« Klady's Sunday Estimates | Main | Who Will Win The Critics' Choice Awards Tonight »
January 09, 2006
Looking At The Business Of 2005
"But don't forget the big picture. The prices at theaters may be as high as they can go for a while without diminishing returns. Ads might have to follow formalized agreed-to rules like trailers so people can anticipate and avoid (if they like) in-theater ads… or at least let ticket buyers know that they have been heard. And home delivery systems must keep expanding, just as anti-piracy measures must.
But what makes the film business unique from TV or the music business is the cost of production, the amount of money earmarked for marketing and theatrical distribution. One of these things can be adjusted if there is the will… another can really not expect to change too much realistically… and the third is the driver for the whole shebang."
Posted by poland at January 9, 2006 10:25 AM
Comments
Some people will not let this slump talk die. Now if 2006 is less than 2005 it will be a story.
Posted by: BluStealer ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.mcnblogs.com/thehotblog/nav-commenters.gif)
at January 9, 2006 12:12 PM
I predict 2006 will be slightly above 2005 but not near 2004. This year doesn't have Shrek 3 AND Spiderman 3.
Posted by: KamikazeCamelV2.0 at January 9, 2006 10:46 PM
Can't everyone just look at 2004 as a great one of a kind year and not something that should be aspired to yearly or the year is a failure?
Posted by: Bruce at January 10, 2006 06:03 AM
2004 was a great year, but in the business world its all about growth. So yes, a downturn is technically a slump (although it should last longer than just one year to be labeled such). Personally, slump talk is a good thing, because it will force the studios to reevaluate the crap they put out and perhaps invite the next Coppola or Scorsese to make a masterpiece.
Posted by: palmtree at January 10, 2006 10:35 AM
Palmtree is making a point I've been trying to hammer home to the fanboys.
For at least 8-10 years Hollywood has relied on franchises, remakes and sequels. That practice is doing for Hollywood what "Employee Pricing" did for Detroit.
These days a studio won't nurture a "Sixth Sense" or "Something About Mary" into a long-running hit. That is caused by the need to please Wall Street. Why build value for the long term when there's easy money to be made in the next Star Wars episode or Harry Potter book? High profits at low risk, accompanied by tons of hype.
Nobody in the Liberal Media will dare admit that they're conning the public. After all, the Liberal Media poured on the hype for "King Kong" and felt chagrined when it came up short. [There is a real-life parallel in how the media reported that West Virginia mine disaster.]
Summer '05 was a shock to most industry types but not to this moviegoer. I actually went over a month between movies because there was so little out there with any appeal. It was easy for me to avoid "Star Wars Episode 3" -- I fell asleep in "Episode 2". Come Thanksgiving/Xmas and the pattern repeated itself. I didn't need to see Harry Potter 4 because I fell asleep in Harry Potter 3.
Posted by: Chucky in Jersey at January 10, 2006 05:41 PM
I think the Detroit analogy is a good one, with basically a monolithic industry that has very little incentive to change except from leaner meaner competition (independents, foreign, etc.).
I'm not sure though how the liberal media played into King Kong, which had a decidedly conservative viewpoint. But yes, the hype machine does seem oblivious to reality.
Posted by: palmtree at January 10, 2006 09:30 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)