Live data from Hacker News

I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

rogerebert.com

261–270 of 287 posts

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#261
post #51

The problem is movies have become too expensive to make. When a movie cost 100-200 million dollars to make, studios believe that to be successful they must make, or more typical take, a brand and develop a movie around that brand. Studios need a brand that ideally people already know that they can franchise into a cartoon, plush dolls, a theme park ride, and 3 sequels in hopes to try and get the 150 million back. Thi…

Movies aren't expensive to make, unless you want to make them expensive. The technology involved has been getting cheaper year after year. Take "monsters" for example. It's a sci-fi movie in the best tradition, that doesn't look low-budget, and that cost less than a million dollars to make.

I think the problem is that studio's have too many incentives to increase budgets and few reasons to trim them. I'm sure they could make the same movies they make today for a fifth of the budget, if they reorganized themselves around doing that.

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#262
post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Kids get bored quicker I bet you walked to school uphill, in both directions, in 3ft of snow in 110 degree heat! Kids never change. You have.

When I was a kid, I could sit and watch movies or TV for hours. Even crappy ones. Now, of course, it has to actually be good. Kids have always had shorter attention spans than adults, though. That's why children's movies are usually just over an hour while adult movies can be 2-3 hours.

I agree. I only posted to comment on the idea that somehow kids these days have gotten worse compared to older generations. The original post mis-attributes the kids getting bored to shorter attention spans, rather than lower quality films.

Take for example

  Snow White and the Seven Dwarves (1937): 84 minutes
  Bambi (1942) runtime: 70 minutes
  Toy Story 3 (2010): 103 minutes
The "kids these days" myth has existed since the dawn of language. People grow up and do not understand they have changed, not the children.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Disney_theatrical_featu...

http://www.disneymovieslist.com/disney-movies.asp

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#263
post #80
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say that like it is some force of nature. Movies don't have to be expensive to make and Ebert specifically called out that the bright spot for 2011 was independent films. You are correct about branding, but the movie studios decided to make these big budget movies. They are gambling big for a big payoff when they certainly could make great movies significantly cheaper. I bet if you looked at studio executives' co…

Thanks for the reply. You are right that movies don't have to be expensive, but I do believe to get the kind of revenue that the big studios want, the studios believe the movies need the big name actors, the explosions and special effects, and 3D. The indies and docs were a bright spot in terms of enjoyment for the movie goes, but I do not know whether the studios believe they are a bright spot or not.

If they did not play accounting games they could pay actors based on movie revenue without increasing upfront costs. However, major studios are setup as cost plus contracts where they get upside on successes and still make money even if nobody sees the movie.

Also, if you look at the actual costs it's not hoard to find advertizing more than 50% of the budget for mildly expensive films. Because advertizing is effectively a huge fixed cost they are incentive to make expensive movies with big stars and or explosions that they can leverage to make their advertizing less expensive.

EX: Jurassic park and Avatar could show Dinosaurs and so did not need big name talent to get people into seats.

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#264
post #3

I guess... and of course I defer to Ebert on all things cinematic... but these are all critiques you could have leveled with equal force in 2002. There've been good years in the preceding decade. Except for 3D. But how much of an effect is 3D having? Most movies aren't 3D. I'll say this: I went to see Super 8 at an old 60's-70's style theater in the far-out suburbs, one almost identical to the ones I saw movies in wh…

> these are all critiques you could have leveled with equal force in 2002 Netflix streaming wasn't around in 2002. This (and similar services) is the biggest factor in theaters losing market share.

Not to mention that tickets were $6 in 2002 and are now $11 where I live.

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#265
post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This video Alamo posted to youtube of an angry customer bitching about getting kicked out for texting is amazing . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1L3eeC2lJZs tl;dwatch: customer: I was texting and you kicked me out; whine whine whine alamo: gtfo and don't come back

Do you believe this is real?

KXAN Austin News believes it is real and interviewed the CEO about it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeMEr_vBzBk

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#266
post #260
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alamo Drafthouse was great last time I was there (crap...6 years ago?). For those of you not fortunate enough to get to Austin, the seating was not regular theater seating, you had some space and a table area for your food and/or bucket of beers. They often showed silly movies like Halloween I, where people will yell out things like "Don't open the door!" There is also wait staff, so you placed an order and they brou…

A surprising number of the old Portland theaters serve beer and food. The one I've been to (haven't visited them all) that serves you at your seat is McMenamin's Mission Theater at 16th and Glisan. I haven't been to Living Room Theaters on 10th, but they serve you at your seat, just not while the show is in progress.

The only McMenamin's theater I've been to is Kennedy school, might have to try out the Mission Theater, will have to look into the Living Room. Also, the Hollywood Theater on Sandy now serves beer, but they only show indie films, so I haven't gotten my wife to go there yet.

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#267
post #181

Wow, it's not because of pirating? Spot on Mr. Ebert. I predict 2012 will magically bounce back because of a few AAA features hitting next year: The Hobbit, Dark Knight Rising, and the incredible Prometheus by Ridley Scott (who is returning to Scifi - finally - after 20+ years).

If the directors of the first two Alien films are returning to sci-fi, I wonder if David Fincher will follow.

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#268
In its most simple and irreducible form, the challenge is this: big-screen movies need to offer an experience so preferable to home viewing (or video games, or TV, or other uses of leisure time) that customers will pay time and ticket prices for it.

That's becoming harder and harder, because all sides of the equation have been getting hit. On the pricing side, it goes without saying that higher prices place a greater burden on entertainment value. But on the entertainment side, we now have a) alternatives (Netflix, video games, etc.) that are increasingly attractive, inexpensive, and readily available, and b) movie offerings that have, at best, held steady in their general entertainment value.

Interestingly, the theater-going experience itself has been improving over the past few decades. But at the heart of it all, customers aren't there for the window dressing; they're there for the content. A juicy piece of IP, such as Harry Potter, would drive people to a run-down shithole of a theater if they had to go -- but conversely, a shitty product wouldn't attract people to the nicest theater ever built. So, while we can all applaud the efforts of theater chains to improve their general offerings -- atmosphere, food, dining, etc. -- we shouldn't believe that such improvements are wholly sufficient, or ever could be. (At worst, if the cost of such atmosphere, ambience, furnishings, services, etc., eventually leaks into the ticket prices, then theaters are making the game even harder for themselves).

In summation, I place the burden for the future of the big-screen movie business primarily on the shoulders of the movie studios. Not the exhibitors. Studios can't keep rehashing the same, warmed-over crap each year and expect anything more than a dice roll from the outcome. They need to place bigger bets with breakthrough IP. They need to wean themselves from the largely mistaken belief that uber-expensive movie stars drive box office attendance (overseas, they do; domestically, there's almost zero correlation). And they need to go all-in on the bets they do place. No more licensing, buying, or developing 100 properties to produce 2. Borrow a page from the Apple product philosophy, and launch only the titles you are dead serious about supporting. Fewer, but better.

Finally, as a whole, the industry needs to stop being so stridently anti-consumer. Enough with the war on piracy, the DRMs, the 50 super-uber-ZOMG-uncensored-platinum-edition releases of every title on DVD and Blu-ray, and so forth. Studios, you are product companies. Focus your time, your attention, your budgets, and your people on your products. And make every product count.

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#269
post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was a kid, I could sit and watch movies or TV for hours. Even crappy ones. Now, of course, it has to actually be good. Kids have always had shorter attention spans than adults, though. That's why children's movies are usually just over an hour while adult movies can be 2-3 hours.

I agree. I only posted to comment on the idea that somehow kids these days have gotten worse compared to older generations. The original post mis-attributes the kids getting bored to shorter attention spans, rather than lower quality films. Take for example Snow White and the Seven Dwarves (1937): 84 minutes Bambi (1942) runtime: 70 minutes Toy Story 3 (2010): 103 minutes The "kids these days" myth has existed since…

I was actually agreeing with that--when I was a kid, I could actually sit through a kid's movie. If kids today empirically can't do that, then maybe they have changed.

Re: I'll tell you why movie revenue is dropping...

#270
post #261
post #51

The problem is movies have become too expensive to make. When a movie cost 100-200 million dollars to make, studios believe that to be successful they must make, or more typical take, a brand and develop a movie around that brand. Studios need a brand that ideally people already know that they can franchise into a cartoon, plush dolls, a theme park ride, and 3 sequels in hopes to try and get the 150 million back. Thi…

Movies aren't expensive to make, unless you want to make them expensive. The technology involved has been getting cheaper year after year. Take "monsters" for example. It's a sci-fi movie in the best tradition, that doesn't look low-budget, and that cost less than a million dollars to make. I think the problem is that studio's have too many incentives to increase budgets and few reasons to trim them. I'm sure they co…

Movies are very expensive to market (average cost in Hollywood is over $20 million in marketing), and a movie _without_ marketing -- virtually regardless of the how much it cost to make -- will do almost no theatrical business at all.

Tarsem's "The Fall" is a great example: the guy spent tens of millions of dollars of his own money making a pretty interesting film, had no marketing, and did just a few million at the box office, despite moviegoers liking the film.

Post reply on HN