Friday, December 11, 2020
WarnerMedia's CEO says that blockbuster movies will cost $1 billion
Business Insider: WarnerMedia sent shockwaves through Hollywood last week when it announced that all of Warner Bros.' 2021 movies would debut on its streaming service, HBO Max, and in theaters on the same day in the US.
The move is in response to the coronavirus pandemic, which has upended the theatrical industry. But it will also boost Max, which has struggled to convert subscribers since launching in May.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
It’s difficult for me to imagine what 200 million of anything looks like let alone how much actual money that is. 200 million dollars spent to produce a movie is a lot of money. Movies typically make so much money because so much money has been put into them- which makes sense, you can’t make money without spending it. My other thing is what exactly did they need to do and what steps were taken in order to result in a grand total of 200 million dollars- and this is without the streaming. I think obviously now everything is going to have to be streamed in once sense of another, so I understand why more money would be invested into that especially now when covid is still a relatively new thing, so spending more money in order to ensure people’s safety seems like a higher priority than anything from a producer’s standpoint. From a watcher, consumer, audience member it is difficult to digest the fact that so much money was put into two hours worth of motion pictures.
I think that, when boasting how big blockbusters are going cost, one only thinks of movies in big series, like Marvel, DC, and Star Wars, forgetting that blockbusters can come from really anywhere if the movie is good enough. However, what I don't see mentioned is what is this going to do to the cost of streaming services like HBO Max that have these movies? Most people have a limit to how much they'll pay for a monthly service and if it goes over that, your billion dollar blockbuster movie might not make that person stay subscribed, as some people will just wait out for blu-rays, or find a friend that has the service and maybe buy them dinner as a trade off. I think this whole conversation is highly optimistic and by no means something that is going to happen within the next year or so, especially when looking at the subscription numbers the article presents.
This article and this move on WarnerMedia’s part is very uninteresting. It feels like they are just trying to catch up to have a competing chance in a world already heavily dominated. What was once a Netflix dominated world changed recently with the addition of Disney+. There was Amazon Prime, HBO, and others of course but they play different roles. Netflix hit on a new market and paved a path to which Disney took advantage of and Amazon tweaked over time to bridge. Nickelodeon and other companies tried to follow pursuit, but they hold a different place in this path and so does WarnerMedia. This article feels like it is just trying to convince us to believe that WarnerMedia can have a competing chance, but it is just highly unlikely. Mia also brings up a valid point that 200 million dollars is a lot of money. However, most big end movies nowadays are costing minimum of 500 million to make with the idea of course that they end up making billions. If WarnerMedia is already having trouble getting subscribers and they are bringing lower tier big end films then they are unlikely to cause a surge in subscriptions. It also feels much like they are putting all their eggs in one basket, if it does not work out, what will happen to the company?
Post a Comment