The predictable success of a movie’s depend on the budget specially. The days are gone when people make a movie hit or popular by it’s story. Now people pay their attention to the movie where a super star acting as a hero.
Big Budget Movies Earn More
The predictable success of a movie’s depend on the budget specially.
That said, there's tons of films that don't work under this model like John Carter, Edge of tomorrow, and 47 Ronin. Here's a fun list!
The days are gone when people make a movie hit or popular by it’s story.
All said, I'd say people have always been easily entertained by spectacle. If this weren't true then Buster Keaton would have had a totally different career.
Now people pay their attention to the movie where a super star acting as a hero.
Bottom line, marketing is probably the most powerful driving force to a films success or failure.
__________________
I will say if a big star is attached it will make a difference.
Stick Jennifer Lawrence in it and you're almost guaranteed an audience and to make some fast cash.
But it's certainly not all the time that a big budget or big star will make a big profit.
Paranormal Activity was made on a budget of 15k... and it's total profit was something sill like 25,000 times what it cost.
That means an independent movie that's not actually that good, with a budget that my own children could afford, is more successful than the likes of Harry Potter, Avatar, even the Star Wars Saga.
As BB said above, John Carter is a prime example of big budgets making no return at all.
Waterworld is another, in 1995 Waterworld cost $350m if you include marketing etc... in today's money that's a budget of around $800m. Waterworld was a monumental flop.
The major problem with movies these days is reused ideas and remakes.
An example: Insidious is just Poltergeist wrapped around in a different cast.
Stick Jennifer Lawrence in it and you're almost guaranteed an audience and to make some fast cash.
But it's certainly not all the time that a big budget or big star will make a big profit.
Paranormal Activity was made on a budget of 15k... and it's total profit was something sill like 25,000 times what it cost.
That means an independent movie that's not actually that good, with a budget that my own children could afford, is more successful than the likes of Harry Potter, Avatar, even the Star Wars Saga.
As BB said above, John Carter is a prime example of big budgets making no return at all.
Waterworld is another, in 1995 Waterworld cost $350m if you include marketing etc... in today's money that's a budget of around $800m. Waterworld was a monumental flop.
The major problem with movies these days is reused ideas and remakes.
An example: Insidious is just Poltergeist wrapped around in a different cast.
__________________
Rodent's Reviews: Delivering The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly In Film
Rodent's Reviews: PART DEUX!
Rodent's 1950-Present Sci-Fi And Futuristic Fantasy Movies
Rodent's Reviews: PART DEUX!
Rodent's 1950-Present Sci-Fi And Futuristic Fantasy Movies
Resident Evil: Retribution was my one-pointer
X
Favorite Movies
Leading on from success to do with budgets, can anyone explain to me why Hollywood does this? For example, why do studios pump $100 million+ into a loud and dumb blockbuster with a ridiculous concept which will invariably make a loss? Why not take that money and split it 5 or so ways into intriguing concepts by directors with unique visions? Apart from being much more economical and not putting all their eggs in one basket, it would probably earn then more in the long run.
I understand that franchises like The Hunger Games are guaranteed to make gargantuan sums of money now so Hollywood are going to split them up into two parters like the cash hungry cows they are. But what about those new concept films with huge budgets? Well, I say new concept, but I'm referring to movies like Hercules starring Dwayne Johnson or Pompeii by Paul W.S. Anderson.
Why do those types of movies get so much financing? Quite a lot of them bomb. And would it not be possible to market the less expensive films in a more commercial way, thereby attracting crowds of fans who might actually get treated to a good movie?
Just something I don't understand about the studio system. I also can't fathom why studios tamper with directors' visions as it is a rare occasion where the former makes the film better for this and fans are always wanting to see directors cuts.
I understand that franchises like The Hunger Games are guaranteed to make gargantuan sums of money now so Hollywood are going to split them up into two parters like the cash hungry cows they are. But what about those new concept films with huge budgets? Well, I say new concept, but I'm referring to movies like Hercules starring Dwayne Johnson or Pompeii by Paul W.S. Anderson.
Why do those types of movies get so much financing? Quite a lot of them bomb. And would it not be possible to market the less expensive films in a more commercial way, thereby attracting crowds of fans who might actually get treated to a good movie?
Just something I don't understand about the studio system. I also can't fathom why studios tamper with directors' visions as it is a rare occasion where the former makes the film better for this and fans are always wanting to see directors cuts.
X
Favorite Movies
My theory on the reason why things have changed this way in fact the advance of technology. During the 90s spectacular CGI imagery became possible, and it opened up a whole new world, and lead to films such as Terminator and The Matrix etc. The Hollywood realized that all they needed was this new toy in order to get people to the theaters, and that they didn't really need a 'story'.
Back in the old days there wasn't any of these, and all they could focus on is the script and acting. That was natural, and that was mainstream.
Now the mainstream has changed and the generation has changed, and popular movies have turned into big-budget messes with a bunch of meaningless explosions. Marvel is trying hard to add good story and acting to these kinds of films, but its true that the amount of rich, complex films have reduced significantly.
I've learned to adapt to the new films a bit, but there's a reason why I usually watch old films.
Back in the old days there wasn't any of these, and all they could focus on is the script and acting. That was natural, and that was mainstream.
Now the mainstream has changed and the generation has changed, and popular movies have turned into big-budget messes with a bunch of meaningless explosions. Marvel is trying hard to add good story and acting to these kinds of films, but its true that the amount of rich, complex films have reduced significantly.
I've learned to adapt to the new films a bit, but there's a reason why I usually watch old films.
X
User Lists
Leading on from success to do with budgets, can anyone explain to me why Hollywood does this? For example, why do studios pump $100 million+ into a loud and dumb blockbuster with a ridiculous concept which will invariably make a loss? Why not take that money and split it 5 or so ways into intriguing concepts by directors with unique visions? Apart from being much more economical and not putting all their eggs in one basket, it would probably earn then more in the long run.
The problem with moderate budget films is you still have to spend $40-60 million on marketing and that will put a film that was reasonably budgeted into a $100 million budget and those can really hurt if you're only making $80-100 million back.
Basically it's safer financially to back 10 Transformers per year than to back 50 The Transporter's.
Check this search out for more. Also, Steven Soderbergh talked about this in his "I'm sick of Hollywood" speech he made last year. I can't find it, but I'm sure others on the site can.
“Why do you wanna fight?” says Adrian. “Cause I can’t sing or dance,” replies Rocky. Perhaps this exchange epitomizes the reason for the classic boxing movie’s success and overwhelming cult status. It provided a cinematic classic for a largely male audience who needed a hero; one that wasn't heroic because of his moon walk or falsetto, but for his fighting spirit. With a budget of $1 million, Rocky notched up an impressive worldwide gross of $225 million, giving a percentage return of over 11,000%. Knockout.