• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Denis Villeneuve on HBO Max move: "AT&T has hijacked one of the most respectable and important studios in film history"

sol_bad

Member
Underground, Red Notice, The Gray Man (200M+). The Irishman also cost $159M.

Do you mean 6 Underground? That came out last year and there is absolutely no news of a sequel yet. And it was meant to be set up as a franchise.

It's going to be another year until The Gray Man gets released. Two year time frame between big budget films for a single studio is pretty poor and shows that streaming is not good for these big budget titles.

Red Notice, originally a Universal film but they palmed it off to Netflix. Generally when a major studio palms something off to Netflix it's a bad sign. Remember Cloverfield?

And Netflix seemed to have ignored Scorceses next film even though Irishman was a critical success. Is it because of the high budget?

These examples just show even more that streaming is just not sustainable for big budget films. If Netflix were pushing out 2-4 150-200 million dollar films a year you could argue that streaming is a way to go but they aren't. Instead they are pushing out 50 low budget offerings a year.

And if theatres die in America, what we have on Netflix right now, as in original offerings, will become the standard in entertainment. Low quality, low budget efforts.
 
Do you mean 6 Underground? That came out last year and there is absolutely no news of a sequel yet. And it was meant to be set up as a franchise.

It's going to be another year until The Gray Man gets released. Two year time frame between big budget films for a single studio is pretty poor and shows that streaming is not good for these big budget titles.

Red Notice, originally a Universal film but they palmed it off to Netflix. Generally when a major studio palms something off to Netflix it's a bad sign. Remember Cloverfield?

And Netflix seemed to have ignored Scorceses next film even though Irishman was a critical success. Is it because of the high budget?

These examples just show even more that streaming is just not sustainable for big budget films. If Netflix were pushing out 2-4 150-200 million dollar films a year you could argue that streaming is a way to go but they aren't. Instead they are pushing out 50 low budget offerings a year.

And if theatres die in America, what we have on Netflix right now, as in original offerings, will become the standard in entertainment. Low quality, low budget efforts.

The Irishman, Triple Frontier and 6 Underground came out last year. Now, don’t forget the $100+ productions of The Crown and Stranger Things. Netflix also paid $100M for Seinfeld’s 23 Hours To Kill. Guess how many $100M+ movies Warner Bros had last year. 4. So, Netflix had more 100M+ productions last year than WB and Sony. Disney had 9 across the MCU and the Walt Disney movies.
 

sol_bad

Member
The Irishman, Triple Frontier and 6 Underground came out last year. Now, don’t forget the $100+ productions of The Crown and Stranger Things. Netflix also paid $100M for Seinfeld’s 23 Hours To Kill. Guess how many $100M+ movies Warner Bros had last year. 4. So, Netflix had more 100M+ productions last year than WB and Sony. Disney had 9 across the MCU and the Walt Disney movies.

You can't really change the argument from movies to TV shows, the topic is on theatrical movies. If you want to look at TV as well then you'd have to look at what Warners TV division and HBO produce. For Disney you'd have to look at Disney/ABC/FX for their TV divisions.
 

FunkMiller

Member
Well, Denis, maybe some of you cunts could have done something about the terrible movie going experience we’ve all had for many, many years, and the endless parade of lacklustre movies that have been shown at them.
 
You can't really change the argument from movies to TV shows, the topic is on theatrical movies. If you want to look at TV as well then you'd have to look at what Warners TV division and HBO produce. For Disney you'd have to look at Disney/ABC/FX for their TV divisions.
Actually, I can because they are all productions that Netflix is putting money in. There is no reason to not include them.
 
Well, Denis, maybe some of you cunts could have done something about the terrible movie going experience we’ve all had for many, many years, and the endless parade of lacklustre movies that have been shown at them.
This also. Going to the movie theatre can be a terrible experience. The reality is that fewer and fewer people are going to the cinema in developed countries.
 

FunkMiller

Member
This also. Going to the movie theatre can be a terrible experience. The reality is that fewer and fewer people are going to the cinema in developed countries.

I find it very hard to feel much sympathy for a bunch of whining multimillionaires who were quite happy to benefit for years off of gross profits made at the expense of the movie going public’s enjoyment.

More than happy for cinema as a wide spread medium to die a death, and become a niche market for those that still want it.
 
Last edited:

MacReady13

Member
As someone who refuses to watch Dune outside a theatre, a reminder that those night outs are still available.

Wonder Woman, for example, will still be showing in many a theatre this month ready for your family or date with the popcorn, drinks, and the works. The streaming option should be there given the circumstances, because we are not in everyday life anymore.

It’s what precedent this sets for the future. And I really don’t like it. And contrary to what SOME may think, it isn’t about the money for MOST artists. It’s about their vision being compromised.
 

OrtizTwelve

Member
Until the Covid pandemic and hysteria simmers down and goes away, movie theaters are dead for the foreseeable future. Probably another 1 or two years.

Streaming is the only logical option for the time being. The majority of movies that come out of the major Hollywood studios are garbage anyways, and don’t need a theatrical release.

Movie theaters will continue to exist but likely in much smaller numbers and become more formal and exclusive venues, sorta like an upscale lounge — like they were in the 1930s to 1950s.
 
Last edited:

oagboghi2

Member
It’s what precedent this sets for the future. And I really don’t like it. And contrary to what SOME may think, it isn’t about the money for MOST artists. It’s about their vision being compromised.
You can lead a horse to water...
I find it very hard to feel much sympathy for a bunch of whining multimillionaires who were quite happy to benefit for years off of gross profits made at the expense of the movie going public’s enjoyment.

More than happy for cinema as a wide spread medium to die a death, and become a niche market for those that still want it.
The funny thing is that no one is losing anything. You can still go the theatres.

So why does it matter so much to directors that everyone pay 20-35 bucks a ticket?
 
Last edited:

sol_bad

Member
So why does it matter so much to directors that everyone pay 20-35 bucks a ticket?

It's logic.
Less people at the cinemas. Less money at the box office. Less revenue for the studios. Movie budgets shrink.

If Warners next five 150 million+ budgeted films make 300 million+ at the box office world wide, are Warner going to be happy to keep their budgets so high?
Creative visions will be truncated.
 

FunkMiller

Member
It's logic.
Less people at the cinemas. Less money at the box office. Less revenue for the studios. Movie budgets shrink.

If Warners next five 150 million+ budgeted films make 300 million+ at the box office world wide, are Warner going to be happy to keep their budgets so high?
Creative visions will be truncated.

Budget has little to nothing to do with creative vision though.
 

FunkMiller

Member
About 50 million.
So you're saying the directors should use models and strings and have their vision compromised in that manner?

No, I’m saying that the over inflated budgets of modern movies are primarily down to the overblown salaries of actors, directors, producers, and the rest of the hangers on, and that I see nothing wrong with a massive reset in Hollywood that would see far more lower budget movies produced, which would allow for a much broader range of voices and talent to come through, rather than the constant, endless parade of the same old fuckers.

Creativity is not stifled by budget. Never has been, never will be. Laziness is stifled by budget. Greed is stifled by budget. Hubris is stifled by budget. All things the movie industry is absolutely chock full of.
 
You guys seem to have no clue how crucial the theater experience is to getting our summer blockbuster movies, it's like what Gamepass is going to do to AAA games if it becomes the norm. There is so much short-sightedness going on here.
 

sol_bad

Member
No, I’m saying that the over inflated budgets of modern movies are primarily down to the overblown salaries of actors, directors, producers, and the rest of the hangers on, and that I see nothing wrong with a massive reset in Hollywood that would see far more lower budget movies produced, which would allow for a much broader range of voices and talent to come through, rather than the constant, endless parade of the same old fuckers.

Creativity is not stifled by budget. Never has been, never will be. Laziness is stifled by budget. Greed is stifled by budget. Hubris is stifled by budget. All things the movie industry is absolutely chock full of.

There are hundreds of lower budget films out in the wild, if you can't find them than you aren't looking in the right places.

The salaries of directors, producers and actors is not overblown, if they can bring in 500 million+ at the box office than they deserve their salaries. Christopher Nolan has made billions of dollars for Warner Brothers, of course he deserves his damn salary. Just because you sit there jealous of the money they make doesn't mean they deserve it. And I'm sure as hell these directors and actors have contributed more to the world than you or I ever will. If you aren't jealous of the money they make, I have no understanding as to why you would care about movie budgets and what they are paid.

I find it very hard to feel much sympathy for a bunch of whining multimillionaires who were quite happy to benefit for years off of gross profits made at the expense of the movie going public’s enjoyment.

More than happy for cinema as a wide spread medium to die a death, and become a niche market for those that still want it.

This is really weird talk. Because you don't enjoy the cinema going experience you want everyone else to suffer in misery like you do? The cinema isn't for you, obviously. So why should the people that love cinema have to suffer?
 

FunkMiller

Member
There are hundreds of lower budget films out in the wild, if you can't find them than you aren't looking in the right places.

The salaries of directors, producers and actors is not overblown, if they can bring in 500 million+ at the box office than they deserve their salaries. Christopher Nolan has made billions of dollars for Warner Brothers, of course he deserves his damn salary. Just because you sit there jealous of the money they make doesn't mean they deserve it. And I'm sure as hell these directors and actors have contributed more to the world than you or I ever will. If you aren't jealous of the money they make, I have no understanding as to why you would care about movie budgets and what they are paid.



This is really weird talk. Because you don't enjoy the cinema going experience you want everyone else to suffer in misery like you do? The cinema isn't for you, obviously. So why should the people that love cinema have to suffer?

If you’re still enjoying going to the cinema, then more power to you. For me, it’s got progressively worse and worse over the decades due to corporate greed and the safe and secure knowledge they have a captive market. That market might not be so captive anymore though with streaming services, so they’ll get their comeuppance. I have no issue with this.

And I’d you think the current Hollywood machine is not stifling to creativity, I don’t know what to tell you. Enjoy your Disney.
 
Last edited:
You guys seem to have no clue how crucial the theater experience is to getting our summer blockbuster movies, it's like what Gamepass is going to do to AAA games if it becomes the norm. There is so much short-sightedness going on here.
The vast majority of summer blockbuster movies are garbage so no loss there.
 
The vast majority of summer blockbuster movies are garbage so no loss there.

Tell me something... since it's the majority that does mean you like some summer blockbusters yes? Don't you think there being far less summer blockbusters will lead to less of the ones you enjoy? What if the streaming future means you never get a Fury Road ever again, for instance?
 

Wiktor

Member
Seems like bunch of whining. The fact is, for next 12 months cinemas will be dead. And it's disgusting that some of those hollywood bigshots are delussional enough to think their entertainment flicks are worth pushing people into cinemas during a fricking pandemic.
Fact is WB already delayed everything for almost a year. So the choice was either to release on HBO Max or stop production of anything new till 2022, which would be horrible for movie industry.
After vaccinations become common everything will return to normal. The fact that those people can't stomache even a single year of compromises in middle of global pandemic speaks volunmnes about their character. Not to mention it's stupid. WB is the studoo most prone to risk-taking among big ones and the simple truth is they need HBO Max to succeed to continue doing that. If HBO Max fails WB will sooner or later have to heavily cut down on producing movies. How does that help the industry?
 

Wiktor

Member
And I can see why some of these artists like Denis, Nolan want to preserve the certain aspects of the movie industry that make it so great, theatres are a better and easier way to show the movie the way these artists intended. I guarantee there will be a major portion of the population just watching Dune on their computer/iPad - in a way the artist didn’t intend.
Some people will just never know.
So why are they even agreeing to home releases? If that vision is so cruicial why allow people to experience it outside cinemas at all?
 

sol_bad

Member
Seems like bunch of whining. The fact is, for next 12 months cinemas will be dead. And it's disgusting that some of those hollywood bigshots are delussional enough to think their entertainment flicks are worth pushing people into cinemas during a fricking pandemic.
Fact is WB already delayed everything for almost a year. So the choice was either to release on HBO Max or stop production of anything new till 2022, which would be horrible for movie industry.
After vaccinations become common everything will return to normal. The fact that those people can't stomache even a single year of compromises in middle of global pandemic speaks volunmnes about their character. Not to mention it's stupid. WB is the studoo most prone to risk-taking among big ones and the simple truth is they need HBO Max to succeed to continue doing that. If HBO Max fails WB will sooner or later have to heavily cut down on producing movies. How does that help the industry?

Warner Brothers don't need HBO Max to survive and HBO Max is already failing, it's struggling to gain subscriptions.
Warner Brothers and all the other studios have other revenue streams apart from the cinemas. Releasing block buster theatrical movies on HBO Max is not going help them gain any more money or keep them alive. They are going to lose more money than if they were to wait another 6+ months to start releasing their films. If HBO Max goes from 38 million to 80 million+ subscribers within a week, then and only then will they make money from Wonder Woman 84.
Releasing Wonder Woman 84 on HBO Max will have a negative effect on a world wide scale as well, not just for America. People around the world who were going to see the film in the cinemas may now possibly pirate the film and stay home. HBO Max makes it very easy for pirates to share this film and their future films. And there are places around the world where people can go to the cinemas, like Australia.

As to why directors agree to home release after a theatrical release ........ you can't keep hundreds of thousands of films in the cinemas.
 

johntown

Banned
I applaud what they are doing! I cannot stand going to the movies and usually wait for everything on blu ray or digital. I hope more studios follow suit.

The reason I don't like the movies is because I live in an area where people are rude and jerks and make the experience horrible.
 

T8SC

Member
 

sol_bad

Member
I applaud what they are doing! I cannot stand going to the movies and usually wait for everything on blu ray or digital. I hope more studios follow suit.

The reason I don't like the movies is because I live in an area where people are rude and jerks and make the experience horrible.

Do you complain to management or security?
 

johntown

Banned
Do you complain to management or security?
Get up in the middle of a movie and find a manager to complain? Too much of a hassle that may or may not do any good.

I can wait for consumer releases so anything that speeds that up I like.
 

It's Jeff

Banned
It's their shit. They'll do what they want. In case you hadn't noticed, Denis, we're operating during extenuating circumstances. Maybe it's worth thinking about what best for your audience right now instead of yourself.

These people sometimes. I wouldn't even invite one of these prima donnas to my extended family's Thanksgiving.
 

sol_bad

Member
Get up in the middle of a movie and find a manager to complain? Too much of a hassle that may or may not do any good.

I can wait for consumer releases so anything that speeds that up I like.

I always hold management or security accountable for any annoying people at the cinema. Take an initiative and complain. The more people that complain, the less it will happen.
 

IntentionalPun

Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Do you mean 6 Underground? That came out last year and there is absolutely no news of a sequel yet. And it was meant to be set up as a franchise.

It's going to be another year until The Gray Man gets released. Two year time frame between big budget films for a single studio is pretty poor and shows that streaming is not good for these big budget titles.

Red Notice, originally a Universal film but they palmed it off to Netflix. Generally when a major studio palms something off to Netflix it's a bad sign. Remember Cloverfield?

And Netflix seemed to have ignored Scorceses next film even though Irishman was a critical success. Is it because of the high budget?

These examples just show even more that streaming is just not sustainable for big budget films. If Netflix were pushing out 2-4 150-200 million dollar films a year you could argue that streaming is a way to go but they aren't. Instead they are pushing out 50 low budget offerings a year.

And if theatres die in America, what we have on Netflix right now, as in original offerings, will become the standard in entertainment. Low quality, low budget efforts.

Netflix US revenue alone is around $1 billion....

.... every month.

That’s actually more than the total for US film Box office. The entirety of it...

Yes, that money goes to buying content as well as making it, but box office also doesn’t all go to films.

Not to mention they have insane potential to grow worldwide and can use their content worldwide far cheaper then the film industry can as they make way less of a percentage oversees whereas that doesn’t really happen for a digital service.
 
Last edited:

sol_bad

Member
Netflix US revenue alone is around $1 billion....

.... every month.

That’s actually more than the total for US film Box office. The entirety of it...

Yes, that money goes to buying content as well as making it, but box office also doesn’t all go to films.

Not to mention they have insane potential to grow worldwide and can use their content worldwide far cheaper then the film industry can as they make way less of a percentage oversees whereas that doesn’t really happen for a digital service.

It's nice to throw numbers around but we have seen the end results of the Netflix funded movies or the movies that the big Hollywood studios palm off to Netflix. The quality of their films is generally abhorrent. Yes, Netflix have spent some big money on 6 Underground and The Irishman but as I mentioned in another thread there is no sign of a 6 Underground sequel and Netflix completely passed on Martin Scorsese's next big budget film. It will be over 12 months before we see another big budget affair on par with the traditional Hollywood studios. Yes, Extraction was pretty good for a 'low" budget effort but it still pales in comparison to something like John Wick.

Streaming only is not fit for big budget films. I will continue to believe this until Netflix can maintain 2-3 big budget titles a year that are of good quality.

Don't even get me started on their low budget efforts, sure they have some good gems like Marriage Story and I'm Thinking of Ending Things ..... but jesus the majority of it is absolute tripe.
 

IntentionalPun

Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
It's nice to throw numbers around but we have seen the end results of the Netflix funded movies or the movies that the big Hollywood studios palm off to Netflix. The quality of their films is generally abhorrent. Yes, Netflix have spent some big money on 6 Underground and The Irishman but as I mentioned in another thread there is no sign of a 6 Underground sequel and Netflix completely passed on Martin Scorsese's next big budget film. It will be over 12 months before we see another big budget affair on par with the traditional Hollywood studios. Yes, Extraction was pretty good for a 'low" budget effort but it still pales in comparison to something like John Wick.

Streaming only is not fit for big budget films. I will continue to believe this until Netflix can maintain 2-3 big budget titles a year that are of good quality.

Don't even get me started on their low budget efforts, sure they have some good gems like Marriage Story and I'm Thinking of Ending Things ..... but jesus the majority of it is absolute tripe.

So 2-4 $150 million+ budget movies a year is your threshold huh?

You do know they released 2 such films in 2019?

Lol

They are just getting started; a lot of creatives don’t want to go straight to streaming and so Netflix can’t just instantly make a bunch of blockbusters easily. They’ve had better luck making “prestige TV shows” as there is no such snobbery in TV.

“It’s nice to throw numbers around”... that’s your response to me telling you they bring in just as much money as the entire US box office? Lol
 

sol_bad

Member
So 2-4 $150 million+ budget movies a year is your threshold huh?

You do know they released 2 such films in 2019?

Lol

They are just getting started; a lot of creatives don’t want to go straight to streaming and so Netflix can’t just instantly make a bunch of blockbusters easily. They’ve had better luck making “prestige TV shows” as there is no such snobbery in TV.

“It’s nice to throw numbers around”... that’s your response to me telling you they bring in just as much money as the entire US box office? Lol

You did read my post that you quoted earlier yeah? I feel like I am repeating myself.

I just mentioned those 2 films in my last post and they aren't releasing another big budget film until either late 2021 or early 2022. If any other studio made 6 Underground and it was a box office success, the sequel would already be shooting by now or there would be reports of it shooting soon. And of course that is a threshold, the big studios (who make less than Netflix according to you) can generally release anywhere between 2-5 big projects a year. That's the big boys league and that's where Netflix need to be to prove that big budget can be made for the small screen.

Just getting started? They were founded in 1997. They released The Irishman 12 months ago, why didn't they snap up the opportunity to make the next Scorsese film? Scorsese obviously isn't against releasing a movie on the small screen so why didn't Netflix snap it up? Is it because the 250 million budget of Irishman wasn't feasible for Netflix in the long run? They can afford it but didn't outbid Apple. I suspect that in the future Apple will not be enthusiastic about Martin Scoresese's next film after Killers of the Flower Moon either.
Reports say that 26 million households watched The Irishman in the first 7 days, turn that into $15 monthly subscriptions and it's not a lot of "profit" after advertising costs. It's at about 64-66 million views now after 12 months, not very optimal from a profit standpoint.

I say "nice to throw money around" because the profit that Netflix is making is not going into quality products. Chances are, the vast majority of people that own Netflix are watching movies from the big Hollywood studios or TV shows from network studios and not the original films by Netflix.

Hell, they can't even get their Bright sequel on track, it'll be 5 years between films by the time that gets made.

And why are you the second person bringing up prestige TV shows? Blockbuster films and prestige TV are 2 totally different things.
 
That money is gonna trickle down...


The movie experience needs updating. The studios won't try any innovative ideas until they're tried & tested. I hope the movie theatres that are no longer needed are tested in that manner. My favourite cinema in London was Lexi in Kensal Rise, it was run by & for charity, had a bar, garden, multi use cinema & great community ties.

Have the traditional cinema experience for those seeking it. Open the doors to innovative experiences ( I loved secret cinema). I'd look forward to & pay more for a secret cinema Dune experience.

Studios selling or licensing their products to streaming services they own is pretty murky atm.

Edit: Lexi

 
Last edited:

IntentionalPun

Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
You did read my post that you quoted earlier yeah? I feel like I am repeating myself.

I just mentioned those 2 films in my last post and they aren't releasing another big budget film until either late 2021 or early 2022. If any other studio made 6 Underground and it was a box office success, the sequel would already be shooting by now or there would be reports of it shooting soon.

You don't find it hilarious that Netflix met your criteria in 2019? Come on man.. lol. And what you keep saying about sequels is just nonsense.. sequels aren't always instantly greenlit, particularly for new IP. They can take many years to come to fruition. And unless you signed a multi-movie deal with the talent, they are likely already booked for the times after your movie is shot. Major film studios have multi-year / multi-movie deals because of that.

Netflix is brand new to this, and nobody other than people like Adam Sandler are going to sign the kind of multi-movie deals where you can feasibly do back to back productions for the same companies. Hell Netflix isn't even producing most of the movies they release, they are buying them afterwards, when the talent involved is already off filming something else, and signed up for potentially years of other films.

It's a problem even the established studios face, let alone a brand new "Studio" who at most will release a limited theatrical run.

And of course that is a threshold, the big studios (who make less than Netflix according to you) can generally release anywhere between 2-5 big projects a year. That's the big boys league and that's where Netflix need to be to prove that big budget can be made for the small screen.

No movie studio can be born in 2015 and get enough people signed up to be churning out blockbusters a few years later like that, let alone a streaming company who has the entire film industry nervous, and many don't want anything to do with day-one streaming. Continue to ignore that and churn out this nonsense while ignoring that Netflix is not only bringing in way more money, but it's money they can practically count on month after month.. they only have to worry about keeping subscribers and gaining subscribers, spreading worldwide into territories with 100's of millions of potential new customers.

Movie studios on the other hand have to spend 100's of millions of dollars to turn around and get a percentage of box office receipts.. then they have the flailing BR/DVD market.. and the shrinking cable market to sell to... which is why so many are starting their own.. get this.. streaming services! (that aren't anywhere close to Netflix's revenue and many aren't growing like they expected... hint: HBO Max/Warner) Meanwhile Netflix adds a movie to their growing catalog that is replacing other films movies on their service as they spend less money to get hollywood blockbusters (partly due to many studios now NOT offering them up in the first place due to their own streaming services.)

Just getting started? They were founded in 1997.

Come on man.. you know what I was referring to. Netflix bought their first "original film" (meaning they bought distribution rights) in 2015. As a movie studio, they are just getting started... particularly for big budget releases. They are competing with film studios many of which are over 100 years old.. with 100 years of relationships with all the companies you need to do business with, with decades of relationships with some top talent, etc. It's not an industry you can just buy your way into overnight and instantly get the best talent all the time. You have to over-pay for projects that other studios passed on (due to concerns of budget and commercial success.) Literally the story for the majority of Netflix film projects.

Scorsese obviously isn't against releasing a movie on the small screen so why didn't Netflix snap it up? Is it because the 250 million budget of Irishman wasn't feasible for Netflix in the long run?

That movie is still getting theatrical distribution by Paramount and other worldwide partners. Netflix largely wants exclusivity, or very limited releases in theaters. Apple apparently is far more willing to be just digital exclusive; likely due to... them being newer, and more desperate for content as they are behind Netflix.

I say "nice to throw money around" because the profit that Netflix is making is not going into quality products. Chances are, the vast majority of people that own Netflix are watching movies from the big Hollywood studios or TV shows from network studios and not the original films by Netflix.

Completely false; even mediocre Netflix fair tops Netflix charts. That's partly because they advertise them more, but the stuff they produce or buy from elsewhere is incredibly popular on the service.

Hell, they can't even get their Bright sequel on track, it'll be 5 years between films by the time that gets made.

Completely normal for any movie studio. Netflix is paying the same kind of production companies that make Hollywood Blockbusters. It's incredibly common for sequels to take years to come to fruition.

And why are you the second person bringing up prestige TV shows? Blockbuster films and prestige TV are 2 totally different things.

I brought it up to coincide with my point you are ignoring; that the film industry hasn't embraced streaming, so it doesn't matter what Netflix can afford, they are not in the running for most films as the filmmakers demand a wide theatrical release. Netflix isn't interested in doing that and only buckled for Scorcese for a limited release. Most films still start with the old school studios and then when they think the movie is getting too expensive or will be a flop they shop it around to streaming. The fact Netflix buys these expensive films with limited commercial appeal (according to the studios) is evidence they have more than enough money to fund film.

As opposed to TV production studios who have never released anything in theaters, aren't tied to the "cinema experience" and aren't anti-streaming.
 
Last edited:

sol_bad

Member
You don't find it hilarious that Netflix met your criteria in 2019? Come on man.. lol. And what you keep saying about sequels is just nonsense.. sequels aren't always instantly greenlit, particularly for new IP. They can take many years to come to fruition. And unless you signed a multi-movie deal with the talent, they are likely already booked for the times after your movie is shot. Major film studios have multi-year / multi-movie deals because of that.

Netflix is brand new to this, and nobody other than people like Adam Sandler are going to sign the kind of multi-movie deals where you can feasibly do back to back productions for the same companies. Hell Netflix isn't even producing most of the movies they release, they are buying them afterwards, when the talent involved is already off filming something else, and signed up for potentially years of other films.

It's a problem even the established studios face, let alone a brand new "Studio" who at most will release a limited theatrical run.



No movie studio can be born in 2015 and get enough people signed up to be churning out blockbusters a few years later like that, let alone a streaming company who has the entire film industry nervous, and many don't want anything to do with day-one streaming. Continue to ignore that and churn out this nonsense while ignoring that Netflix is not only bringing in way more money, but it's money they can practically count on month after month.. they only have to worry about keeping subscribers and gaining subscribers, spreading worldwide into territories with 100's of millions of potential new customers.

Movie studios on the other hand have to spend 100's of millions of dollars to turn around and get a percentage of box office receipts.. then they have the flailing BR/DVD market.. and the shrinking cable market to sell to... which is why so many are starting their own.. get this.. streaming services! (that aren't anywhere close to Netflix's revenue and many aren't growing like they expected... hint: HBO Max/Warner) Meanwhile Netflix adds a movie to their growing catalog that is replacing other films movies on their service as they spend less money to get hollywood blockbusters (partly due to many studios now NOT offering them up in the first place due to their own streaming services.)



Come on man.. you know what I was referring to. Netflix bought their first "original film" (meaning they bought distribution rights) in 2015. As a movie studio, they are just getting started... particularly for big budget releases. They are competing with film studios many of which are over 100 years old.. with 100 years of relationships with all the companies you need to do business with, with decades of relationships with some top talent, etc. It's not an industry you can just buy your way into overnight and instantly get the best talent all the time. You have to over-pay for projects that other studios passed on (due to concerns of budget and commercial success.) Literally the story for the majority of Netflix film projects.



That movie is still getting theatrical distribution by Paramount and other worldwide partners. Netflix largely wants exclusivity, or very limited releases in theaters. Apple apparently is far more willing to be just digital exclusive; likely due to... them being newer, and more desperate for content as they are behind Netflix.



Completely false; even mediocre Netflix fair tops Netflix charts. That's partly because they advertise them more, but the stuff they produce or buy from elsewhere is incredibly popular on the service.



Completely normal for any movie studio. Netflix is paying the same kind of production companies that make Hollywood Blockbusters. It's incredibly common for sequels to take years to come to fruition.



I brought it up to coincide with my point you are ignoring; that the film industry hasn't embraced streaming, so it doesn't matter what Netflix can afford, they are not in the running for most films as the filmmakers demand a wide theatrical release. Netflix isn't interested in doing that and only buckled for Scorcese for a limited release. Most films still start with the old school studios and then when they think the movie is getting too expensive or will be a flop they shop it around to streaming. The fact Netflix buys these expensive films with limited commercial appeal (according to the studios) is evidence they have more than enough money to fund film.

As opposed to TV production studios who have never released anything in theaters, aren't tied to the "cinema experience" and aren't anti-streaming.

Why do you think the majority of studios and actors don't want to go direct to streaming? It's not lucrative that's why. The majority of films on Netflix are there because the production studios had no other choice or the people presenting an idea had no other choice. As good a The Irishman was (a bit long though if you ask me) the big studios saw it as a financial risk, 250 million to make and then another 100+ on marketing, this is smart business decision making. As I mentioned in my last post, Netflix are making very little profit per piece of content released, 1.2 billion profit from 15 billion spent on acquiring content is terrible. A vast majority of their content is most likely losing them money.

Quite a few sites are estimating now that Warner might lose 1.2 billion dollars by releasing all their films day and date on HBO Max in 2021. This is not a good move by AT&T at all, this is not a good move for the film industry as a whole, AT&T management have no idea what they are doing.

As for Hollywood sequels, generally we get them within 2-3 years of the previous movie. Unless there are production issues, a worldwide pandemic or a new vision for the franchise. No news is bad news for the 6 Underground sequel after 12 months and it's bad news that Blight 2 still doesn't even have a director attached.
 

SlimySnake

Member
Well, Denis, maybe some of you cunts could have done something about the terrible movie going experience we’ve all had for many, many years, and the endless parade of lacklustre movies that have been shown at them.
TBF, he is one of the few directors who have consistently made great movies this past decade. Prisoners, Arrival, Sicario, Blade Runner 2049 all fantastic movies.

But overall, i agree. this decade has been rather forgettable thanks to all the comic book fluff.
 

sol_bad

Member
TBF, he is one of the few directors who have consistently made great movies this past decade. Prisoners, Arrival, Sicario, Blade Runner 2049 all fantastic movies.

But overall, i agree. this decade has been rather forgettable thanks to all the comic book fluff.

Finally found my post from months ago.

2001
Gladiator, Traffic, Erin Brockovich, Memento, The Devils Backbone, Amelie, Mulholland Drive, Dornie Darko, Artificial Intelligence, Shaolin Soccer, Training Day, A Perfect Mind, Oceans 11, Black Hawk Down, The Others, Zoolander, Kiss the Dragon.

2002
The Pianist, Minority Report, Secretary, One Hour Photo, Infernal Affairs, Catch Me if You Can, 28 Days Later, The Bourbe Identity, Panic Room, Changing Lanes, Punch Drunk Love, Spirited Away, Gangs of New York, Spider-Man, Blade 2.

2003
Monster, Mystic River, Lost in Translation, Kill Bill 1, X-Men 2, Finding Nemo, Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl, School of Rock, Elf, Oldboy, 21 Grams, Bad Boys 2, Paycheck.

2004
Team America, Anchorman, Spider-Man 2, Million Dollar Baby, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Kill Bill 2, The Life Aquatic, The Aviator, Collateral, Hellboy, National Treasure, Troy, The Terminal. Harold and Kumar go to White Castle

2005
Memories of Murder, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, Batman Begins, Munich, King Kong, A History of Violence, Brick, The Island, Memoirs of a Geisha, Mr & Mrs Smith, The Descent.

2006
The Drparted, Pan's Labyrinth, The Fountain, Children of Men, The Prestige, Apocalypto, Letters from Iwo Jima, Little Miss Sunshine, Blood Diamond, Deja Vu, Hot Fuzz.

2007
The Assasination of Jesse James, There Will Be Blood, No Country for Old Men, Zodiac, The Bourne Ultimatem, Gone Baby Gone, Superbad, Ratatouille.

2008
Hellboy 2, Iron Man, The Dark Knight, Slumdog Millionaire, The Wrestler, Wall-e, Doubt, Frost/Nixon, Milk, Burn After Reading, Step Brothers, Cloverfield, Tropic Thunder, Gran Torino, Taken, The Hurt Locker, King Fu Panda, Pineapple Express, Let the Right One In, The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, Rambo, Changeling, Ip Man, Harold and Kumar Escape From Guantanamo Bay, Body of Lies, Speed Racer, Red Cliff

2009
Avatar, Mother, District 9, 500 Days of Summer, Up, Inglorious Basterds, Zombieland, Fantastic Mr Fox, The Blind Side, Coraline, Moon, State of Play, The Road, Drag Me To Hell, 9, Watchmen, Knowing,

2010
Shutter Island, Toy Story 3, Winter's Bone, 127 Hours, Black Swan, The Fighter, Inception, The Social Network, The King's Speech, The Town, Buried, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World, Insidious, Salt, The Book of Eli, How to Train Your Dragon, The Other Guys, The Expendables, Kick-Ass.

2011
The Help, Moneyball, The Descendants, Drive, The Artist, Fast Five, Bridesmaids, Shame, I Saw The Devil, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Warrior, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, We Need to Talk About Kevin, Adventures of Tintin, Super 8, Sucker Punch, In Time, Paul, The Raid.

2012
John Carter, Avengers, Moonrise Kingdom, Argo, Silver Linings Playbook, Zero Dark Thirty, Life of Pi, Django Unchained, Cloud Atlas, End of Watch, Flight, Prometheus, Dredd, Jack Reacher, Looper, Ted, Wolf Children, 21 Jump Street

2013
Gravity, Secret Life of Walter Mitty, Prisoners, Warm Bodies, The Conjuring, Saving Mr Banks, Iron Man 3, Captain Phillips, Under the Skin, Spring Breakers, American Hustle, The Wolf of Wall Street, Fast and Furious 6, Inside Llewyn Davis, Pacific Rim, Oblivion, Rush, Frozen.

2014
A Most Violent Year, The Rover, The Grand Budapest Hotel, Interstellar, Birdman, Whiplash, Guardians of the Galaxy, 22 Jump Street, Nightcrawler, Gone Girl, Boyhood, Chef, The Raid 2, The Lego Movie, X-Men: Days of Future Past, Captain America: The Winter Soldier, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, Edge of Tomorrow, The Equalizer, The Interview, Noah, Ex Machina, John Wick.

2015
The Revenant, Bridge of Spies, Joy, The End of the Tour, The Gift, It Follows, Mad Max: Fury Road, Creed, Room, Inside Out, Spotlight, Sicario, The Martian, Straight Outta Compton, Steve Jobs, Kingsman, Furious 7, Trainwreck, Crimson Peak, Ted 2.

2016
The Handmaiden, Don't Breathe, Hush, The Nice Guys, Arrival, The Lobster, The Witch, The Wailing, Swiss Army Man, Zootopia, Silence, La La Land, Deadpool, Doctor Strange, Passengers, The Founder, London Has Fallen, Hacksaw Ridge, 13 Hours, 10 Cloverfield Lane, The Accountant, Central Intelligence, Eddie the Eagle.

2017
Alien: Covenant, Lady Bird, The Killing of a Sacred Deer, Okja, I Don't Feel at Home in this World Anymore, Dunkirk, Bladerunner 2049, War of the Planet of the Apes, Get Out, Colossal, IT, Split, Your Name, Wind River, Logan Lucky, Coco, Logan, Star Wars: The Last Jedi, Wondoe Woman, Thor: Ragnarok, The Disaster Artist, Baby Driver, I Tonya, Mother!, The Post, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing in Missouri, The Shape of Water, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle, Guardians of the Galaxy 2, Spider-Man: Homecomming, John Wick 2, Life, Blade of the Immortal, The Hirman's Bodyguard.

2018
The Mule, Mission Impossible: Fallout, You Were Never Really There, Annihilation, Ready Player One, Unsane, Green Book, Creed 2, Deadpool 2, Avengers: Infinity War, Upgrade, First Man, Isle of Dogs, Crazy Rich Asians, Black Panther, Spider-Man: Into the Spiderverse, Roma, Blackkklansman, A Quiet Place, Bumblebee, Searching.

2019
Joker, Us, Parasite, Marriage Story, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, The Farewell, Knives Out, The Lighthouse, 1917, Jojo Rabbit, Midsommar, Dolemite is my Name, Alita: Battle Angel, Spider-Man: Far From Home, John Wick 3, Avengers Endgame, One Cut of the Dead, Ford V Ferarri, Dark Waters, The Kid Who Would Be King, Ready or Not, Hustlers, Crawl, Long Shot, The Report, Good Boys, Little Monsters, Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark, Doctor Sleep, Hotel Mumbai.
 

IntentionalPun

Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Why do you think the majority of studios and actors don't want to go direct to streaming? It's not lucrative that's why.

It's really not because it isn't lucrative; that's just nonsense. There are loads of Hollywood talent that are snobs about theaters, and awards (major awards require theatrical runs.)

The WB talent are bitching because HBO Max is not generating revenue and they already signed deals based on theater box office receipts. There's literally nobody complaining about the money Netflix is willing to drop on people.

The majority of films on Netflix are there because the production studios had no other choice or the people presenting an idea had no other choice. As good a The Irishman was (a bit long though if you ask me) the big studios saw it as a financial risk, 250 million to make and then another 100+ on marketing, this is smart business decision making. As I mentioned in my last post, Netflix are making very little profit per piece of content released, 1.2 billion profit from 15 billion spent on acquiring content is terrible. A vast majority of their content is most likely losing them money.

Why are you repeating back concepts that I just stated? lol, I'm well aware that Netflix is buying a lot of movies the studios worried were too expensive and won't be commercially viable.. you should know that because I just said that in the post you quoted.

But what you just said about profit is laughable.. your made up numbers that aren't even real of 1.2 billion in profit from 15 billion spent is not terrible at all and is actually great for a company that is growing as fast as Netflix.

But where are you even getting that made up number from? They made 2.6 billion in operating income (profit minus expenses) in FY2019.

Quite a few sites are estimating now that Warner might lose 1.2 billion dollars by releasing all their films day and date on HBO Max in 2021. This is not a good move by AT&T at all, this is not a good move for the film industry as a whole, AT&T management have no idea what they are doing.

No, they are estimating how much releasing to streaming day one will cut into BOX OFFICE RECIEPTS. They get about 60% of that, so they are estimating it will cut revenue by 700 million.

They get essentially all of the revenue of $15 / month subscribers. They need less than 4 million new subscribers to stick around for a year to make up for that estimated 700 million in theater revenue.

They'll likely far exceed that, hence why they did it. What ATT fucked up on is pissing off their talent.. this is not a financial fuckup, other than the potential long term effects of pissing off their talent who are mad because a lot of them have backend deals that only account for theater box office receipts, and not any sort of deal tied to new subscribers.

As for Hollywood sequels, generally we get them within 2-3 years of the previous movie. Unless there are production issues, a worldwide pandemic or a new vision for the franchise. No news is bad news for the 6 Underground sequel after 12 months and it's bad news that Blight 2 still doesn't even have a director attached.

It's not remotely abnormal for a sequel of a successful film to not be greenlit only a year after it's release. There is no "generally we get them within 2-3 years", sequels are all over the map.. and for Bright 2 Netflix did not secure any sort of contract with Will Smith or David Ayer.. and Smith seems potentially disinterested in even doing the sequel, and either way filled his schedule up.

All normal shit.. and either way, literally none of it has to do with money. Netflix already paid to have the sequel written and re-written...

Netflix keeps getting these sort of "unknown how successful they will be" projects, so they aren't pre-greenlighting sequels are signing contracts with people (outside of Adam Sandler.) Expect that to change moving forward.. they are certainly making more than enough money.
 
Last edited:

sol_bad

Member
But what you just said about profit is laughable.. your made up numbers that aren't even real of 1.2 billion in profit from 15 billion spent is not terrible at all and is actually great for a company that is growing as fast as Netflix.

But where are you even getting that made up number from? They made 2.6 billion in operating income (profit minus expenses) in FY2019.

 

IntentionalPun

Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
This says for calendar year 2019 (different from FY2019) they profited 1.9 billion.

So, thanks for proving you made your number up?

That's also a great profit for a company growing it's revenue so steadily. And they still have TONS of room to grow.

People skeptical of the way they amortize their costs are being ridiculous too... every company does that for anything that's essentially R&D and it's incredibly unlikely they'll ever post a loss and at some point will likely have profits higher than the total of their future write-downs.
 

sol_bad

Member
This says for calendar year 2019 (different from FY2019) they profited 1.9 billion.

So, thanks for proving you made your number up?

That's also a great profit for a company growing it's revenue so steadily. And they still have TONS of room to grow.

People skeptical of the way they amortize their costs are being ridiculous too... every company does that for anything that's essentially R&D and it's incredibly unlikely they'll ever post a loss and at some point will likely have profits higher than the total of their future write-downs.

This document states December 31st on it for 2019. If Netflix are happy to release those numbers for December, why does it matter if it's the calendar or financial year?

And you haven't shown where you got your numbers either.
 

IntentionalPun

Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
This document states December 31st on it for 2019. If Netflix are happy to release those numbers for December, why does it matter if it's the calendar or financial year?

And you haven't shown where you got your numbers either.

I was just pointing out the 2.6 billion number is for their fiscal year.. from their financial reports, not hard to find, since it's not a made up number like yours.

There is no 1.2 billion number.. as that article stated, for 2019 calendar they had an operating income of around 1.9 billion.



That's the second link you sent proving yourself wrong lol
 
Last edited:

sol_bad

Member
I was just pointing out the 2.6 billion number is for their fiscal year.. from their financial reports, not hard to find, since it's not a made up number like yours.

There is no 1.2 billion number.. as that article stated, for 2019 calendar they had an operating income of around 1.9 billion.



That's the second link you sent proving yourself wrong lol

wow
Huge difference between 1.2 and 1.8 billion when 15 billion is being spent on content.
<__<
 

IntentionalPun

Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
wow
Huge difference between 1.2 and 1.8 billion when 15 billion is being spent on content.
<__<
Yes over 50% higher profits than you stated...

You have to be kidding me claiming that isn't a huge difference 🤦‍♂️

And their operating income for the last 12 months?

Over $4 billion:


Some of that likely due to spending being down due to COVID.. but they are rolling in the money/subscribers in the mean time.
 
Last edited:

sol_bad

Member
Yes over 50% higher profits than you stated...

You have to be kidding me claiming that isn't a huge difference 🤦‍♂️

And their operating income for the last 12 months?

Over $4 billion:


Some of that likely due to spending being down due to COVID.. but they are rolling in the money/subscribers in the mean time.

Isn't operating income before tax?
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom