x404.co.uk
http://x404.co.uk/forum/

Hollywood 'scared to take risks' says Hole director
http://x404.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=10751
Page 1 of 1

Author:  paulzolo [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 8:30 am ]
Post subject:  Hollywood 'scared to take risks' says Hole director

Quote:
Joe Dante, famous for 1980s classic Gremlins, says he's proud he managed to complete his latest movie, The Hole 3D.
[…]
"Sometimes you get as far as casting them, you get as far as finding locations and then all of a sudden the money dries up."

It's not how the studio system used to work, the director told Newsbeat.


In summary: Hollywood likes making genre films and films based on TV because it guarantees bums on seats. Don’t expect anything new during the recession either. It will get even more generic.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/11421165

Author:  Amnesia10 [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 10:16 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hollywood 'scared to take risks' says Hole director

Well the studios are finding funding harder than ever because of the financial crisis, and so are playing safe. It had to happen. Film franchises are also a safe bet as far as getting bums on seats.

Author:  HeatherKay [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 10:35 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hollywood 'scared to take risks' says Hole director

It strikes me the studios were playing safe a long time before the "credit crunch" appeared.

Bean counters would never have allowed Metropolis or Gone With The Wind or Blade Runner to be made.

Author:  timark_uk [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 10:43 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hollywood 'scared to take risks' says Hole director

HeatherKay wrote:
Bean counters would never have allowed Metropolis or Gone With The Wind or Blade Runner to be made.
The bean counters very nearly closed Blade Runner down for good. It was only Ridley Scott for the most part that kept the project alive, and it was a massive cinematic flop upon it's initial release.

Mark

Author:  HeatherKay [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 10:48 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hollywood 'scared to take risks' says Hole director

timark_uk wrote:
it was a massive cinematic flop upon it's initial release.


Which kind of makes my point. Hollywood built its whole reputation on being a dream factory. Without that element of risk, we end up with the generic mix of CGI and impossible explosions we get now.

I can't be bothered about going to see a movie in the cinema these days. There don't seem to be any film actually being made that I would want to watch. I may catch one or two on the telly later, even go as far as buying the DVD, but going to see it on the big screen? Nah.

Author:  timark_uk [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 10:54 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hollywood 'scared to take risks' says Hole director

HeatherKay wrote:
timark_uk wrote:
it was a massive cinematic flop upon it's initial release.
Which kind of makes my point. Hollywood built its whole reputation on being a dream factory. Without that element of risk, we end up with the generic mix of CGI and impossible explosions we get now.
Which reinforces the point I was making. (8+D
Without the risks we wouldn't now have films that are benchmarks for cinematic excellence.
I'd say the last Hollywood film I saw that could even possibly fall in to this category would be Moon. It cost $5 million to make and made just over $9 million at the box office.
Now I'd call that a good return, but I'm not sure Hollywood would.

Mark

Author:  Amnesia10 [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 11:09 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hollywood 'scared to take risks' says Hole director

timark_uk wrote:
I'd say the last Hollywood film I saw that could even possibly fall in to this category would be Moon. It cost $5 million to make and made just over $9 million at the box office.
Now I'd call that a good return, but I'm not sure Hollywood would.

Mark

Is that before or after Hollywood accounting? ;)

Author:  paulzolo [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 11:11 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Hollywood 'scared to take risks' says Hole director

Amnesia10 wrote:
timark_uk wrote:
I'd say the last Hollywood film I saw that could even possibly fall in to this category would be Moon. It cost $5 million to make and made just over $9 million at the box office.
Now I'd call that a good return, but I'm not sure Hollywood would.

Mark

Is that before or after Hollywood accounting? ;)


All losses are put against Babylon 5, which made a staggering large pile of money, but was never profitable due to this silly practice.

Author:  pcernie [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 12:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Hollywood 'scared to take risks' says Hole director

Quote:
"You're going to be seeing more genre films, there are going to be more horror films, there's going to be more action movies," he told Newsbeat.


How will we know the difference? :oops:

Author:  Amnesia10 [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 12:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Hollywood 'scared to take risks' says Hole director

paulzolo wrote:
All losses are put against Babylon 5, which made a staggering large pile of money, but was never profitable due to this silly practice.

Yes the writer said that he was billed for some loss in the Congo or other. :roll:

Author:  timark_uk [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 12:55 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Hollywood 'scared to take risks' says Hole director

Amnesia10 wrote:
paulzolo wrote:
All losses are put against Babylon 5, which made a staggering large pile of money, but was never profitable due to this silly practice.
Yes the writer said that he was billed for some loss in the Congo or other. :roll:
What?

Mark

Author:  paulzolo [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 1:29 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Hollywood 'scared to take risks' says Hole director

timark_uk wrote:
Amnesia10 wrote:
paulzolo wrote:
All losses are put against Babylon 5, which made a staggering large pile of money, but was never profitable due to this silly practice.
Yes the writer said that he was billed for some loss in the Congo or other. :roll:
What?

Mark


Quote:
Hollywood accounting is not limited to movies. An example is the Warner Bros. television series Babylon 5 created by J. Michael Straczynski. Straczynski, who wrote 90% of the episodes in addition to producing the show, would receive a generous cut of profits if not for Hollywood accounting. The series, which was profitable in each of its five seasons from 1993–1998, has garnered more than US$1 billion for Warner Bros., most recently US$500 million in DVD sales alone. But in the last profit statement given to Straczynski, Warner Bros. claimed the property was $80 million in debt. "Basically," says Straczynski, "by the terms of my contract, if a set on a WB movie burns down in Botswana, they can charge it against B5's profits.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_ ... g#Examples

JMS wrote:
The show, all in, cost about $110 million to make. Each year of its original run, we know it showed a profit because they TOLD us so. And in one case, they actually showed us the figures. It's now been on the air worldwide for ten years. There's been merchandise, syndication, cable, books, you name it. The DVDs grossed roughly half a BILLION dollars (and that was just after they put out S5, without all of the S5 sales in).

So what does my last profit statement say? We're $80 million in the red.

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts ... ode=source

Author:  timark_uk [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 1:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Hollywood 'scared to take risks' says Hole director

That's scandalous.

Mark

Author:  ProfessorF [ Tue Sep 28, 2010 1:59 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Hollywood 'scared to take risks' says Hole director

But by no means unique.

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/