Nearly 40 years ago, a great white dorsal fin sliced through American cinemas with its ominous, minor-second-interval leitmotif, and a new business model was born. "Jaws," which cost $7 million to make, was deemed a good fit for a June release in 1975 partly because it took place at a beach around Independence Day. But its extraordinary success — the movie went on to earn $471 million at box offices worldwide — subsequently helped spawn Hollywood's now-conventional wisdom that if you're going to make a blockbuster, then summer, when kids are out of school and people are in search of industrial-strength air-conditioning, is the best time to release it. After "Star Wars" became a huge hit two summers later, all the big studios seemed to take notice.
Illustration by Jasper Rietman
1. Hollywood is an incredibly risk-averse industry.
2. What happens when every studio has the same strategy . . .
3. . . . ''R.I.P.D.''
In the years since, those studios have crammed more man-eating marine life, aliens, pirates, superheroes, robots, dinosaurs and car chases (and their exploding iterations) into an increasingly crowded season. A decade ago, there were 22 films that each ran on 3,000 screens during the summer. This year, there were 31, the most ever. A lot of them, however, bombed. "R.I.P.D.," "Turbo," "Lone Ranger," "Pacific Rim" and "White House Down" all cost more than $100 million, only to tank at the domestic box office. After a bit of soul searching, several explanations have been suggested — Ryan Reynolds's inability to open a movie, why anyone would want to see the "Lone Ranger" in 2013 and so forth. But a number of economists are coming around to a more unsettling idea: The summer-blockbuster strategy itself may have tanked.
From an economics perspective, this summer schedule is baffling. The studios are choosing to release all of their big films precisely when they know their competitors are doing the same thing. "There's rational behavior and there's, well, other behavior," says Peter Broderick, a film-distribution strategist who runs Paradigm Consulting. "Decision-making in Hollywood, perhaps more than anywhere else, is driven by conventional wisdom and inertia and a whole lot of things that are more complicated than just being rational."
There are three main reasons big studios may not be behaving optimally. The first has to do with a poor understanding of statistics. Movie executives see that box-office revenues have been higher in the summer and conclude that there is something inflationary about a summertime release. Yet this thinking is inherently flawed. The summer was never actually as profitable as it seemed. The official season, which lasts about a third of the year (at least the way Hollywood divides the calendar), generates around 40 percent of annual ticket sales. Furthermore, box-office revenue may be higher in the summer precisely because that's when studios have chosen to release their most popular movies. The expected box-office appeal of the film may be driving the release date, in other words, rather than the release date enhancing the box-office performance.
Economists refer to this chicken-and-egg problem, in which cause and effect become entangled, as "endogeneity." It's a problem that muddies all sorts of statistical analysis when you don't have controlled experiments. (Does higher campaign spending win elections, for instance, or does the more popular candidate simply attract more financing?) Liran Einav, an economist at Stanford University, has developed a model that tried to get rid of this endogeneity problem by figuring out a way to control for film quality, which he defined as mass appeal, not Oscar-worthiness. Einav concluded that there was indeed a bigger audience available in the summer; but even so, he determined, a large portion of the seasonal swings in box-office revenue comes from the fact that the biggest crowd-pleasers ("Shrek," "X-Men," "Jurassic Park") are reliably released on the same handful of weekends each year. In the five decades leading up to "Jaws," the year's top-grossing movie was released in the summer only 20 percent of the time. In the decades since, the figure shot up to 63 percent. In the last decade, it has been 80 percent.
Catherine Rampell is an economics reporter at The Times. Adam Davidson is off this week.
Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang
It’s the Economy: Hollywood’s Tanking Business Model
Dengan url
http://koraninternetonline.blogspot.com/2013/09/itas-economy-hollywoodas-tanking_5.html
Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya
It’s the Economy: Hollywood’s Tanking Business Model
namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link
It’s the Economy: Hollywood’s Tanking Business Model
sebagai sumbernya
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar