Has Hollywood become too Dependent On Blockbuster films?

Some things don't translate well away from their original producers. Just look at how Hollywood handled The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. They had a huge opportunity and made a hash of it.
 
Vince W said:
Some things don't translate well away from their original producers. Just look at how Hollywood handled The nHitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. They had a huge opportunity and made a hash of it.
Click to expand...

The 2005 film was far from perfect, I love Tom watch it. It’s a bit of a guilty pleasure. And the original Marvin did have cameo in that film.:cool:
 
BAYLOR said:
The 2005 film was far from perfect, I love Tom watch it. It’s a bit of a guilty pleasure. And the original Marvin did have cameo in that film.:cool:
Click to expand...

It's somewhat watchable. The British casting was quite good, but the girl who played Trillian and the fellow they had as Zaphod (Sam Rockman?) were terrible. Also the story was altered too much and muddled. The highlight was the appearance of the original and proper Marvin.
 
To my knowledge, all of the BBC's property from before that date remains theirs; just anything after (until a new (not Conservative) government amends their charter) has to be given away.
 
Narkalui said:
To my knowledge, all of the BBC's property from before that date remains theirs; just anything after (until a new (not Conservative) government amends their charter) has to be given away.
Click to expand...

I would love to see a quatermass tv series , As to who I would like to see produce it? Chris Carter.
 
Cathbad said:
So you mean when they're no longer "blockbusters"?
Click to expand...

That will happen unles they get costs under. Controll. And that another thing that bothers me,Movie studios should be abl le to produce theatrical films for far less.
 
BAYLOR said:
That will happen unles they get costs under. Controll. And that another thing that bothers me,Movie studios should be abl le to produce theatrical films for far less.
Click to expand...
You want it to change? Stop paying $20 to see a movie. It'll change. Personally, I couldn't care less what they pay to produce a movie. I want quality. And that commodity is getting harder to find.
 
Cathbad said:
You want it to change? Stop paying $20 to see a movie. It'll change. Personally, I couldn't care less what they pay to produce a movie. I want quality. And that commodity is getting harder to find.
Click to expand...

Never allowing MIchael Bay produce,write or direct a film ever again would be a good start.
 
Cathbad said:
At what point do you feel making millions will become non-viable?
Click to expand...

Film-making is risky. Historically, most movies lose money or barely break even. The big hits subsidise the many misses. With the growing dominance of blockbuster, studios are making fewer movies, but the ones they make cost buttloads of money. This has mad a risky business even riskier, because the risk is no longer spread around.

When the bombs (and there are bombs) are no longer subsidised by the hits. The studious are playing a dangerous game with blockbusters. If you release five $300 movies in a year, two of them turn a $200 mil profit each, two earn a modest $50 in profit, and one of them bombs for a $200 mil loss, and you still make a healthy profit. But if you have two bombs in a year, you're in big trouble.
 
I've looked... and the one entity not talking about not making more Star Wars films... is Disney.

:p
 
How Disney sees Star Wars:

giphy.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Robert Zwilling Hollywood Writers Go On Strike Technology 0
S Lovecraft and Hollywood H P Lovecraft 9
M Interesting article on what happened to Princess Monokone in the US and the differences in outlook between Hollywood and Studio Ghibli Anime and Animation 7
P Can hollywood hacking be done well? Writing Discussion 11
WaylanderToo Get you some Hollywood! General Film Discussion 2

Similar threads


Back
Top