Spielberg Predicts 'Implosion' of Film Industry

Discussion in 'TV & Media' started by Lyon_Wonder, Jun 13, 2013.

  1. Lyon_Wonder

    Lyon_Wonder Commander Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2004
    http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/steven-spielberg-predicts-implosion-film-567604

    Steven Spielberg on Wednesday predicted an "implosion" in the film industry is inevitable, whereby a half dozen or so $250 million movies flop at the box office and alter the industry forever. What comes next -- or even before then -- will be price variances at movie theaters, where "you're gonna have to pay $25 for the next Iron Man, you're probably only going to have to pay $7 to see Lincoln." He also said that Lincoln came "this close" to being an HBO movie instead of a theatrical release.

    George Lucas agreed that massive changes are afoot, including film exhibition morphing somewhat into a Broadway play model, whereby fewer movies are released, they stay in theaters for a year and ticket prices are much higher. His prediction prompted Spielberg to recall that his 1982 film E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial stayed in theaters for a year and four months.
     
  2. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    Well I would agree with the first point that some high production cost films will flop at the box office. As for the second point about variable ticket prices can't see that working. Not if the top end is as high as say US$25, the question is what price is the consumer willing to pay. Do they say want to pay US$25 to see it once or wait until it comes out on Blu-ray and pay a similiar amount to see it any time they want.

    Sure a core audaince might pay US$25 but would the average movie goear pay that price what mount families US$100+ to see a film. Though they may start off with high prices and as the weeks go by reduce the rpice, though that wouldn't work either just wait x weeks and see it at the cheaper price.
     
  3. Jax

    Jax Admiral Admiral

    Movie budgets are out of control and I do wonder where all this money really goes. The top stars are over paid, needless CGI at times, wasteful expensive post 3D conversions, bloated length times, poor unfocused marketing, which doesn't try to use free media enough.

    The gaming industry is having similar issues with bloated AAA budgets and wasteful marketing.
     
  4. sojourner

    sojourner Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Location:
    A Long Time Ago...
    Lucas' point runs completely contrary to evidence as pointed out by Spielberg's example. movies are staying in theatres for ever shorter periods and coming to retail markets (BR, dvd, on demand) ever faster. What incentive would a theatre have to keep a movie after most of the audience has moved on?
     
  5. cardinal biggles

    cardinal biggles Full of Country Goodness and Green Peaness Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2001
    Location:
    potrzebie
    They're always predicting this. Every time some big-budget expected blockbuster tanks (i.e., Last Action Hero, Waterworld, John Carter), a bunch of Very Wise People -- industry analysts, film scholars, or in this case a pair of high-profile director/producers, ironically the same two who got the snowball rolling 40 years ago with Jaws, Star Wars, and Close Encounters -- come along and talk about how the model is unsustainable and exhibition methods will change, and you'll see more inexpensively-produced indies come to the fore... and it never really happens.
     
  6. Guy Gardener

    Guy Gardener Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2000
    Location:
    In the lap of squalor I assure you.
    The audience hasn't moved on, they're all saving up to buy 50 dollar tickets.
    You'd have to suspend DVD releases for this model to have any relevance.
     
  7. stj

    stj Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2006
    Location:
    the real world
    Honest accounting would change the industry beyond recognition.

    A string of flops? Not so much. Part of the budgets are fictions, designed to inflate supposed costs, to hide profits, i.e., falsify monies that are supposed to be shared. Much of it never leaves the studio. Plus the ancillary revenues from television rights and DVD sales can be substantial. Plus the hit/flop distinction in popular reporting still tends to ignore foreign box office. So some movies that are supposedly huge flops, such as Alexander, still end up making money.

    What can (and will) happen, is basically borrowing short (to make blockbusters) and lending long (not making a profit for three years.) But will it happen to enough studios at the same time so that the whole system collapses? Seems doubtful.
     
  8. CorporalClegg

    CorporalClegg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    Location:
    Land of Enchantment
    It all really depends on whether or not theatres can "up the ante" when 3D TVs become ubiquitous. If they can't, in turn, make IMAX much more accessible, something will have to change.
     
  9. Harvey

    Harvey Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2005
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    I think most of their predictions about theatrical exhibition are pretty far-fetched, but the one thing of note here is that Lucas and Spielberg are not making the typical claim that inexpensive, independent films are going to come to the fore after a number of tentpoles come crashing down. Theatrically, the small and medium sized movies are disappearing, and the fact that influential filmmakers like Lucas and Spielberg can barely get their smaller projects into theatres doesn't point to any change in that trend.

    (Meanwhile, a name like Steven Soderbergh with Michael Douglas and Matt Damon as talent, can't seem to secure funding for theatrical release).
     
  10. Kegg

    Kegg Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2009
    Location:
    Ireland.
    ...in America. Behind the Candelabra is having a theatrical run here in Ireland and probably elsewhere. Not sure what the story is behind that, possibly the deal with HBO was only for American TV?
     
  11. Harvey

    Harvey Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2005
    Location:
    Los Angeles, California
    Oh, yeah. The deal probably only covers domestic territories (i.e. the United States and Canada). Sorry for being a bit Amero-centric, but hey, it's the American way? :p

    Soderbergh addressed why the movie premiered on television stateside, rather than in theatres, in a recent talk:

     
  12. tighr

    tighr Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2011
    Location:
    California
    I think you'd find that the market would have a high tolerance for paying more to see big budget films. Especially if this paradigm also delayed release of the films on physical media, or if prices of disks were tied to budgets.

    I think far more likely, though, will be the emergence of boutique theaters. People will pay more to sit in a nice theater with leather seats, dinner, drinks, etc... A place where "no cell phones" is actually enforced, and where you can get an experience unparalleled from home. I have a 124" projector screen in my living room, so I only go to the theater to see films that are truly worth the theatrical experience these days. Everything else can wait for BD, where I can pause my movie to go refill my wine/beer or flip over my steak on the grill.
     
  13. CelticViking

    CelticViking Lieutenant Junior Grade Red Shirt

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2013
    One of the big changes in recent years was the borrowing of monies to fund movies from banks/creditors at very high interest rates, thereby leading to shorter post production times to make sure the money was rolling in before the interest rates get punitive.

    This has all but killed practical effects in favour of computer generated ones.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY_63Dlj83g

    This is a tremendously enlightening interview on this very subject.
     
  14. Third Nacelle

    Third Nacelle Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2013
    Location:
    The Denorios Belt
    I think just the opposite. The audiences for big budget films are mostly teens and younger people. People without a lot of money. I can however see people shelling out more for low-budget films that appeal to a niche audience.

    Already, I usually pay about twice as much to see an indie film at a small theatre than I paid to see Into Darkness at the megaplex.
     
  15. FPAlpha

    FPAlpha Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Location:
    Mannheim, Germany
    And that's exactly why high prices are very unrealistic these days.

    Everytime buddies and me go to the movie we kind of feel ripped off by the ticket alone.. especially if it's 3D and there's absolutely no need for it.
    Case in point Iron Man 3.. there exactly one sequence in the movie that works in 3D and it's about 1-2 minutes long but i still pay the markup for the 3D (and there was no 2D version at the time) for the whole movie.

    Together with other unpleasantries like dirty floors (seriously people.. why is the floor looking like a warzone everytime the movie is over?), cellphone idiots, people who take their small kids to the movies to save up on the babysitter etc. it's no wonder people tend to skip the theater and wait for the video release so they can comfortably sit at home on their comfy couch, enjoy reasonably priced junk food and soda and have some friends over.

    Specialty theaters like you mention sound good but the ticked prices would be insane.. it would have to be comparable to theater or opera prices and who wants to pay upwards of 50 bucks for a movie they don't know if it's good (granted.. if it's an unknown play or the actors are crap you run the risk too).

    So no.. variable movie prices won't work. The studio just need to stop having inflated production costs. I get why a big budget movie like Avengers might break the 200 million mark with so many name actors and high investment costs for everything around it but today it seems it became the norm to break the 100-150 million mark for movies where i actually don't see a difference visually to a movie that cost half of it.

    So stop moaning and get us quality movies and we will gladly pay to see it.. give us crap and we'll maybe rent the video or wait until it's aired for free on TV in about 2-3 years.
     
  16. Starkers

    Starkers Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2001
    Location:
    Behind enemy lines
    As others have said, I can actually see the reverse being true...
     
  17. MacLeod

    MacLeod Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Location:
    Great Britain
    Just out of interest what do people pay in the US for cinema ticket these days?
     
  18. Vendikarr

    Vendikarr Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 17, 2001
    Location:
    Vendikarr
    The last time I went I paid $10 per person for a matinee rate for Into Darkness (3D). The theater didn't have a 2D option and I didn't know that going in.
     
  19. JoeZhang

    JoeZhang Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
  20. RandyS

    RandyS Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2007
    Location:
    Randyland
    Exactly. What they're saying now is along the same lines as what was said 36 years ago when Star Wars and Close Encounters "mad movies fun again". This is nothing new.