Link: PSFK: The Future Of Entertainment.
There are some very interesting insights on the next 75 years of Hollywood here. My problem with these insights is they all come from the inside. Seems to me that Hollywood has gotten itself into a funk and cannot seem to get out of it. Studios are so worried about their bottom line they cannot see beyond it. Audiences are getting smarter but Studios are not responding.
At least there are other ways to spark a revolution. Like technology, for instance. I agree with Robert Dowling, editor-in-chief and publisher of The Hollywood Reporter, that in the future there will be great change in all areas of film and we will see a takeover of the Digital Revolution. It seems to me that this will totally change the dynamics of the Hollywood system. There will be a shift in power toward the consumer and there will be a more intimate relationship between people and the films they are watching. I also believe filmmakers will be able to connect to niche audiences in a much more effective and rewarding way. Down the road, in the not-too-distant future, I'm expecting to see the gap bridged between the film festival and the multiplex, giving filmmakers an alternative choice.
So my question to you, the film lover, is this: Where do you see Hollywood heading in the next 75 years? And to all you filmmakers out there, what opportunities do you see in the future? What are your dreams for the industry?
What do you think?
Dave


Yawwwwwwn.
Hollywood isn't going to go anywhere, because Hollywood isn't in a slump. Right now, the Box Office is down $600million. Of course, 2 of last years smash hits, the passion of the christ and F9/11 WEREN'T Hollywood movies. That's over $475million dollars that Hollywood is NOT down. Add in the fact that last years Harry Potter was in the summer, and this years Harry Potter is at Christmas, (that's another $250mil) and Hollywood will be AHEAD.
Honestly, with the films coming out the last 3 months of the year, like Wallace And Gromit, Harry Potter 4, Walk The Line (which I think could come out near 200mil.), Chronicles of Narnia (250), King Kong (same), The Producers and Memories Of A Geisha, as well as all the artier films waiting to break out (like Jarhead, Munich, Brokeback Mountain...etc.), I predict that the last 3 months of the year will be so big that the box office will be OVER last years, not even including Passion and F9/11.
Until Hollywood ACTUALLY takes a hit, they won't change. And until SOME people step up and work the change, it's not going to happen. Who is trying to change things and has the power to? Look to Mark Cuban, and then look behind him. I don't see anyone behind him.
It's now been over 102 years since the first person showed movies to a crowd, right here in Lake County. That weekend, the theatre made $300 (in 1893 money). They've been raking it in ever since, and thinking something might come along and change that without a fight is crazytalk.
Posted by: Nat Dykeman | 09/23/2005 at 03:16 AM
PS.
Sorry I popped your comment cherry with a comment that's longer than the actual article.
Don't hate me.
Posted by: Nat Dykeman | 09/23/2005 at 03:17 AM
Nat, come on. I love you, but I have to disagree with a few figures. First off, Farenheit 9/11 was funded by Miramax (Disney's street cred) and distributed worldwide by Lion's Gate (although IFC was in on the theatrical distribution here). So there was definitely $$$ flowing into the coffers that are the Hollywood box office revenues.
Also, if Harry Potter 3 made $250 mil, do you really think Walk The Line will make $200? I love The Man in Black to no end, but I don't think there are that many people out there who will show up for that film.
Posted by: Paul | 09/23/2005 at 09:10 AM
I don't think anyone will ever know what the deal was with F9/11. I've heard that in order to release it from Disney, the Weinstein's and Michael Moore had some sort of cap that they could make, and the rest went to a (non-partisan) charity. I think Lion's Gate just had a distributor's agreement here. And, of course, worldwide shouldn't matter at all, since these slump numbers only come from Domestic Numbers. I have no idea what the worldwide box office number is like over last year.
I might have been a bit high on my Walk The Line estimation. For some reason I thought RAY was like a 120m movie, and it looks like Walk The Line is actually GOOD. Plus, Johnny Cash's recent record sales put Ray Charles' to shame. But, I just looked it up, and Ray only did $75 mil. Of course, it doesn't help that they put it out almost EXACTLY 3 months after it was released in theatres, at the hight of Oscar Season. That's a fumble in my book. So, if I figured 50% over Ray's Box Office, lets downgrade that to 120 I guess.
No need to nitpick tho. Right now the box office is 600M under. Come January 1st, I'll bet that that number comes in above, or, at most 1% off. (that's 95 mil)
Don't ask me what I'll bet.
Posted by: Nat Dykeman | 09/23/2005 at 01:27 PM
Hi guys, I just found your blog and have been doing some back reading and digging around. I thought I would start by sharing my thoughts on where I think Hollywood will be in 75 years.
Personally, I have no idea where Hollywood will head over the next 75 years, but I suspect that it will rapidly cease being the juggernaut that we've come to know and love/hate, at least in terms of movie-making. Frankly it's amazing that it's lasted this long; and with huge, populist film cultures like India and China increasingly exporting and competing in the world market, it may be that the glory days of Hollywood are ending.
It really depends on whether or not the system can make money, an increasingly hit-and-miss endeavor. There seem to be no (or few) sure-things anymore, as audiences have more and more entertainment options.
Posted by: moviechic663 | 10/27/2005 at 04:19 PM
What can I say but Amen?
It is amazing Hollywood has lasted this long. 100 years ago there were basically two places a filmmaker could get his or her hands on a camera: The Thomas Edison Company or Hollywood. So it made since that Hollywood decided what films would play for an audience. It is simply amazing that we've reached a point where such a massive amount of film is shot each year and anyone can get their hands on a camera. Yet still a handful of people still control what is allowed in front of an audience.
Thanks moviechic.
Posted by: Paul | 10/27/2005 at 04:55 PM