Is the superhero cinema saturation point nigh?

[Soubhagya]

It doesn't work like that. There is no rational market. The boardrooms of Disney don't look at a 200,000 production and say, yeah, this is a great movie and it we build it up it will sell. THe independent movie theater was effectively killed off about 15 years ago, purposely starved of product. The result was the immediate rise in ticket prices. Now the whole supply chain is controlled by 3 studios. You just don't understand how an openly competitive theatre market works. On the internet, talk is cheap. Your information was wrong because you are measuring the wrong thing. A movie in the old days might be in the theatre for 2 years. Look up the history of the Wizard of Oz. Today the movie is out 3 months, and then it is rolled out to foreign markets and DVD or Netflix and they are finished, on to the Next Big Blockbuster. And it is worst in LA than in NYC.

It is all about the spectacle now. Hollywood wants sure bets. Sure bets are expensive specticulars with huge openings where showings can be manipulated by publicity and access to screens, and with a built in audience. They can spin that nickle dependably as long as there is another generation of 14 year olds. Complex storytelling and creativity is risky and not promoted. There is a bigger audience for it than comic movies. But it is risky. Star power is also dieing. If you want to know if people are getting sick of it, yeah. But it remains a dependable way to turn a dime. And they will milk it to the last breath, until people just stop going the the movies all together, which at 17 bucks a ticket is getting close already.

Aren't films coming out which begin with limited releases and then released widely? The Post is one example. It had a limited release in USA in December 22. Then it was released widely at January 12. They do such with films like that. Get them in limited theaters. Generate good worth of mouth and get strong buzz. Then release widely. Molly's Game, Darkest Hour are few more examples from the top of my head. If anyone says films aren't being made because studios are interested in safe bets how can anyone explain the large number of films?

And films don't run for two or three months like years ago. Its foolish to compare something like Gone With The Wind to films released today. They did not face this kind of competition from the likes of games, television, etc. Less and less people are going to the theaters. You can't keep a film for so long. Even those big budget ones. Its a business. You have to earn. If a film earns it stays longer. If i recall correctly Avatar stayed for 9 months in theaters because it did that kind of business for a long period of time. But it was something unlike anything else. An exception. Times have changed. Theaters aren't the only main player for people's entertainment in these days.

I agree with high priced tickets. One reason is budgets of films are getting bigger. Something like 200 million in a film was a rarity years ago. Now its the norm for the films 'meant for the crowd'. To recoup that they ask for bigger percentages from theaters. Who increase their prices to handle that. Its not a short term thing. This has happened over a long period of time.

They shall start reducing those budgets. And more has to be done to bring more people to the theaters. These are real problems. But films aren't being made because superhero films are made is not true. Facts are there for everyone to see. More number of films are being made now then ever before. Look at the numbers from 1980.

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/yearly/

[Powerboy]

It doesn't work like that. There is no rational market. The boardrooms of Disney don't look at a 200,000 production and say, yeah, this is a great movie and it we build it up it will sell. THe independent movie theater was effectively killed off about 15 years ago, purposely starved of product. The result was the immediate rise in ticket prices. Now the whole supply chain is controlled by 3 studios. You just don't understand how an openly competitive theatre market works. On the internet, talk is cheap. Your information was wrong because you are measuring the wrong thing. A movie in the old days might be in the theatre for 2 years. Look up the history of the Wizard of Oz. Today the movie is out 3 months, and then it is rolled out to foreign markets and DVD or Netflix and they are finished, on to the Next Big Blockbuster. And it is worst in LA than in NYC.

It is all about the spectacle now. Hollywood wants sure bets. Sure bets are expensive specticulars with huge openings where showings can be manipulated by publicity and access to screens, and with a built in audience. They can spin that nickle dependably as long as there is another generation of 14 year olds. Complex storytelling and creativity is risky and not promoted. There is a bigger audience for it than comic movies. But it is risky. Star power is also dieing. If you want to know if people are getting sick of it, yeah. But it remains a dependable way to turn a dime. And they will milk it to the last breath, until people just stop going the the movies all together, which at 17 bucks a ticket is getting close already.

The Wizard of Oz was out for two years because there was no television, no DVDs and not a lot of other things vying for the dollars and time of the audience. As someone pointed out, a movie that runs for 3 months today was highly successful.

There simply are not enough blockbusters to sustain a multiplex. Runs are limited due to contracts for showings on other media. At the theater near me, there are all sorts of movies playing that are not blockbusters. They just usually don't sell as many tickets but they also cost less to make.