Hollywood’s current state of failure and the reasons for it

[batguy]

What a topic. I hardly think I can offer insights not better expressed before but who knows.

I pin it all on the producers. Every last problem can be traced back to them. Scrapping 10 low budget/ moderate return scripts to spend 200 million on a reboot? Hiring a young and promising director and then curtailing their creativity because it might be a little risky? Cramming in diversity not to represent people but because it can get a Screenrant article written about it before you remove it for foreign audiences?

It's all so cold and so calculated. You can feel it. All these issues with the producers just build on themselves. If budgets weren't so high then the pressure to make a billion dollars wouldn't be there. If financial pressure was lessened it wouldn't be such a big deal to take some risks. If audiences were still used to films being risky and unexpected then diversity would be a feature and not a gimmick. But you need inclusion for American audiences but to make a billion you need to cut it out for global audiences and that filmmaker can't be allowed to have final cut because they might make a decision that will cost someone buying a ticket.

We can blame the audience for being dumb sure. That's easy. You can say they only have a TikTok attention span but the fact is they have been driven to this. Why spend $20 to go watch a 2.5 hour reboot that you can accurately guess the complete plot of when you can swipe. It's random and thrilling. The creators are totally free. You might have wholesome puppies one second and a car chase the next. It's unexpected, challenging, and engaging which are all things producers are far to afraid to attempt anymore. Steven and George were lightning in a bottle and because he was largely self financed after the first film I would go so far as to drop Lucas off that list too. The machine is to big and it knows the ledge it has parked itself on. They can't risk a fall.

Totally agree.

Hollywood itself has known for a long time that their giga-tentpole business model isn't sustainable. Spielberg was talking about the problem in an interview like 10 years ago. They just can't seem to break the habit.

I remember having a discussion with a friend years ago that the studios are shooting themselves in the foot by never investing in new talent. Instead of doing another $200m tentpole they could spread out that cash to 10-20 young indie filmmakers and see what they find. If even a couple of those indies are moderate hits then the experiment pays off. And they could make the indies commit to 2-3 picture deals at a fixed cheap salary too, which would further help recoup the cost of the experiment. If they discover the next Spielberg then they will get a couple more movies out of him cheaply before he can start demanding what he's worth.

 

[blewis17]

Harrison Ford sends terrifying warning about Hollywood's creepy tactics

That seems like a LOT for ILM to have done to de-agify Ford, considering the middle of the road final results. Seems there are Deep-fake Youtubers who get similar results with only a fraction of the (expensive) resources.

 

[ghostryder]

https://www.axios.com/2023/08/10/disney-streaming-movies-parks-earnings-iger

 

[batguy]

That seems like a LOT for ILM to have done to de-agify Ford, considering the middle of the road final results. Seems there are Deep-fake Youtubers who get similar results with only a fraction of the (expensive) resources.

Deepfaking holds up deceptively well on internet videos because the resolution is low. It cannot deliver anywher near theater-grade image quality.

But yeah, the future of movie de-aging is probably closer to deepfakes than not. ILM has been doing painstaking CGI reconstructions of the human face and then trying to animate it with motion control dots & stuff. Compared to deepfakes, the ILM work takes a stupid amount of man-hours and the facial expressions still don't look natural enough.

I imagine in another 10 years they will be using some kind of hybrid of the two methods. Maybe they will start with low-res deepfake tech for the baseline/expressions, and then do another software pass to interpolate (fabricate) a higher image quality back onto the deepfaked face.

 

[Paul Andrew]

https://www.axios.com/2023/08/10/disney-streaming-movies-parks-earnings-iger

View attachment 1727633

I think one of the biggest problems with this is there doesn't appear to be any transparency regarding what those re-runs actually made dollar wise, as far as I know anyway.

Presumably the higher residuals are for the episodes that were watched more, or that had more ad dollars attached to their re-runs, but who's to say?

It does seem awfully screwy though.

 

[Psab keel]

De-aging technology is just another symptom of the larger issue. Instead of embracing stories where A list actors can play age appropriate roles they pay millions of dollars to keep them looking young forever instead of recasting, or God forbid, tell a story that doesn't involve them. Like any other trend, so many people want to play with the new toy. When CGI became a regularly used tool it seemed everyone embraced it, even when something like a practical effect could have been used just as well for a fraction of the cost.

I'm not saying AI, CGI, or the like are going to disappear, but when your storytelling capabilities are so limited that they can't conceive of anything outside the existence of a handful of IPs, then you're only going to be able to mine the well for so long before you're forced to come up with something new. The industry is now dealing with the fallout for their complacency. Add in the pandemic, streaming, lower theater attendance, the writers/ actors strike, public tastes changing, the death of the movie star, the rise of influencers as actors, and it's all a recipe for the situation we're seeing unfold now.

 

[Cephus]

Tremors was never successful. That's why it got cancelled after 13 episodes. Nobody watched it. Nobody watches it now. Duh.

 

[Paul Andrew]

Tremors was never successful. That's why it got cancelled after 13 episodes. Nobody watched it. Nobody watches it now. Duh.

That's not the point exactly. Is the show still in reruns? Are ad dollars still being collected to run ads with those reruns? How much? What's the viewership actually like? It's not actually nobody, or it wouldn't still be on somewhere.

 

[batguy]

If that 'Tremors' show was 4x as popular then he would have gotten a check for $12.
If it was 10x as popular then he's up to $30.
It's crap no matter what.

Meanwhile the average 1-bedroom apartment in the northern LA area costs $25-30k/yr.
The average used car price in LA is $31k. Insurance is $3k/yr. Gasoline is $5/gallon.

 

[Cephus]

If that 'Tremors' show was 4x as popular then he would have gotten a check for $12.
If it was 10x as popular then he's up to $30.
It's crap no matter what.

Meanwhile the average 1-bedroom apartment in the northern LA area costs $25-30k/yr.
The average used car price in LA is $31k. Insurance is $3k/yr. Gasoline is $5/gallon.

It was a failed TV show from 2003. I like it, I have it on DVD, but it isn't like it was ever a huge success. I'd say he's lucky he's making anything, considering how few people ever watched it. If he had written Game of Thrones or Stranger Things, he might have a point. He wrote a failed series that nobody has cared about in 2 decades.

He should have done something else since then. If he's relying on a failed TV show that nobody has cared about in 20 years, he's got problems.

 

[Paul Andrew]

It was a failed TV show from 2003. I like it, I have it on DVD, but it isn't like it was ever a huge success. I'd say he's lucky he's making anything, considering how few people ever watched it. If he had written Game of Thrones or Stranger Things, he might have a point. He wrote a failed series that nobody has cared about in 2 decades.

He should have done something else since then. If he's relying on a failed TV show that nobody has cared about in 20 years, he's got problems.

That residual statement is from this March. Clearly it's worth enough to still be in reruns and earning ad revenue for whoever owns it.

You seem to attach a lot of meaning to whether or not a property was good or successful to whether or not the creators of it should be paid for its continued use.

It seems to me that if the property is still making money - however successful it was originally or however much cultural cache it retains since then - then the people who created it should still be getting a meaningful cut.

 

[Captain Dunsel]

https://www.axios.com/2023/08/10/disney-streaming-movies-parks-earnings-iger

View attachment 1727633

Yikes, better get a better agent, my friend.

But there is also a bit of the story missing, there…

How much was the writer paid up-front to write each episode (I am sure that it was not .69 cents)?

Let’s also talk about all the other crew members who worked on each of these episodes produced…the gaffers, the property master, the painters, carpenters, etc….I am sure they are NOT being paid a residual payment for a job they worked on, months or years ago, and only received payment for the project as it was being produced (as most jobs do).

If we are talking about fairness all around for the product produced, why don’t these other jobs receive a cut of the residuals? I guess while we’re at it; these industry workers who don’t receive residuals are being hit the hardest of all….they cannot work while the strike is happening and will likely receive no increased benefit as an outcome when the strikes are inevitably over.

I’m not unsympathetic to the writers and actors, but there would seem to be some details missing in what is being argued about.

 

[batguy]

If he had written Game of Thrones or Stranger Things, he might have a point.

The industry won't survive if only 20 writers can make a living off it in any given year.

This is what the whole strike is about.


The thing is, supply & demand doesn't only apply to ticket prices and CEO pay. It also applies to getting/keeping good employees. The studios are underpaying writers, and they are getting what they paid for!

It's not a coincidence that writing was better in past times when writers were getting paid more. Writer pay isn't the only thing holding down quality these days but it's a factor in it. The low pay has to be costing the profession some talented people, that's just common sense with any profession. And the low pay is a symptom of how little respect & priority the studios put on the job in general - that's the deeper issue.

 

[Lightning]

If we are talking about fairness all around for the product produced, why don’t these other jobs receive a cut of the residuals?

That's an easy one, and there are 2 reasons. Number 1 is that their union didn't negotiate for residuals in their contract. Number 2 is that the reason they didn't ask for residuals is that behind the scenes crew are expected to be able to immediately jump to the next production, while writers know they will have significant gaps between jobs, which will have unpredictable lengths even after being hired.

 

[Cephus]

The industry won't survive if only 20 writers can make a living off it in any given year.

This is what the whole strike is about.


The thing is, supply & demand doesn't only apply to ticket prices and CEO pay. It also applies to getting/keeping good employees. The studios are underpaying writers, and they are getting what they paid for!

It's not a coincidence that writing was better in past times when writers were getting paid more. Writer pay isn't the only thing holding down quality these days but it's a factor in it. The low pay has to be costing the profession some talented people, that's just common sense with any profession. And the low pay is a symptom of how little respect & priority the studios put on the job in general - that's the deeper issue.

But they have to produce things that people want to watch. That's the whole point! You can't complain that you wrote a failed TV show 20 years ago and you can't buy a car from the proceeds. That is stupid. Hollywood is trying to live off of what they did once upon a time, instead of going out and DOING SOMETHING NEW!

Nobody else gets paid for what they did years ago. I mean, sure, I'd love to get a paycheck every time someone opens a software package that I wrote a decade ago, but that's not how it works in the real world.

 

[Cephus]

That's an easy one, and there are 2 reasons. Number 1 is that their union didn't negotiate for residuals in their contract. Number 2 is that the reason they didn't ask for residuals is that behind the scenes crew are expected to be able to immediately jump to the next production, while writers know they will have significant gaps between jobs, which will have unpredictable lengths even after being hired.

Which is why they might have to get other jobs in the interim. You don't get paid for sitting around on your ass, nor should you.

 

[signeddiamond]

While I’m not defending Iger’s actions or compensation package, for those of you calling for his head on a platter, remember that Iger retired back in 2021 and was asked to come back by the Disney board after Chapek’s lackluster performance as CEO…

Sean

Iger built his empire on very shaky ground and the longer it goes on the more you can see it start to fall apart. Simply put it was never sustainable. When your business philosophy is to buy the competition and then just remake your old films eventually you will bleed it all dry.

Damn near every animated film worth mentioning has been live actioned. Brand recognition and a proven story just sitting there. No need to make anything new and watch a billion dollars flow in. Buy Star Wars and tell them to just remake A New Hope and then watch the returns fall from there. Pixar is pressured to make movies that sell toys and if it's something that might fail to do so you can just toss it on Disney+ which all just degrades the brand.

Marvel was an anomaly but even now you can see it start to crumble. Marvel had a gameplan and largely was left alone as long as it made money. Once the Thanos story was over suddenly there needed to be more streaming shows and more diversity and the power creep needs to go to max. Now few people are interested in a product that seems so calculated and corporate just like all the other Disney products.

Iger is a smart guy and knew how to come in and get the machine moving fast. What he wasn't able to do was ensure that the machine was sustainable. You need to make new IPs. New animated movies that you can live action in 20 years. Invest in new creators and new stories rather then just buying the rights to successful old ones.

I like Iger. He gave me a lot of the excitement at the theaters over his tenure but the candle that burns twice as bright lasts half as long. Rumor is he might run for president. If he does I think it would be wise to remember his record. Sure he might blast onto the scene with jobs and roads and profits but can you count on those short term gains?

 

[p51]

Some have already touched on a few points, but here's my take, mostly due to younger crops of writers and studio heads, though some of them have always been the case:

• People try so hard to give props to old movies, they are afraid to make something new
• Studios are not keen to investing in something unfamiliar and never have been
• "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," which explains all the sequels without end
• Movies are written often for what algorithms tell the studios will sell, and the public doesn't always agree
• Studios are so busy telling the public what they want to see, and blaming them when they decide not to show up
• Too strong a focus on trying to not create a furor with anything in the film (read: woke), without anything otherwise compelling
• Studios and writers are so focused on "can we do this," as opposed to, "should we?" I mean in regard to FX-driven films with nothing going for them otherwise
• Along with a lack of life experience to draw from among the current crop of writers/directors/producers, there seems to be really bad writing overall. But in the end, Ralph Waldo Emerson said it best when he wrote, “People do not deserve good writing, they are so pleased with bad.”

 

[Lightning]

Which is why they might have to get other jobs in the interim. You don't get paid for sitting around on your ass, nor should you.

What are these other jobs perchance? Uber Driver? Because I can't think of many that will hire you for a few months knowing you will quit at the end.

 

[Cephus]

What are these other jobs perchance? Uber Driver? Because I can't think of many that will hire you for a few months knowing you will quit at the end.

Whatever it takes. That's how reality works. Just because you really want to write for TV or film, that doesn't mean you're going to get to. Welcome to the real world.