Substantially fewer films will be produced over the next year or two. And a significant portion of the production costs of the reduced slate will be borne by hedge funds and other investment groups.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
The amount of time you invest in a film is not directly proportional to its success.
In the U.S., it would be so much better if the studios made many more smaller films for niche markets rather than a few tent pole films that swamp cinemas and Hoover up all the funding.
The film business has changed hugely. You seem to spend about 30 per cent of the time producing the films and 70 per cent talking about it.
There will always be big companies making big movies. But making film and distribution is changing in front of our eyes. I'm not sure what the future holds for this industry.
I don't want to commit to too many films, as it would result in getting out of touch with what is happening in the industry.
I think there are more films being made, but there are probably less outlets for them and distributors.
I think, on a larger note, that filmmakers and studios should start to tuck it in a little bit, because films wouldn't have the pressure they have if the word wasn't out about how expensive they were.
Because of the way tech is changing, and becoming cheaper and user-friendly, it's becoming easier to make films cheaply, maintaining quality.
It costs so much to make films. With a novel, you can write the whole thing on a ream of paper from Staples for $4.
We have so many films that we can fit into the slate a year, and we spend $100 million on those films in order to make $400 million dollars. We don't spend $20 million in hopes of eking out $40 million.