What is Digg?88 Comments
- phpMonkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6For the fans of Firefly/Serenity, it may be difficult to come to terms with a statement like this. We all knew Universal picked up the movie rights and allowed Joss many freedoms in making his movie. But then to blame Universal's marketing campaign when the movie is not a financial success (so far)? Personally, my judgment is still reserved. Serenity was a great movie in a summer of mediocre films and disappointments. However, blaming someone won't help it make more money. Then again, Fox can burn in hell for canceling a great series.
- adml_shake, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Even if Sci-Fi was interested in bringing the show back, Fox probably won't let then and Joss has said that Firefly is dead, and that any future installments would be along the lines of the movie franchise. And I don't know what you other people are talking about that the move was promoted like any other. I saw most of the promos on sci-fi web sites, and the Sci-Fi channel it's self, and a few others on some other TV shows. But other than that I hardly saw anything for it.
- trolleyfan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Yeah, but they sure as hell get more than 50%. Movie theaters take a minuscule amount of the gate for the movies (A theater manager friend of mine said below 10%, except in unusual circumstances) so where does the extra 40% go? Distribution? Not likely.
Methinks that $100M-break-even-point is BS."
More or less. Hollywood accounting is...interesting. It bears about as much resemblance to standard, balancing checkbook-style "subtract debits, add credits, total=profit" as a times-table bears to the average, oh, textbook on topology.
Some of that added complexity is real - when you're creating something that has hundreds of people/companies _getting_ money from it while _earning_ money from it comes from an equally large number of people/companies, all with different percentages of profit/gross that kick in at different levels of profit/gross, and lots of the people/companies (in both columns) work/own lots of the others (so in a very real sense, you can be paying yourself) the whole thing is going to be hideously complex. You probably need a five-dimensional spreadsheet just to do the basics.
Other chunks of the complexity are, of course, BS. Given just how complex who owes what and at what level is, it can cost group "A" in this whole mess more money/profit if the movie makes over a certain amount than if it makes _less_. And, of course, that can all vary for all the different players - and their lawyers. Think the plot of "The Producers" if _everyone_ in the film/play/film was trying variant the same thing at the same time.
Or, IOW, it's a mess.
Fox, now, it's hard to see how Fox could _not_ screw up "Firefly." I knew the show was doomed the minute I knew it would _be_ on Fox. The whole network is, from what I can tell, built to screw up. Had they not latched onto the "Simpsons" and "Married With Children" early on, they probably would be as dead now as "The Paramount Network."
Heck, when they did the live-action "Tick" show, Fox _Children_ wouldn't allow Fox _Primetime_ to use the same supporting characters as the animated series - thus "Bat-Manuel" rather than "Der Flatermaus", etc - even though they were no longer producing or even showing in reruns the animated show!
That's right, two divisions of the same company couldn't even agree to share some character names for the same show...
*Ahem* Enough Fox ranting.
On a less ranty/more agreeable note, I tend to agree that while publicity could have been handled _better_, even if IESB had gotten red-carpet, limo to the door service, it won't/wouldn't have effected things much. Movie box office is down because
1) The quality of movies has dropped big-time. That's a result of most big movie companies doing everything by committee. In general, most people aren't going to bother going to bad films - they've got bad TV for that.
2) The cost of going to movies has basically exceeded a tipping point where waiting for it to come out on DVD/Cable is basically the more common response. Sure, nothing beats wide-screen, Sensurround sound, audience cheering movie theaters - for _some_ films - but those films are rare and are made even rarer by point "1" above. I only go to movies because my wife gets free tickets for donating platelets. Lose that and, well, my movie-going would probably drop to about three films a year - and "Serenity," much as I liked it, wouldn't have been one of them. I'd wait for the DVD.
3) The fifteen minute block-O-commercials before every film is just the icing on the cake. I can see commericals at _home_, free of charge. Usually the same commericals too. This has basically resulted in lowering the amount of that "tipping point" above. I mean, a lot more people would pay $10, $11, $12 for a movie if they weren't _also_ "buying" commericals with it. Again, you can get those at home, for free.
I tend to agree with the statement "Movie theaters are nearing their end." The multiplex idea gave them a little extra lifespan, but that's it. Like the music industry, the film industry is going to have to find a different distribution system. I suspect most of the big movie companies aren't going to make this transition.
I liked "Serenity", saw the film, and will probably buy the DVD.
David - Sixcolors, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Doom made 15 million opening weekend. Serenity made 10 million. Not sure if that's advertising or idiotic film goers, but something is wrong there."
More people have heard of Doom than Firefly. I personally won't be seeing Doom because if I can't play it, why watch it? And The Rock as Sarge? Please.
"What happened to the days where sci-fi was intelligent?? Give me some decent sci-fi-- and I will go to the theater for it.
Serenity in my opinion, barely looks worth the rental fee."
That there is an intelligent opinion. Panning the movie before seeing it. You rock, sir.
Seriously though; I had no idea what to expect when I went to see Serenity. I just knew that my friends were enthused about it and a few were calling it a Star Wars killer (but these days, Star Wars needs killing... it has gotten lame and needs to be shot).
The commercials for the movie made it seem like it was nothing but comedy, which simply isn't true. Comedy makes up a good portion of it, but it doesn't feel forced. There's no reaching for gags. The story has a great plot and I cared about the characters right up to the end. I didn't want any of them to die. *coughJarJarHack* - hettybembler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Seriously. I am a huge Firefly/Serenity fan, and while I don't think they necessarily did a great job with the trailers or the movie poster, you can't say Universal didn't give it their best shot. Not only did they put out a *lot* of advertising to snag new viewers but they went out of their way to try new ways of marketing the film (screening the movie all over the US for fans to build buzz, months before it was released?). I have come to terms with the notion that this movie may well have not been for everyone.
- BeefandBeer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I am not a fan of Firefly. The only reason why I watched Serenity is because someone on a funny video site kept on posting off-topic posts about Serenity. It got my interest. I believe the internet is a good way to build up interest on those who are newbies to a franchise, but their publicity wasn't good enough.
- Rndm_Tngnt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Really, Serenity isn't a terribly marketable film. It's a Space Western Adventure Comedy Drama. You can't really whip out a 20 second TV spot that will clue in viewers. So you have to make a deceptive ad that will appeal to the greatest number of people. However, those people will feel jilted at being conned into seeing something they weren't expecting. Marketing is hard.
- cankles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2no big profits mean more people paid for it which means more people wanted to see it
- mutant, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Movies like this cash in after the box office. Counting on high box office reciepts for a niche sci-fi movie is pretty stupid. How much has the box set sold? How much will the DVD sell. That is the money.
The retards that wrote this article are stupid for assuming Serenity is a failure, I think for what it is, it did great, and will do fine as time goes on. - Pogue_Mahone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2If it cost $39M to make the film, and $10M to market it why does it need to make $100M to break even? I must be missing something in the math there...
- Guano, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Doom made 15 million opening weekend. Serenity made 10 million. Not sure if that's advertising or idiotic film goers, but something is wrong there.
- oculus1857, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I have to agree this guy is a winniey B*tch! Really, needs to get over the fact that he got pwned by some folks, 4 browncoats, on a forum and move on. Also, grammer check much!
Universal did all they could do to promote this film. I even meet the actors and actresses of the film when I went to Dragon Con, www.dragoncon.org. I saw the movie twice and each time I brought a friend with me who had not seen the flick and they where pleasently surprised how good it was. However, I had to drag them. America seems to have a lot of 'fear' when going to the movies to see something new. Yes, America home of the 'Brave'. Alteast some of us are still brave, they are called Brown Coats.
Also, I am to blame for part of 'Doom' movie's success. I did go see it and man did it suck @$$. Serenity, unlike 'Doom' will stand the test of time while 'Doom' will be in the $6.99 on DVD a year from now. - diggerphelps, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The movie had no "brand name" stars.
Doom had The Rock.
It also had no other well-known tie-ins, save for a cancelled sci-fi TV show, to which the title bears no relationship.
That's what American audiences go to the movies on Friday night to see (for the most part).
This is not a reflection of the film's quality, more of the sad state of Hollywood movies (and the audience). - ziffel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Why can't Sci-Fi pick this show up and fund the making of a 2nd season? Didn't they do that with Stargate SG1?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Because $100M gross doesn't all go to Universal.
- hettybembler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1900 is small
2400 is a good number - PowerLlama, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1'Poor marketing is a lame excuse. Serenity was released in a very good number of theaters. It just didn't have a mainstream appeal."
Actually Serenity was in a very small number of theaters. - adml_shake, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ hettybembler
"Joss had a three show deal with Fox, which is why he made Serenity with them. They've since let him out of the contract."
Well first off, it was Universal that he had the deal with. Second where did you hear that they let him out of his contract? Do you have a link? - crazyfan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1IESB.NET sucks ballz, what a winer!
This movie isnt all its cracked up to be, its not like the biggest and best movie ever.
Universal will probebly promote this more for DVD. - Ravenlock, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1jimlunsford: This movie sucked that is why it failed.
Yay! More eloquent and insightful statements! Thanks so much, jim! - DanElHombre, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Serenity is a great addition to the series.
I couldnt imagine anyone that bought the series would not pick up this movie on DVD as well.
Firefly is still in the Top 10 in top sellers at amazon
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/new-for-you/top-sellers/-/dvd/all/ref=d_hp_sn_ts/104-3944427-5951940 - hettybembler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Uh, no it was 20th Century Fox for Fox TV. Firefly was the first of a three show development deal with them. This has nothing to do with the movies.
Whedon out of deal:
http://www.defamer.com/topic/trade-roundup-whedon-out-of-ideas-024140.php
http://www.eonline.com/News/Items/0,1,15210,00.html - schotty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well I went with the woman and her sister to see it opening day and I was the only one who seen Firefly. They got and enjoyed the movie. So if there are individuals that are teetering on whether or not they need to see the series first, the answer is no. It does help but not necessary.
- skippy2057, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Never saw the show (don't watch much tv these days), the film was a hoot though, thoroughly enjoyed it. Shame it hasn't done better, maybe they will make up on DVD sales down the road. I have not been to the movies a whole lot this year, but I don't recall seeing very much advertising - although obviously there was enough to get me into the theater...
- drummin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Nobody failed this movie at all, and it already made more than it probably should have.
Serenity/Firefly had a very small but rabid fan base who all I'm sure went out and supported the movie. I mean, the TV show was canceled, so why would they expect the movie to be huge.
I didn't know a thing about the storyline and I went to see it. And... it was ok. Nothing to write home about and certainly not destined to be any kind of hit. - Shdwdrgn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't get why anyone would WANT to go to the theaters these days. The prices are absolutely ridiculous. Ticket prices are up to $11 or more, yet the only thing that has changed in the theater over the years is they put more crap on the screen to waste your time before the movie starts. (Quit preaching to me about how piracy is illegal, you're not going to change my opinion that way!) And they're charging, what, $3 for a large soda and not even offering free refills? What the hell is that? It cost them 50 cents for the cup and maybe 25 cents for the soda. And I can just about buy a whole box of popcorn for the same price they charge for a bucket. What am I paying for here, to have some guy scoop the popcorn into the bucket for me?
I don't see more than 1 movie a year in the theater anymore. I'll wait for the DVD. I may not have a huge screen at home, but for the price the theater charges me, I could just wait and buy the movie when it comes out, and I will enjoy it MUCH more when watching at home. - bluehouse, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I bet it will do well when it comes out on DVD
- boscorelle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I sincerely hope SciFi gets wise and has Joss restart this awesome series -- movie rocked btw :)
- oculus1857, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I meant 'grammar', oops! I guess I can't be invited to a previewing of a movie either. :(
- jk_baller23, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Hopefully Fox sees that Serenity had some success, and will renew the series. Their dvd sales for Firefly skyrocketed because of Serenity (currently #5 in DVD sales at Amazon) and it isn't even a complete season. The movie may have done better if it was released during the summer. Their wasn't that much marketing for Serenity though. Only reason I knew about it was because of the previews they played after the reruns of Firefly on Sci-fi. Anyway, I want more Firefly.
- boscorelle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I thought the same thing -- but the show grows on ya
- Sixcolors, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1*realizes the hypocracy of part of his last post* Ouch. XD I guess I can't say anything about Doom. Who knows, it may actually be decent. But given the choice, I chose Serenity and wasn't disappointed. I've never seen the series, but I certainly want to pick up the Firefly DVD now.
- capndan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think people just fail to realize that movies aren't making as much money anymore in the box office because NOBODY WANTS TO GO ANYMORE. I don't even give going to the theater a second thought anymore becuase in a couple months I can spend a couple bucks to rent it, curl up on my couch with GOOD FOOD, and not have to deal with anyone else. It just isn't worth spending so much money anymore when these multiplexes are sticking movies on screens hardly bigger than some people's home projection systems. Movie theaters are nearing their end, and once they start doing a simultaneous release on DVD and theater I think profits will pick up immensely. Serenity for sure will see a lot more money once it gets released on DVD.
- hettybembler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I never said Serenity was a good movie, all I said was that popularity != quality. People love to watch Laguna Beach, but that doesn't make it a good show.
- hettybembler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Joss had a three show deal with Fox, which is why he made Serenity with them. They've since let him out of the contract.
- pillfred, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It was a sci-fi movie, lets face it not a lot of people get into those movies.
- EricBoyers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Joss made a deal with Universal where he can't launch another Firefly/Serenity TV series for (I believe it is) 10 years. So the only hope of a continuing story would come from movie sequels.
- vokiel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What counts is the amount of cash the movie will make when it gets printed on consummer media. Think of Odyssey 2001, do you still think this movie tanked because no one went to see it when it came out?
- hettybembler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What's Odyssey 2001?
- VladDrac, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1God.... if people refuse to watch a TV show IN THEIR OWN HOME they certainly won't leave the house to watch it for MONEY at the theatre! I'm not saying the movie sucked. I have no idea. But it should be a surprise to no one that it bombed!
- TK99, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I still Joss should have brought Serenity to either the WB or UPN and never FOX.
Or if he had been smart talked to Brad Wright of Stargate SG1 on the do's and dont's of TV for scifi shows. - Nowheredan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"The movie failed because it was a bad movie"
Yes. A bad movie with an 80% rating on Rotten Tomatoes (AKA 80% of reviewers gave it a positive score). The consensus is that it was a good movie, if not great.
Doom, on the other hand, is at 20%. It cost 50% more to make, opened in 50% more theaters, and made 50% more in it's opening weekend. But seeing as it's a terrible film (I saw it - didn't pay for it though, and no I didn't steal it) it will probably taper off much quicker. - trolleyfan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"1) The quality of movies has dropped big-time. That's a result of most big movie companies doing everything by committee. In general, most people aren't going to bother going to bad films - they've got bad TV for that."
Addendum: And because of this, more people are going to default to _assuming_ it'll be a bad film and thus not go.
David - Chewie67, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@remy_lebeau - Can you elaborate?
- Chewie67, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Crap movie = crap profits. Always has, stop whining."
Deuce Bigalow = 90 Million
There goes that theory. The author is whining because he didn't get invited to a press junket, but his point is still valid. The movie wasn't promoted well. Friends of mine who LOVE Sci Fi didn't know anything about the movie. Universal could have done better.
Hopefully the DVD sales will be strong. - MonkeyFit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Everyone I have talked to all said they heard it was a great movie. Yet I still haven't talked to anyone that has actually seen it. I want to see it, but I refuse to go to the theater in my home town. I have to drive 50 mi. to see it in a decent theater. And without a car, I have to wait fro someone willing to do the same. And for all those that want to tell me to suck it up, I've seen movies in nice theaters and then saw them again in the crap theater, and vice versa. The theater here actually degrades the quality of the movie. I need to find someone to take me to see it in a decent theater.
- bloaded, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The movie was a great movie and the marketing could have been better but to blame universal is just stupid. We should all be thanking universal for picking up the rights to a cancelled show and letting Joss do what he does.
- coldsteel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1If I were to take the guys numbers on face value and agree that the movie needs to make $100 million to break-even it speaks more for the inefficiency (or greed) of the industry than anything else. I've seen independent films made with MUCH less than 1 percent of that amount that would be a roaring financial success at $1 million and that could easily make that with proper Internet distribution (I'd pay a buck or two for them - maybe Apple's on to something). I think I read somewhere that the budget for the made for SCIFI channel movies for example was 'only' $1 million per movie so it can certainly be done.
PS I saw Serenity at the movies - I think I've only seen one Firefly episode, but I did like Serenity. - HoGiHung, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1And they're charging, what, $3 for a large soda and not even offering free refills? What the hell is that? It cost them 50 cents for the cup and maybe 25 cents for the soda.
Actually, depending on volume, the cup costs about 8 cents. The soda 10-35 cents, again depending on volume.
The series and movie are great. Maybe someone at Sci-Fi will have the balls to fight for the show and pick it up. Nothing against BSG or the StarGates, but Firefly would make Friday a perfect night for Sci-Fi TV. At least for me. Put Atlantis on first, SG-1, Firefly then BSG.
Ho. - Incognito, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Production costs for Serenity was 39 million, a relatively small film. Marketing was probably no more than 10 million, if that. So for this movie to break even this film needs to make 100 million."
So much for when it reaches 39 million with dvd sells it will be a success.
Lets call a spade a spade people, no matter how good the movie was, the marketing has failed it twice. And worse yet, Joss and crew trusting both Fox and Universal have been bad decisions both times. Some responsibility does fall on him for not making sure advertising covered the parameters it should have when he signed with these two companies.
Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.
Get some negotiation skills or get your own company. -
Show 51 - 85 of 85 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is