Weak summer has studios at a loss

[Grubert]

Deadline Hollywood: June Gloom Consumes Hollywood: The Week That Studios Sought Out Agents

Intensively over the next few days, extending even for the next few weeks, a gaggle of studio moguls and/or their executives have scheduled a series of meetings with top agencies in Hollywood.

Yes, the movie gods are coming down off Mount Olympus in order to soak up the wisdom of the mere mortals who rep the talent. Top agencies like CAA and WME and UTA and ICM are hosting intimate confabs with 20th Century Fox (Tom Rothman and/or Emma Watts) and Warner Bros (Jeff Robinov and/or Greg Silverman) and Universal (Adam Fogelson and/or Donna Langley) and Paramount (Rob Moore and/or Adam Goodman).

That's how seriously this Summer of Discontent has unsettled the studios who are beginning to admit being relatively clueless what to greenlight next now that so many movies aren't clicking with moviegoers. "I have three heads of studios coming into my office. They're completely at a loss about what to do," one top tenpercenter put it bluntly.

So what are the agents going to tell the studios? Here are our writers, here are their pitches and treatments and scripts, here is the originality you should be making instead of numbing predictability. Like, duh. Could this be an opportunity for creativity?

That's what a major producer told my colleague Mike Fleming yesterday: "this sluggish summer might be a blessing in disguise for talent and producers who want to take risks but have been hamstrung for the past two years by studios that have been operating in retreat mode, and looking for the safest bets possible. The lack of originality this summer might get off this safe track and in the mindset to take some risks again, and that would be a good thing."

You know how serious it is when even studio execs wonder if they're being too formulaic.

[Batman1980]

It's just a lull, there have been quite a few blockbusters this year already, Inception is the next one up to bat to rock the box office with explosions.

[Grubert]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Stormcrow

It's just a lull, there have been quite a few blockbusters this year already, Inception is the next one up to bat to rock the box office with explosions.

However, Inception is what most other summer movies are not: original.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Grubert

However, Inception is what most other summer movies are not: original.

Going by the previews and initial impressions yes, feels a lot like Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind or Dark City to me.

[Moviefan2k4]

That's how seriously this Summer of Discontent has unsettled the studios who are beginning to admit being relatively clueless what to greenlight next now that so many movies aren't clicking with moviegoers. "I have three heads of studios coming into my office. They're completely at a loss about what to do," one top tenpercenter put it bluntly.

Oh, I got some great ideas about what they should do...

1) Enough with adding completely pointless buckets of sex, blood, and/or profanity to the majority of films being made today. In truth, 99.9% of movies don't need it; they just serve as ratings boosters for the industry folks who are scared of losing money.

2) Treat your audiences (i.e. the moviegoing public) with respect. We can smell terrible efforts from miles away, and we're not well-known for our extensive patience with idiocy, either.

3) Quit dealing "under the tables" with film ratings, and pushing every boundary to its limit. If you want a PG-13, make a film that actually warrants it. Don't go around like super-greedy morons, purposely manipulating the MPAA to get your own way. Hypocrisy and double-standards suck.

[Holmes]

Originally Posted by Moviefan2k4

2) Treat your audiences (i.e. the moviegoing public) with respect. We can smell terrible efforts from miles away, and we're not well-known for our extensive patience with idiocy, either.

I'm not feeling your other two points, but this seems spot-on enough.

It always comes down to product and a gamble. The studios chose to bet on Shrek #5,000,000, Sex and the City 2, Prince of Persia, etc. and they rolled the dice. It didn't pan out in a big way this time. Nothing permanent, no cause for "THE END IS NIGH!" calls from the industry--just a mild run of films which didn't -electrify- audiences.

To be honest, I feel more and more alienated from the Big Movies. I recognize it's important they turn a profit, of course, but still... I saw Please Give with Catherine Keener and Rebecca Hall this weekend and loved it. As long as I can continue to see films such as it (and An Education, and Greenberg, and The Last Station, and The Road, and A Single Man), I'm pleased. I don't give a sh-t how big The Karate Kid is or how disappointing The A-Team's gross is. Then again, I s'pose there is a connection between, say, Sony Pictures Classics' operating/purchasing budget and how well the big Sony summer films perform.

[Holmes]

Oh, and ballooning budgets are a BIG issue, as far as I can see.

Green Zone cost at least 100m to produce, and then millions upon millions more to advertise. Spending well over one hundred million dollars on a super-political film with a controversial subject moviegoers have time and time again been hesitant to embrace (the Iraq War) is not good business.

Or The Wolfman! ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY MILLION DOLLARS (before prints & advertising!). On a -horror- movie! An R rated horror movie with almost no teen appeal!

On one hand, perhaps it's great for movie fans directors such as Paul Greengrass and actors such as Benicio Del Toro are being given huge budgets to play with on personal-interest projects, but an industry which lets this type of behavior go on (frequently) is doomed to hit a wall. The talent and the suits have to come together and compromise.

[SGRSBSKIER]

Ticket prices could be having an effect as well for all movies.


At my theater I have had a few people ask if some of the 3D movies were showing in 2D and when they found out its only 3D they chose not to see it and regularly get people complaining about it mostly parents. Some areas are charging $15-$20 for 3D. If you don't care about the 3D you can buy the movie for the price of about 1 ticket.

[Moviefan2k4]

Originally Posted by Holmes

Oh, and ballooning budgets are a BIG issue, as far as I can see.

Well, the reason for that (at least with regards to the film industry) is that several years ago, when the suits and studios had the chance to spend their money wisely, they didn't, and now everything's hitting the fan. The same is generally true of almost every big company, in the U.S. and around the world...if you spend what you have foolishly, eventually you'll lose it. For years, Hollywood's spent so much to make and market so much complete garbage...and then, they have the collective audacity to whine and complain when no one goes to see their work. I personally think a large number of people are waking up to the reality of the industry's present state, and their talking with their wallets, to prove a point...useless crap may sell at first, but in the end it always winds up causing more trouble.

[Holmes]

I believe 3-D is going to become an annoyance to more and more people very quickly. It was fun when it was A Christmas Carol and Avatar, but now it's going overboard. I heard they're shooting The Hangover 2 in 3-D, c'mon! They're doing their best to run the gimmick into the ground again.

[Foggy]

Originally Posted by Holmes

Oh, and ballooning budgets are a BIG issue, as far as I can see.

Green Zone cost at least 100m to produce, and then millions upon millions more to advertise. Spending well over one hundred million dollars on a super-political film with a controversial subject moviegoers have time and time again been hesitant to embrace (the Iraq War) is not good business.

Or The Wolfman! ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY MILLION DOLLARS (before prints & advertising!). On a -horror- movie! An R rated horror movie with almost no teen appeal!

On one hand, perhaps it's great for movie fans directors such as Paul Greengrass and actors such as Benicio Del Toro are being given huge budgets to play with on personal-interest projects, but an industry which lets this type of behavior go on (frequently) is doomed to hit a wall. The talent and the suits have to come together and compromise.

Unversal haven't been the most wisest of companies with there money!

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by SGRSBSKIER

Ticket prices could be having an effect as well for all movies.


At my theater I have had a few people ask if some of the 3D movies were showing in 2D and when they found out its only 3D they chose not to see it and regularly get people complaining about it mostly parents. Some areas are charging $15-$20 for 3D. If you don't care about the 3D you can buy the movie for the price of about 1 ticket.

Yes I have seen this happen as well at my theater. A family of four may have other priority then spending $80 on tickets plus drinks and pop corn for a movie no matter how great How To Train Your Dragon is in 3D. Most of Hollywood is a bit out of touch with the everyday reality life of the majority of this world. They live in their big castle and ride they big cars and private jet, they assume everyone as the money to spend for their movies I think. It's not always the case.

[bobuk12]

Let me guess how the conversation is going

"Gentlemen, you'll never believe this startling news. We provided movie fans with blockbuster movies like Karate Kid, The A-Team, The Losers, Killers, Shrek 4, Johan Hex all during summer movie season. Now believe this, this summer is pathetic compared to last summer and the summer before when bigger name and better movies came out?!?!??! I NEED A SERIES OF MEETINGS TO THINK!!!!!"

Let me think for you *******, quit releasing trash. Jonah Hill is going to be trash, Shrek 4 shouldn't have existed, the A-Team is an 80's TV show that should have come out in september or last spring. I have an idea, STOP remaking movies, STOP giving people like Ashton Kutcher the opportunity to make more garbage and let that homo keep making commercials for Nikon.

Hollywood's biggest problem is that they think they know what people want. That must be why they remade the Karate Kid, right????????

Idiots. Sorry I know that was a harsh rant

[EvilGav]

Ticket pricing is a huge issue. In the UK it's £7-8 per movie for an adult (around $12-15 or so), which means that for the price of two of you going to the cinema (excluding all the crap you buy from the candy vendors, actually getting to and from the cinema etc etc) you could buy the Blu on day of release - which will be all of 3 months after the cinema release.

3D is, I suspect, putting off a lot of people as well. As another poster said, who wants to pay a 30% subsidy for a film that doesn't need or warrant 3D ? It's becoming an over-used gimmick and at this rate the studios are likely to kill it off completely.

Movies themselves are a problem. The number of movies being released that aren't a sequel, prequel, reboot, remake or re-imagining are tiny (main-stream here, well aware that there are lots of indie and art-house films that don't fall into this category). What happened to actually producing good, new, original work ? Where are the movie versions of true stories (frequently far more interesting than the fictional works being produced) ? Why does a studio think that a big budget, lots of effects and explosions make a summer block-buster ?

The problem, especially where pre/sequel's are concerned, is that when you get it wrong, you kill off the franchise. X-Men is all but dead, thanks to rushing The Last Stand and then making Wolverine without speaking to anyone with a reasonable concept of the comics it comes from. Superman Returns has killed off that franchise. I'm sure other people can think of more.

Basically, studios need to actually let a producer make something a little more "out-there".

[SixSpeedSamurai]

They probably went away from the meeting saying "we need more 3-D!" "We'll make so much 3-D that after a while, we'll bring back 2-D as the next big thing and charge more for it."

They need to bring the costs down. If it were not for free movie tickets from Kelloggs, there is no way I'd be taking my family to see Toy Story 3 this weekend in 3-D. At least it's only going to cost me $9 this weekend for tickets before snacks and junk.

[retablo]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Stormcrow

It's just a lull, there have been quite a few blockbusters this year already, Inception is the next one up to bat to rock the box office with explosions.

Actually, Toy Story 3 is up next, and it'll be huge. Then Twilight: Eclipse. Plenty of things to rock the box office before Inception.

[opterasis]

Originally Posted by bobuk12

Hollywood's biggest problem is that they think they know what people want. That must be why they remade the Karate Kid, right????????

Idiots. Sorry I know that was a harsh rant

Have you actually seen Karate Kid? I grew up in the 80s, as did all my friends, and I don't know a single person that didn't absolutely love the remake.

Honestly people need to stop with the remake hate. It's over 20 years later, and proof that a remake can be good with decent actors and a decent script. What you need to hate is movies that push out shitty scripts and shitty actors, whether its a remake or an "original" movie.

[jebhdb]

My family likes to play Siskel and Ebert during the previews when we go to the movies. We often decide what we will or won't go and see based solely on that first impression. Studios need to do a better job marketing their films. Often the trailer either gives the whole movie away or totally misrepresents what the film is about. Kick-Ass is an example of a film that I feel could have performed better at the box office if the studios had done a better job of marketing it.

[Ferris]

This isn't an easy problem to fix. Consumers like trends until they get saturated with it. Some reboots were very successful (Star Trek, Batman Begins), so Hollywood saw the trend and is beating it into the ground. A few years prior to that, it was sequels (we're seeing a little revival of that now) and we all got sick of that.

Personally, I think the folks here who mentioned over-marketing of 3-D made a good point. I saw one movie in 3-D (fir part of Harry Potter 6) and thought it was neat, but did nothing to make me feel it added to the theatre experience. Furthermore, there is NO WAY I'm paying a subsidy for it. It's about content to me, not kitsch.

Originally Posted by bobuk12

Let me think for you *******, quit releasing trash. Jonah Hill is going to be trash, Shrek 4 shouldn't have existed, the A-Team is an 80's TV show that should have come out in september or last spring. I have an idea, STOP remaking movies, STOP giving people like Ashton Kutcher the opportunity to make more garbage and let that homo keep making commercials for Nikon.

Idiots. Sorry I know that was a harsh rant

That is the only thing that made the rant harsh, man.

[Gabriel360]

The high price of 3D is not only a problem in that it may turn away potential movie-goers if they can't afford the cost, but also in the fact that if you pay so much to see a movie in 3D, you'll probably not have to the money to see it again. A movie in 2D, however, can get repeat customers with lower prices.