boardrooms are doing it. And they couldn't figure out how to do a decent job even if someone gave them a map. The fundamental thing is the movie companies must take risks on new ideas. Right now they are risking little. The only reason they're making any kind of living is we have a general public so blissfully stupid they'll just seem to buy anything. But this crap can't go on forever. The music industry is certainly finding out that one.

quote: Mark J. Marshall
Why do we measure box office success by counting dollars instead of total ticket sales?

Because it sounds better in the press. It's all about spin.
[Roll Eyes]

I couldn't care less if a movie hits the $100 million mark, or even manages to do it in a single weekend. Who cares!? BFD!

You can hit the $100 million mark with less than 10 million tickets sold. That's 1 in 30 Americans seeing the movie. Very UNimpressive.

If the idiots in the press would start tracking actual ticket sales, then that slump would appear more real. And more real in the long term -especially when you count ticket sales per capita and compare that to historical sales.

Right now "Titanic" is the box office champ. Another movie could come along and equal its haul with quite a few less tickets sold. If we measured box office champs by tickets sold, "Gone With the Wind" would still be the all time champ. Modern films like "Jaws" and the original release of "Star Wars" would be well ahead of "Titanic."

This difference in spin versus reality is a golden opportunity for any entertainment press outfit. The capability is there to quickly tabulate actual tickets sold, rather than stupid box office gross. Those tickets sold figures can provide a far more realistic figure to see just how Hollywood is doing with its product compared to previous years or decades.

| IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 01-04-2006 02:06 PM

quote: Mike Blakesley
Mark J.: The reason "Passion" is singled out as a "boost" is because it got a lot of people into theatres that never (or very rarely) go to movies.

If that's true... why isn't Hollywood making more of those kinds of movies? Seems to me that there's a target audience there that could be tapped into.

(I already know the answer to this, but it is the obvious question everyone - ESPECIALLY EXHIBITORS - should be asking.)

| IP: Logged

Jeremy Fuentes
Mmmm, Dr. Pepper!

Posts: 1168
From: Corpus Christi, TX United States
Registered: Jan 2004

posted 01-04-2006 03:57 PM

I've said it before, none of this talk really matters. All that matters is how your theater is doing. All the "crap" movies, like King Kong(a matter of opinion BTW) equal good weekends for us. Thats all that matters. Right?

| IP: Logged

Steve Scott
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1300
From: Minneapolis, MN
Registered: Sep 2000

posted 01-04-2006 04:08 PM

For many patrons, "Oscar-nominated" is eponymous for "I will enjoy without thinking about the content" Patrons are told what to see this time of year, and they follow. When the snow melts, then they want the bang for their buck Summer titles to try to pull them away from more worthwhile activities they could be doing in their thawed world.

| IP: Logged

Mike Blakesley
Film God

Posts: 12767
From: Forsyth, Montana
Registered: Jun 99

posted 01-04-2006 04:25 PM

quote: Mark J. Marshall
If that's true... why isn't Hollywood making more of those kinds of movies?

Why do you think Disney pushed the church crowd so hard on "Narnia?"

| IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 01-06-2006 05:08 PM

That's a different kind of movie, Mike. No one had to push people to see Passion. Do you think next year Roger Ebert will be saying that Narnia "boosted" the box office of 2005?

Getting people to go the movies should be the name of the game. The studios who originally shunned Mel Gibson should be following his lead to the bank. But they choose to leave all of that money on the table for some reason.

This week we're treated to that blockbuster "Grandma's Boy" instead.

| IP: Logged

Mike Heenan
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1896
From: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 01-06-2006 05:39 PM

I predict that Ebert will say Snakes on a Plane rescued the box office in 2006. [Big Grin]

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.