I saw an article that the movie “I.S.S.” made 1.2 million this opening weekend. I’m no movie expert but I’m guessing it cost a lot more than that to make.
Not trying to make an argument about whether they’re good or not, but it seems that the last 4 or 5 WB/DC Super Hero movies bombed hard, too. How does WB continue to make movies if each one makes less than it cost??
In: Other
Like Mattress Factory, you only need one sale to cover the lack of sales. It still may or may not be a money laundering front.
Studios also don’t spend as much on movies as they like to say. Often times there are tax credits and endorsements that help keep the cost down. Apple famously pays a lot for not only the Heroes in movies to use IPhone but for the bad guys to use non-iphones.
Overseas and VOD and streaming make up the bulk now.
Fun fact – There was a brief period in the 1980s when demand for VHS rentals was so strong that literally almost *any* movie made money. Guys like Andy Sidaris THRIVED then.
Something other people haven’t mentioned is that movies don’t only make money via their cinema tickets, direct sales and streaming.
There is also merchandise sold, leasing character rights, reusing the music and images for other media (sometimes chargeable), and lots of other things.
When Disney released the “live action” The Lion King, there was even speculation that its real purpose was as an advertisement for the digital technology to produce realistic looking movies. Disney will sell the technology developed to other studios (as well as businesses of other types).
There’s lots of movies and TV series that the studios thought would be mediocre but end up being huge hits and eventually cult classics.
So they often need to just jab a stick at a movie and see if it ends up being a flop or a success.
The math doesn’t work out a lot of the time because you’re only looking at the box office. Which is an important thing, but it’s not all of it. Every single DC super hero film that has ever been released has been profitable. Some of them were not as profitable as they hoped. Like the last year of films haven’t been that great. But then Black Adam ended up being the most profitable movie of last year. These superhero movies have proven to be fairly resistant to box office failures because they can be monetized in so many other ways…. because ultimately if they bomb people still seem to want to watch them on VOD or stream…. or add them to a collection.
But that’s not to say they’re all like that. In the 80s there was a cinema crash and into the late 80s and early 90s. Studios and production companies left and right were going bankrupt and selling off everything to the highest bidder. Just too many of these studios and production companies had flop after flop after flop. Actor salaries were skyrocketing to the point where the only movies that made money were the ones with large special effects budgets and low actor budgets.
The crash of the late 80s/early 90s created the giant entertainment monopoly we have today. This new monopoly is a lot more resistant to the failures of the 80s. The four big studios have their hands in movies, TV and streaming. Disney owns three big theme parks. Most of these companies have a separate production and distribution company. They all have children’s and adult programming. They all own small “indie” production companies. And each of them has an investing sector (financial) which grows rapidly.
No one knows what it would take for Disney to collapse. They’ve had a year of box office flops, reduced Disney+ revenues and lower theme park revenue.
It made 1.2 million in its first day (opened in 2,500 theaters). The movie will be in theaters for longer and in more theaters. In the first week it made $3million. It cost $13.8 million to make (unsure if that includes the advertising budget, but think it might). After 1-2 months it will make quite a bit more than $3 million, then when it goes international it will make more, then when they sell DVDs or licenses it to Netflix or whoever, they’ll make more.
Probably not going to be a huge profit (unless it wins a ton of awards and gets a 2nd wind of turn out) but not a huge loss either, and when a movie does get a huge profit, the studio wins.
Its exactly the same as publishing… one hit film or novel makes up for all the losses from the flops.
Hollywood accounting; They pay themselves for the services they provide to distribute the film from the film’s budget. This is not considered profit.
I.e Movie Co pay Movie Co productions $100m to make a Movie
Movie Co pay Movie Co Distribution $100m to distribute the Movie. The cost to make the Movie is $200m, but flops and only makes $100m. Movie Co loat £100m
However the Movie cost Movie Co Production $10m to make and Distribution only cost Movie Co distribution £1m.
Movie Co are given tax relief due to lack of profit and Movie Co Productions and Movie Co Distribution are sat in some tax haven.
Movie Co Productions and Movie Co Distribution are owned mostly by Movie Co shareholders.
Also consider that the movies they made are always bringing in money forever. A movie may have been a big hit and earned them a billion on release, but for the next 4 decades earn them millions and millions every year.
Latest Answers