Im guessing someone has already written an editorial along these lines, but still, Im curious. Last summer, the big theory about future blockbuster films - spurred by a couple quotes, one of them by Steven Spielberg - was that the Hollywood system of pumping out numerous mega-budget tentpoles would collapse when a number of those films tanked in a row. It probably helped that there was an obvious example - The Long Ranger - to point to. Based on what were seeing this summer, though, I wonder if the reality is actually much less melodramatic (and less revolutionary) than that. Captain America: TWS, Amazing Spider-Man 2, Godzilla, and X-Men: DOFP are looking to bring in around $200-260 million. Thats obviously a lot of money, but for awhile now, it seems $300 million was the number that marked something as a bonafide blockbuster, $400 million or more for something that was really hitting the zeitgeist. Theres obviously tons of other factors here - the specific costs of producing and marketing a film, overseas box office, post-theatrical and ancillary revenues. But I wonder how much the current system is going to undergo smaller alterations, crunching numbers to see precisely how much a Sinister Six movie is realistically worth versus just sticking to the Spider-man brand, or considering which of these franchise films need to be dialed back from event films to high-mid-budget projects that can perform well enough based on their fan bases. The numbers point to waning - but still significant - interest in these kinds of films. I guess Im just curious what kinds of box office numbers result in what types of actual changes.
Posted on: Wed, 28 May 2014 20:22:23 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015