For the last few years franchise movies like star wars, marvel, etc. made money regardless of quality. However now it seems like audiences are being choosier when it comes to these kinds of tentpole releases. I’ve seen some people online say that the movie/theater industry is losing people in general but I don’t think that’s the case.
Super Mario and spiderverse made a lot of money. And Oppenheimer, Barbie, and Dune seem to be tracking well. I think the problem is that people are getting sick of the same old stuff and need more than just a brand name to go to the theater. What do you you think?
Every time a sequel or a comic book movie lands on its face, someone rewrites an article about franchise/superhero fatigue. And that’s been going on for over a decade.
People will show up to watch a good movie. Guardians 3 did really well. Spider-Man is the “same old stuff.” This is all cherry picking examples. Movies don’t do well when they’re bad or the star is unappealing somehow.
Hollywood will stop making these movies when people stop paying to see them.
I think Guardians 3 and Spiderverse may be exceptions though. Spiderverse has a cool visual style that makes it stand out and is riding of the goodwill of the last film. Guardians 3 is the last guardians film and I’ve seen a lot of people say it was the last marvel film they were interested in. I think audiences might need more motivation than just a marvel logo now. Captain Marvel got over a billion dollars while marvel was on the hype train but I doubt the sequel does that well.
Genuine question, how do you know Indians jones flipped hard ?
I went on imdb and it is rated around 7 which isn’t bad at all.Critic and audience reviews (such as IMDB scores) alone don’t make a movie a flop or not. Instead, it’s the movie’s box office performance.
$60M opening weekend against a $250M production budget would be considered a flop. (Source)
Typically, studios want to see at least $100M on their opening weekend to consider something a success.
And some movies that flop and get poor reviews go on to become cult classics. Generally not the case for big franchises though
I want to live in a world in which viewer opinions (reviews and ratings) are the most accepted indicator of movie quality, rather than how much money it made.
Audience and critical reviews will be the indicator of quality in the long term, once the movie’s on streaming and disc. And many movies do gain a new life then thanks to how people feel about them.
Spiderverse is a recent example: it’s doing gangbusters this time thanks to the goodwill of audiences who watched the first one on streaming (it didn’t do great in the box office.)
$250m production budget for an Indiana Jones movie is absolutely bonkers. Raiders had a $20m budget.
Inflation?
Even with inflation the cost of making films (especially in the US) has gone up a lot. Just a rough Google says that 20 mil in 1980/81 is now roughly 75 mil. That makes the new Indie film more than 3x the production cost
End of franchise films ? Not even close. What I think you’re seeing now is the floor is much lower for franchise films than before (especially with comic book movies). You need more than “it’s a Marvel movie” to have people go out and come see. The top movies of the year are still either sequels to franchises or based on existing IP.
That’s true. I should have titled the end of the “risk free” franchise film. Disney and WB drop 200 million on a movie and start filming without a coherent script because they knew that the film would coast on the name alone. I think those days might be gone. Marvel and others might need to step up their game to survive.
I think this is more accurate. You still need effort. I will say Flash and IJ are probably not the best examples though. Flash wasn’t bad and neither was IJ. Flash suffered due to the antics of the Ezra. It also had very inconsistent VFX. Even when sitting in a damn cockpit, they still out a layer of CGI over Ezra when they’re in the suit and it looked awful. If practical effects can be done practically, they should do so. They clearly could do good VFX in the movie, but it’s clear when it wasn’t needed. Faces are still difficult, so they should avoid working on them when they don’t need to. Rubber masks work. I can’t imagine they cost more than the VFX, but based on how they treat VFX artists, who knows. Moreover, it retread a lot of ground that was already done in Flashpoint. Plus, you have the conservatives trying to cancel (and in the same breath arguing against cancelling others) anything that has a woman replacing a man, or an actor that identifies with any of the LGBTQ+ letters.
Indiana Jones on the other hand suffered because the target audience has aged out of theaters. Crystal Skull definitely didn’t pick up a large contingent of fans. The style of movie is definitely aged. Current moviegoers like consistency down to the detail. Indiana Jones does not have that. None of it makes sense when you start to analyze any plot point. But it was never supposed to. The major plot points are more important. Everything else was an excuse to put Indy into ridiculous scenarios. That type of action hero movie just isn’t popular with the main movie going audience.
The bar has definitely been set with Spiderverse, especially for Multiverse movies
The bar has definitely been set with Spiderverse, especially for Multiverse movies
Agreed completely. Writing and Direction are key and studios will definitely need to recognize that (ironic considering the writers are still in strike).
Out of the loop, why is there a writers’ strike?
In short. studios are trying to replace writers with AI
That was part of it. They are also getting stiffed by streaming services.
Plus, half the reason for lack of interest in Flash is that in franchise terms, it’s a “dead man walking” --the whole DCEU is getting the (re)boot after this, so there’s no incentive to watch this installment when you know there’ll be no payoff for anything it sets up.
Agreed. Early-mid 2010s were hollywood’s golden ticket for franchises. Another hunger games? A marvel movie? Star Wars? Hobbit? Just keep churning them out and we’ll go see them.
Now we (at least me and the people I talk to) are over the big franchises. For example, I love the infinity marvel movies, yes they’re repetative and predictable but they were fun, and I started watching them with Iron Man. It was a ton of fun seeking out easter eggs and predicting where it’d go. But it’s over, they finished it, and IMO they finished it well.
Now… well, another one comes out, super, I’ll see it when I get around to it. I’m definitely not going to go to the theater and I’m not going to buy a copy, so sometime on a streaming service probably.
I do hope we see a renaissance in individual films. I’ve been catching up on my backlog and there are so many good ones, I hope that Hollywood sees that not everything needs to be a (4 part) trilogy.
(but then there’s Dune…)
Well it turns out, if you give a shit and hire people that are passionate about the product they make, you make a good movie. And people like to watch good movies. That’s why dune worked. Because it was expertly done.
I had the same reaction with Marvel. I would watch almost every single movie the week it came out. They did extremely well with their Infinity Saga and capped it with an incredible conclusion. Infinity War/Endgame is a master stroke to what could’ve been an absolute disaster. Now that it’s over, the only MCU movies I’ve watched in theaters (let alone the first week) were No Way Home, Wakanda Forever, and GOTG3. The others I watched eventually at home (if at all).
@echoplex21 After Endgame, the only Marvel movie that interested me was GotG3. Now that I’ve seen it I’m done.
EDIT: Removed unnecessary user tags
Marvel is mostly fatigue with some laziness. It’s not that I don’t actually dislike any of it. I just don’t have the energy and desire to keep up all the time. A franchise shouldn’t be like a product. They’re trying to get more and more mindshare by putting out more and more in a shorter time. It’s clear it’s losing some quality in the writing (though even the “bad” ones still have redeeming qualities in my opinion, like I’m still glad I saw the Eternals, but it clearly is also flawed) due to not having the cohesiveness in story any longer. Look at the big hit video games that are trilogies. Horizon Zero Dawn and Forbidden West had like 5 years between them (though a DLC was released a year after ZD). Sure it’s a different medium, but it still shows that sometimes you need to ensure you put the work in and the effort, plus leave the audience wanting for a bit. Having something new all the time just makes it less interesting to begin with.
Flash I had no interest in seeing, never got into the series or story… Indiana Jones to bring back now, from my point of view (especially after Ford’s Star wars horrible return) felt like dragging him out as a big name to drum up ticket sales. New movies and storylines are a risk, it’s safer to stick with what has sold for years I guess. I haven’t looked but how did ghostbusters do recently?
I think Ghostbusters did ok but I think this phenomenon of people avoiding franchises started after that movie, around Antman 3.
It’s sad. I was incredibly excited for Indy but the reviews was such a downer. I thought with Mangold and their confidence this was going to be a sure thing.
Just watched it and it’s okay. If you watch it, view it in the lens of an Indiana Jones movie with all of its quirks and silliness. Ford is definitely older and slower, but they try to use movie magic to make it seem he’s still spry. Overall, it’s an entertaining movie but I can see how it didn’t fair well in the box office.
It’s not bad, but it’s not great. I prefer it over Kingdom of the Crystal Skull as an end to the series. The feel of a Jones movie is there, along with all the plot holes the audience was willing to overlook in the past. Audiences are much more detail oriented and nit-picky. Sometimes the details aren’t important, sometimes they are. In a Jones movie, I don’t think they’re important. It’s fine if you watch it as an Indiana Jones film. I’ll admit having some background info on Operation Paperclip at least helps in understanding some of the context earlier in the movie.
Sadly, no. However, it dose (hopefully) show that people are starting to show it has to be at least mediocre.
The state of creativity is so shit now. It feels like all they do is;
grab a random book or video game and hope it works out.
Make the 10000th in a series beating whatever dead horse they can.
“Live action”
Remake something less than 10 years old
I hope the writers strike does something to stop the death spiral.
Hollywood should stop picking dumb franchises
Could this be the beginning of the end for franchise films?
We can only hope.
‘The Flash’ and Other Mediocre Movies Won’t Stop Superhero Fatigue - Variety. Fifteen years (since Iron Man), for the love of Stan! As Scorsese said, “…that’s not cinema…the closest I can think of them…is theme parks.”
Fun fact: did you know that the (then) new distribution strategy invented for the iconic film The Godfather gave rise of the Blockbuster (and thus “franchise movies”) and the near-death of auteur cinema?
@kingmongoose7877 Of course Scorsese’s mastery, knowledge and love of movies is matched by few and surpassed by none. But I do find it amusing that the he criticises lowbrow superhero genre movies when every third film he makes has a bunch of Irish or Italian guys telling each other to fuhgeddaboudit, then shooting each other in the head. (Yes, I’m exaggerating, but not by that much.)
My point? There are bad, mediocre and good superhero movies, just as there are bad, mediocre and good gangster movies. And every so often there are great genre movies, like The Godfather, or - for my money - Logan (which I think deserved Oscar nominations for picture, director, adapted screenplay, actor, supporting actor and supporting actress).
And, basically, you just need a lot of movies to be made before a masterpiece is produced. For how many decades were westerns a popular genre? Were directors complaining about the guns’n’horses theme parks in the 1950s? Most westerns that were made over that time have been forgotten, but the great ones like Shane or Unforgiven live on. In fifty years most superheroes will have been forgotten, but a handful will live on.
To address @chickenwing 's post more directly: I remember reading articles a few years ago about how the age of the movie star was dead (Tom Cruise being cited as one of a few exceptions), and that the age of the franchise/brand (Marvel, Star Wars, Pixar) had arrived. If the age of the franchise is dying, what will rise to take its place?
If the age of the franchise is dying, what will rise to take its place?
The age of good writing! Or am I too optimistic?
My hope is that like in the 70’s American New Wave the studios panic and start doing weird experimental stuff with young directors. That’s where a lot of the big name directors came from today. Back then US directors copied what the French were doing and it got people back in theaters. If I were a director I’d look at South Korean films there has been a ton of great films come out of there in the last 20 years or so.
@chickenwing Interestingly, one of the things I respect the execs behind the MCU for (Feige I suppose, although even those behind some of the very early decisions before the rise of Feige) is that they have a history of hiring relatively “indie” directors.
Starting with Jon Favreau, then Joss Whedon, the Russos, James Gunn, Peyton Reed, Taika Waititi, Ryan Coogler, Cate Shortland, Destin Daniel Cretton and Chloé Zhao and others I’m probably forgetting. These are not the sort of names you would have expected to head $100M-$250M popcorn movies with their prior experience mostly being in smaller budget movies and/or TV work. It would have been an understandable decision to hire directors with a more proven big budget epic track record, a “safe pair of hands” (ala Ron Howard who replaced Lord & Miller on Solo because they were seen to be too quirky for Lucasfilm).
Yes you could argue that Marvel homogenises their styles with a “house” look & feel wrt to cinematography, soundtrack, action scenes etc, but nevertheless, the sensibility these directors is generally infused into even their big budget MCU films. And, I’d argue, that accounts for some of their commercial success.
the studios panic and start doing weird experimental stuff with young directors.
I wonder if this is possible given the changes in distribution channel over the years. One of the reasons why theatrical releases are dominated by big-budget four-quadrant movies is because smaller, weirder stuff by younger film makers gets released on streaming. Going to the movies is starting to become expensive. Where I live (not in the US) a movie typically costs $20-$30, and premium formats (eg imax or luxurious seating, table service for food & drink etc) can run up to $50 just for the movie ticket. I’m more likely to see a movie that benefits from an enormous screen and enormous sound (ie “theme park rides”) at the movies, because I know I can get 90% of the experience of a smaller film at home at a fraction of the cost, and a fraction of the annoyance (given the inconsiderate behaviour of many people who go to see a movie these days).
I’d look at South Korean films there has been a ton of great films come out of there in the last 20 years or so.
True. Although, based on the ones I’ve seen (basically the well known Korean films and TV shows), they’re generally pretty full-on wrt violence, language and general tone. Not a bad thing by itself (I like dark and gritty), but this sensibility could limit the mainstream success of a movement inspired by South Korean films.
Speaking of foreign films and superhero franchises - I’d love to see the team behind RRR tackle a Marvel or DC movie.
…when every third film he makes has a bunch of…
…there are great genre movies, like The Godfather, or - for my money - Logan (which I think deserved Oscar nominations…
See, right there that makes me question your ability to discern the difference between gummy bears and filet mignon or, like my post here, pop art and highway billboards. The Godfather and Logan in the same sentence? Really?
@kingmongoose7877 Yup. Really. Objectively in terms of craft The Godfather probably is a bit better (note that I said Logan deserved to be nominated for a bunch of Oscars), but personally of the two I prefer Logan. And yes I put them in the same sentence. Deal with it.
Dealt with, many many times before you came along. And like the others, you will remain with me for as long as it takes to write this reply. I’ll keep separating the pearls from the dreck and you keep enjoying movies about muscular men with claws.
super mario is like 40 years old and spiderman is even older, so I’m not sure they really count as “something new” as far as franchises go.
The only movie I was willing to see was the Mario movie and I still ended up torrenting it. Why should I go to a public theater, get ripped off at the ticket box and the food counter for some mild entertainment? Especially when I can cook up an entire meal at home and eat it in front of the TV.
Better food, more comfortable, private setting and most importantly, Cost effective. If you want to get people like me to go to a theater, the incentive better be worth it. I won’t open my wallet otherwise.
Plus I can pause to pee, vape away, set the volume on my surround sound exactly where I want, etc. And my 84” 4K DV/HDR+ OLED may not be a gigantic silver screen, but I enjoy it. Combined with 120TB of storage for Plex, I’m more than happy to wait for the bluray remux.
I used to fucking ADORE going to the movies - but nowadays, it needs to be a spectacular spectacular. Last movie I saw in the theater was Top Gun 2, and it was worthy.
For a sec I thought Indiana Jones and Flash was one title
I don’t think people are sick of the same old stuff. Indy flopped at the box office on the combination of a disappointing 4th movie and Disney’s trend of virtue signalling over good characterization and storytelling.
The Flash has the baggage of an unlikeable lead actor, plus the DCU is still all over the place and constantly rebooted. I honestly have no idea what to expect from the Flash, given previous DCU movies.
Someone who says virtue signaling unironically is the dumbest fuck in the room, no matter what room they’re in.
Wait, is having a woman in the movie virtue signaling? I haven’t seen it to know.
Only when it’s pointless.
Two words: female Bond.
Plenty of great movies with females and/or female leads. Ghost busters was not one of them.
There are only two genders: male and political.
No, Indiana Jones is a terrible example to base those on. It’s a franchise who’s last good film was in the 80s and most people hated the last attempted comeback.
It’s not superhero fatigue or franchise fatigue. It’s bad writing fatigue. Seriously, I don’t know why Hollywood keeps choosing terrible writers for huge projects, but as long as they are doing that they are going to keep getting what they deserve.
And speaking of huge projects, from what I’ve heard Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny cost $295 million to make rather than 250. And that’s not counting publicity and marketing, which brings it to 400 million if not more. That means they need to make at least $800 million to break even. No matter how you slice their opening weekend, they are in huge trouble. And given that Elementals and The Little Mermaid both bombed hard along with most other Disney movies of the last few years, I’d say that Disney is in serious trouble too!
On the other hand, Guardians of the Galaxy 3 was rather well written, and from what I’ve heard it did rather well at the box office. Which is just more evidence that if you have a decently-written film the public WILL go and see it. We’re just avoiding crap, that’s all.
I’ll go out on a limb and say that hauling poor old Harrison Ford away from his bong and forcing him at the age of 80 to make shitty movies is tantamount to elder abuse. As for The Flash, coddling wannabe cult leader and mental defective Ezra Miller was just the icing on the cake. The movie was just badly written.
Frantic last minute reshoots and rewrites are a dead giveaway that something is seriously wrong with a production. But that that is happening so often in Hollywood in the last several years is clear evidence that Hollywood itself has completely lost their way. I don’t know if they can right that ship, and to be honest I don’t much care. If they won’t provide people with the good entertainment that they want, eventually somewhere else will. Maybe Bollywood or China.
As for The Flash, coddling wannabe cult leader and mental defective Ezra Miller was just the icing on the cake.
Hey, let me keep believing that it’s because people for once decided to be decent and skip it because of Ezra.
Speak for yourself. I’ve been majorly burned out on super hero movies.
Seriously, I don’t know why Hollywood keeps choosing terrible writers for huge projects
Don’t worry, soon Hollywood won’t be choosing writers at all. (Thanks ChatGPT!)
(Obviously I agree that good writing is fundamental to the success of a movie, with few exceptions.)
If anyone is surprised by Indiana Jones failing then that is just sad. Name the last good Harrison Ford movie, I’ll wait. Erza Miller was suppose to be a good pick for the younger generation but Warner Brothers forgot that the younger generation doesn’t respond well to groomers and they also use TikTok. Word got out on him.
Black Adam, how many times can you watch the rock play the same character over and over. Fast X, no words needed.
Bad writers would be the main reason for failing films. Too many times you see 5-6 writers on a project, dead give away that it’s going to suck. Studios also like to play the blame game for bad decisions. Why didn’t anyone see the female led ghost busters? Sexism not the fact that the movie was unfunny and a train wreck.
A24 is one of the few studios that produce new and exciting movies. Something original. Even if it is something that has been done, they have a unique perspective, see parasite. Their movies always seem to over perform.
As someone in the industry, the tentpole execs do not give a shit about writing or even quality. They just imagine $$$ and hate risk, so they double down on what they already know. It’s a dumb decision from the outside looking in, but they literally can’t see that. Also, in the last 10-15 years, screenwriting has developed more into a gig economy than a FT job, so even finding good writers and keeping them around is tough as hell.
Sometimes, I think I understand their place too. We’re talking about really big budgets here, and while I agree that it’s better to take risks so we can get amazing movies, I must imagine the dread the exec that greenlighted taika waititi thor love and thunder to do w/e he wanted.
In the end they let the director loose and still got a mediocre movie. (Maybe it was $$ successful? Somebody know?)
This was the revelation I was waiting to unfold. The best indicator that good writing has legs and bad writing flops regardless of genre or franchise these days is definitely the recent Marvel box office runs.
Ant-Man: Quantamania was mediocre and as people saw it and relayed this sentiment it lost audiences and the box office intake dropped hard – no one wanted to spend money or time on it once word got out.
Guardians of the Galaxy: Vol 3 had the opposite happen with good writing and a rare occurrence where Disney let James Gunn do pretty much whatever he wanted. As people saw it and relayed the sentiment that it was well written and worth seeing in theaters, people flocked to it and gave it some of the strongest legs that continued to make box office money well after opening week.
Guardians 3 even got me into a theater for the first time in years because so many people said it was the one movie they recommended experiencing there instead of waiting for a Disney+ release. Well written movies are refreshing. We’re bored enough with the schlock regardless of genre, but give us something with real substance and it still has a chance to excite audiences to spread the word and make money.
which brings it to 400 million if not more. That means they need to make at least $800 million to break even.
400 million spent means 400 million to break even, no?
Presumably 800 gross
No. Marketing typically equals production costs. So $400mm production + $400mm marketing = $800mm breakeven.
No, 400m includes marketing budget. Reason it typically needs double (actually more like 2.5 times the gross) is that studios only get around half of box office receipts.
The rumors for indy 5 were that it needed something like 900 million to break even and a billion to make any profit.
With the new report saying it was a 325 million production and a minimum 100 million promotion budget, I tend to believe them.
You’re making the assumption that, since the pandemic ended, people actually want to go to the theater to see movies. They demonstrably do not. People will not go to see a movie they’re interested in in the theater; they will only go to the theater to see a movie they are absolutely driven to see immediately. It has to have huge visual spectacle and be truly worthy of their time to waste the time and money to sit in a theater, which no one seems to want to do anymore. It has to be something that needs to be seen on a large screen.
I’m sure Dune will do well later this year and there’s been plenty of movies recently that did fine in theaters. But there’s going to be plenty more along the way that fall by the wayside despite the fact that they would have been tent pole pictures with guaranteed box office in past years. But people aren’t going to show up for things like Indiana Jones or Flash after major failures previously in both of those series.
I’m so excited for Dune, definitely going to the cinema.
Indiana Jones is not really a franchise film in the modern sense. It’s a sequel, sure, but it comes many years after the last one and is mostly a self contained adventure. It’s not like the MCU where everything builds up on what came before or teases what comes next to try to build up a larger universe. Whatever attempt there might have been to make Phoebe Waller-Bridge into the next Indiana Jones, didn’t make it into the final movie.
Same for Flash, the DCU is a mess and already scheduled for a reboot. Nobody really cares about the DCU anymore, since nobody really even knows what the state of that universe is. It’s just random cameos without a clear continuity and it all will be blinked out of existence in a bit anyway.
What the MCU is doing is much more interesting, as they used to have that shared universe and it was working. But what they have done in the last few years was a mess. They introduced multiverses, time travel and gods and basically ruined the own continuity they worked so hard to build up over the years. The power levels are completely out of control and it’s hard to care about what is happening when everything can be multiverse’ed in and out of existence at will.
I don’t think anybody will give up on franchises, the latest Batman already has a TV spinoff with The Penguin. But they hopefully will scale it back a bit and focus on making good movies first, not just endless teases of what will come next and trying to cram every cameo into the film they can think of.
