George Lucas & Steven Spielberg: Studios Will Implode; VOD Is the Future

Brian in Mesa

Advocatus Diaboli
Super Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
73,552
Reaction score
25,743
Location
Killjoy Central
George Lucas & Steven Spielberg: Studios Will Implode; VOD Is the Future

http://movies.yahoo.com/news/george-lucas-steven-spielberg-studios-implode-vod-future-225702332.html

Looking into their crystal ball, George Lucas and Steven Spielberg predicted the imminent arrival of a radically different entertainment landscape, including pricey movie tickets, a vast migration of content to video-on-demand and even programmable dreams.

Speaking on a panel at the USC School of Cinematic Arts, Spielberg and Lucas took a grim view of the future of the majors and predicted theatrical motion pictures will become a niche market.

“They’re going for the gold,” said Lucas of the studios. “But that isn’t going to work forever. And as a result they’re getting narrower and narrower in their focus. People are going to get tired of it. They’re not going to know how to do anything else.”

Spielberg noted that because so many forms of entertainment are competing for attention, they would rather spend $250 million on a single film than make several personal, quirky projects.

“There’s eventually going to be a big meltdown,” Spielberg said. “There’s going to be an implosion where three or four or maybe even a half-dozen of these mega-budgeted movies go crashing into the ground and that’s going to change the paradigm again.”

Lucas predicted that after that meltdown, “You’re going to end up with fewer theaters, bigger theaters with a lot of nice things. Going to the movies will cost 50 bucks or 100 or 150 bucks, like what Broadway costs today, or a football game. It’ll be an expensive thing. … (The movies) will sit in the theaters for a year, like a Broadway show does. That will be called the ‘movie’ business.”

“There’ll be big movies on a big screen, and it’ll cost them a lot of money. Everything else will be on a small screen. It’s almost that way now. ‘Lincoln’ and ‘Red Tails’ barely got into theaters. You’re talking about Steven Spielberg and George Lucas can’t get their movies into theaters.”

Both see “quirky” or more personal content migrating to streaming video-on-demand, where niche audiences can be aggregated. “What used to be the movie business, in which I include television and movies … will be Internet television,” said Lucas.

“The question will be: Do you want people to see it, or do you want people to see it on a big screen?” he added.
 

PDXChris

All In!
Supporting Member
Banned from P+R
Joined
Mar 28, 2003
Posts
31,870
Reaction score
28,968
Location
Nowhere
These are the same guys who refused to get on the Blue-Ray train because it would never go anywhere.
 

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
46,522
Reaction score
17,080
Location
Round Rock, TX
These are the same guys who refused to get on the Blue-Ray train because it would never go anywhere.

Well, it's not really going anywhere. It's a pretty small market share right now and DVD is falling like a rock.

As for this, I don't think it's viable because it's glossing over the theater industry. Movie theaters pretty much live on teenagers coming to the movies and buying a ton of concessions--that's how they make their money. Increase prices just to get in by a lot and you lose that core customer base. No way the theaters follow that model.
 

PDXChris

All In!
Supporting Member
Banned from P+R
Joined
Mar 28, 2003
Posts
31,870
Reaction score
28,968
Location
Nowhere
Well, it's not really going anywhere. It's a pretty small market share right now and DVD is falling like a rock.

As for this, I don't think it's viable because it's glossing over the theater industry. Movie theaters pretty much live on teenagers coming to the movies and buying a ton of concessions--that's how they make their money. Increase prices just to get in by a lot and you lose that core customer base. No way the theaters follow that model.

I am talking about the last 7-9 years, not right now. Blu-Ray had a nice ride while HD-DVD, the format they backed died pretty quickly. The point is that they may make great movies need to stick to that.
 

ajcardfan

I see you.
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
39,230
Reaction score
27,017
I don't know how accurate their predictions are for the future. But, they are right as to what is happening with movies right now. There is less and less variety in movies from year to year. We are getting more and more blockbusters that are either remakes, comic book heroes and Pixar and Pixar imitations. As a result, I now go to the theaters less often than I used to.
 

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
46,522
Reaction score
17,080
Location
Round Rock, TX
I don't know how accurate their predictions are for the future. But, they are right as to what is happening with movies right now. There is less and less variety in movies from year to year. We are getting more and more blockbusters that are either remakes, comic book heroes and Pixar and Pixar imitations. As a result, I now go to the theaters less often than I used to.

You just described every summer. What people overlook is the rest of the year. Sure, there are remakes and superhero movies in the fall and spring, but certainly not as many as there are smaller more accomplished movies. Especially in the fall. Pixar used to release stuff around Thanksgiving, now they are releasing two movies within a month and half of each other in the summer.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
92,496
Reaction score
71,203
You just described every summer. What people overlook is the rest of the year. Sure, there are remakes and superhero movies in the fall and spring, but certainly not as many as there are smaller more accomplished movies. Especially in the fall. Pixar used to release stuff around Thanksgiving, now they are releasing two movies within a month and half of each other in the summer.

Chap, Monsters U is the only Pixar film this summer.

The other one...Planes? That's Disney, not Pixar.
 

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
46,522
Reaction score
17,080
Location
Round Rock, TX
Chap, Monsters U is the only Pixar film this summer.

The other one...Planes? That's Disney, not Pixar.

Planes is a spin-off of Cars. Pixar's name isn't on it, but the connection is there. John Lassetter, head of Disney Animation and director of Cars/Cars 2, is the Exec Producer.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
92,496
Reaction score
71,203
Planes is a spin-off of Cars. Pixar's name isn't on it, but the connection is there. John Lassetter, head of Disney Animation and director of Cars/Cars 2, is the Exec Producer.

I guess...but the entirety of the rest of Pixar wasn't involved.
 

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
46,522
Reaction score
17,080
Location
Round Rock, TX
I guess...but the entirety of the rest of Pixar wasn't involved.

Part of that is because Planes was originally destined for the direct-to-video market, but I guess the lure of big money made them decide to put it out to theaters.

I think that is besides the point though. When they complain about lack of originality, most moviegoers pretty much only think of the big summer movies that make the most money, which right now are the remakes, superhero movies and Pixar (imitations).

Since the 70s, Hollywood has always gravitated to whatever makes the most money--and you're seeing the direct result of that philosophy. Sure, blame the studios for not putting out a lot of original content, but blame the audience for not making the original content that IS produced more money. If a movie like Moonrise Kingdom, for example, made 300 million, you'd see many more movies like it.
 
Last edited:

BigRedRage

Reckless
Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2005
Posts
48,274
Reaction score
12,525
Location
SE valley
Just a matter of picking and choosing what you see I guess.

This is the end was the funniest I had seen in ages.

Machete 2 looks sweet.
 

ajcardfan

I see you.
Supporting Member
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
39,230
Reaction score
27,017
Part of that is because Planes was originally destined for the direct-to-video market, but I guess the lure of big money made them decide to put it out to theaters.

I think that is besides the point though. When they complain about lack of originality, most moviegoers pretty much only think of the big summer movies that make the most money, which right now are the remakes, superhero movies and Pixar (imitations).

Since the 70s, Hollywood has always gravitated to whatever makes the most money--and you're seeing the direct result of that philosophy. Sure, blame the studios for not putting out a lot of original content, but blame the audience for not making the original content that IS produced more money. If a movie like Moonrise Kingdom, for example, made 300 million, you'd see many more movies like it.

I do understand the point you are making. I guess my view is slanted by the fact that I just have more time during the summer to go out to the movies than the rest of the year. I'll probably see twice as many movies from May to August, in theaters, than the rest of the year.

But, when Spielberg says cable TV is now more creative than the major movie studios, I think there is something to it.
 

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
46,522
Reaction score
17,080
Location
Round Rock, TX
I do understand the point you are making. I guess my view is slanted by the fact that I just have more time during the summer to go out to the movies than the rest of the year. I'll probably see twice as many movies from May to August, in theaters, than the rest of the year.

Now you definitely have something there. More time in the summer equals more money in the theaters and in the summer, studios are concerned about quantity, not quality.

But, when Spielberg says cable TV is now more creative than the major movie studios, I think there is something to it.

Perhaps, but the big money is still being made by tentpole movies. Sadly, I think Game of Thrones days as HBO's darling are numbered because the budgets will just keep increasing, and at some point, that bubble will burst because HBO's track record of keeping series that cost a lot to produce isn't that good.

I think what you are also seeing is more creative ways to spend money in television than with movies--television has finally moved beyond the good ole' boys network of traditional production, but movies have yet to really pass that. Plus, if you have a story to tell, there is a lot more opportunity in television to tell it.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
558,318
Posts
5,454,173
Members
6,336
Latest member
FKUCZK15
Top