Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2023 13:50:33 GMT -5
Matt Damon explains:
“The DVD was a huge part of our revenue stream, and technology has made that obsolete. So, the movies that we used to make, you could afford to not make all your money when it played in the theatre because you knew you had the DVD coming behind the release, and six months later you’d get a whole ‘nother chunk. It would be like reopening the movie.”
“a $25 million movie would have to make 100 million dollars before [going into] profit. And the idea of making 100 million dollars [on a mid-budget movie]. It’s suddenly a massive gamble in a way that it wasn’t in the 1990s.”
|
|
chrom
Backup Wench
Master of the rare undecuple post
Posts: 84,713
|
Post by chrom on Jul 8, 2023 17:33:41 GMT -5
Matt Damon explains: “The DVD was a huge part of our revenue stream, and technology has made that obsolete. So, the movies that we used to make, you could afford to not make all your money when it played in the theatre because you knew you had the DVD coming behind the release, and six months later you’d get a whole ‘nother chunk. It would be like reopening the movie.” “a $25 million movie would have to make 100 million dollars before [going into] profit. And the idea of making 100 million dollars [on a mid-budget movie]. It’s suddenly a massive gamble in a way that it wasn’t in the 1990s.” That's a good point, home video sales could turn a profit that the theater didn't make.
But ever since all the streaming stations made in the past decade, most would rather wait until it turns up on there.
|
|
|
Post by BorneAgain on Jul 8, 2023 18:50:23 GMT -5
Between the death of the home video market, overabundance of projects to create content, and shows outright becoming lost media due to a lack of physical release, one could make the argument that even with all its virtues, streaming has done some of the most impactful harm to film and television.
I think the situation is actually fairly nuanced, but that a case can even be made is pretty telling.
|
|
|
Post by Confused Mark Wahlberg on Jul 10, 2023 11:36:13 GMT -5
I wonder if Nolan stating that 'Oppenheimer' has 0 CGI shots will have any impact on slowing down the CGI tsunami for a moment.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jul 10, 2023 13:05:32 GMT -5
I wonder if Nolan stating that 'Oppenheimer' has 0 CGI shots will have any impact on slowing down the CGI tsunami for a moment. I wonder if Nolan has been misquoted or is engaging in hyperbole, given that it was announced almost exactly a year ago that he would be using the VFX studio that has handled the CGI on every Nolan film since Batman Begins. There's absolutely CGI in the movie, but most likely just for things like painting out modern objects in the background of scenes filmed in urban areas and recreating period-appropriate buildings.
|
|
Push R Truth
Patti Mayonnaise
Unique and Special Snowflake, and a pants-less heathen.
Perpetually Constipated
Posts: 39,290
|
Post by Push R Truth on Jul 10, 2023 13:16:25 GMT -5
I wonder if Nolan stating that 'Oppenheimer' has 0 CGI shots will have any impact on slowing down the CGI tsunami for a moment. I wonder if Nolan has been misquoted or is engaging in hyperbole, given that it was announced almost exactly a year ago that he would be using the VFX studio that has handled the CGI on every Nolan film since Batman Begins. There's absolutely CGI in the movie, but most likely just for things like painting out modern objects in the background of scenes filmed in urban areas and recreating period-appropriate buildings. I hope the opening title and credits are pieces of paper and a Sharpie
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jul 10, 2023 13:50:49 GMT -5
I hope the opening title and credits are pieces of paper and a Sharpie Given it's a period piece, I think it would be more than appropriate for them to be done with an optical printer.
|
|
|
Post by Confused Mark Wahlberg on Jul 10, 2023 13:57:31 GMT -5
I think Nolan actually dropped a hydrogen bomb for the sake of authenticity.
|
|
Kalmia
King Koopa
Happy to be here
Posts: 11,679
|
Post by Kalmia on Jul 11, 2023 16:27:01 GMT -5
I think Nolan is probably referring to the difference between CGI and VFX. There will be VFX to enhance the practical effects I'm sure, but the basis of everything is still practical. He's not creating explosions out of nothing on a computer. That's how he usually works on movies, anyway.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,051
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Jul 13, 2023 1:22:26 GMT -5
You would think computer effects would get cheaper over time, but they seem to have gotten way more expensive. The problem is the better effects get the more reliant studios get on them, which is what drives the costs up. Jurassic Park was mostly practical effects with CGI rounding off the rough edges. They had around 20 visual effects artists at ILM handling the CGI. The movie's budget was $63 million ($136 million adjusted for inflation). Jurassic World Dominion is 95% CGI, and had 449 VFX artists across six effects studios credited. It cost $265 million. While I think the CGI in JWD is actually pretty good, Jurassic Park still takes one big pile of shit all over it. Thing is, it's not like they treat the vfx guys, well, like people anyway, they get underpaid and ground to dust following various reports coming out.
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jul 13, 2023 2:24:07 GMT -5
Thing is, it's not like they treat the vfx guys, well, like people anyway, they get underpaid and ground to dust following various reports coming out. Which leads me to believe that the VFX industry is exactly the same as the video games industry – the people making 90% of the money are the ones at the top doing 1% of the work. Somebody's getting paid, but it sure isn't the people working 90 hour weeks rebuilding the third act battle scene for Marvel for the third time.
|
|
|
Post by Non Banjoble Tokens on Jul 14, 2023 1:49:45 GMT -5
The big reason we still haven't made FAN: The Movie is mostly because the budget keeps going over board by someone buying millions of dollars worth of Cream of Wheat. I don't know who keeps buying all of it. Who could even eat that much Cream of Wheat?
|
|
|
Post by BlackoutCreature on Jul 14, 2023 6:59:59 GMT -5
The big reason we still haven't made FAN: The Movie is mostly because the budget keeps going over board by someone buying millions of dollars worth of Cream of Wheat. I don't know who keeps buying all of it. Who could even eat that much Cream of Wheat? Wait, you're supposed to eat that stuff? Damnit, can somebody help me clean out the swimming pool?
|
|
chrom
Backup Wench
Master of the rare undecuple post
Posts: 84,713
|
Post by chrom on Sept 30, 2023 9:37:05 GMT -5
Word is the upcoming live action Snow White movie's budget is 300 million.
This point you gotta believe money laundering is going on.
|
|
|
Post by Ryback on a Pole! on Sept 30, 2023 20:46:08 GMT -5
I can't believe Disney spaffed away a fortune to get Vin Diesel to say "I am Groot" a few times in every movie he's appeared in.
Nobody, absolutely nobody, is going to go and see the movie just because Vin Diesel is in it. He's a shit actor anyway, let's be honest. And since all he has to say is "I am Groot" they might as well have got Clive the Janitor to say it and saved themselves a few million.
|
|
|
Post by Non Banjoble Tokens on Oct 1, 2023 2:32:50 GMT -5
I wish someone would teach me how to properly launder money. I keep putting it all in my dryer.
|
|
|
Post by ace on Oct 1, 2023 8:27:43 GMT -5
The funniest thing about budgets is that cheap equipment has gotten so good that small budget movies look like 50 million dollar movies now. And 300 million dollar movies look like 50 million dollar movies too.
If a filmmaker knows how to make a movie some stuff looks incredible, sure. But that’s true of every budget. If you want your movie to look amazing…spend your money on Roger Deakins not two hours of special effects work that no one cares about and big name actors despite the movie star era being long gone.
And if you want to make real money…you better be investing in a sequel to a proven series (all ten of the top ten grossing movies in the world last year). Hell…if anything Hollywood should be thrilled that original movies are sitting at the top this year. With the asterisk that Barbie and Super Mario are based on like…the most famous properties in the world. And Oppenheimer…but Nolan has always been an aberration unto himself. His name is more bankable than almost any “movie star” at this point.
Long story short…hire Nolan and Deakins and make a 50 million dollar sequel to something and you’ll make a billion dollars. The exact same you’ll make if you spend 500 million on it.
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Snips Has Left on Oct 1, 2023 17:23:25 GMT -5
The Creator looked way better at $80 million than a lot of the $300 million movies released during the summer.
|
|