I absolutely adore that you completely ignored by diatribe about smut, and instead focused in on my estimation that Searchlight only spent $15 Million on marketing for Poor Things. Bravo!
Apparently they sent the stars of the film off to several film festivals in private jets around the world in 2023. That alone, plus a modest campaign of posters and previews, would equal at least $15 Million.
I imagine the marketing budget for Poor Things was more than $15 Million, but let's just go with only $15 Million because it adds up to a tidy $50 Million with its production budget of $35 Million.
I don't disagree with you there, but.... So Searchlight, which lost over $100 Million at the box office in 2023, exists only to burn through corporate cash for Disney? For the unquantifiable monetary value of Golden Globe nominations?
It seems a great reset is in order for the entire Hollywood industry. Because this is not sustainable.
Among other things, it's also done for the people involved.
Studios will often provide "artistic" opportunity for actors, directors, etc. that they would like to keep in the family making movies for them and giving them non-commercial outlets to explore their art is one of the ways they do it.
In this sense, it's seen as a form of compensation to the creators who often, take pay cuts themselves to be involved in the making of them.
Take for instance, Keanu Reeves.
By all accounts a great human and loved by all but as an actor... well, he's good at jumping around and kicking/shooting stuff.
That said if you
look him up on IMDB, you'll find a long string of familiar titles that all fall into a similar mold of action/scifi-action but then you'll also start to see titles you've probably never heard of that seem completely out in left field.
Why?
Because Keanu has always wanted to be seen as a serous actor. He's always wanted to be more than a face or someone cashing in on a franchise.
After the first Matrix, they were eager to get him into more Matrix movies and start using him to spawn other action type stuff but he wanted to make art.
So if you're a studio, what do you do?
This guy could be the launch of your next major franchise worth billions of dollars but he wants to do some project about a love story and personal growth as a super aggressive marketer who takes on a peculiar relationship with a woman who, as a project of hers is meant to give him a better appreciation of life and humanity who
(spoiler) does this with guys because she herself left a high-profile business lifestyle she was riding high on before finding out she was terminally ill.
Do you just say "good day" and move on?
... Or do you make his little movie, agreeing to minimal distribution in return for a contract that ensures he'll also star in the movies you want?
Remember, this is a guy who gave away some of his back-end points on Matrix to the stunt team on the film out of respect for their work - he's really not in this stuff for the money and hasn't been for a long time, even if he's aware of his market value.
BTW, if you watch any of these other movies, it's not hard to be left with the impression that he's way better at convincingly dodging a thrown knife and killing a man with bare hands than selling a moment of emotional trauma - there's a reason you've probably never heard of most of these.
Anyway, awards may not do much for Disney's bottom line directly but they sure mean something to the likes of Emma Stone, Mark Ruffalo, Willem Dafoe and others. It stokes their egos. It makes them feel like they're doing "important work".
Also, like the actor equivalent of going back to school to get your doctorate, it can have an outsized impact on future pay because it raises their profile as an actor.
Or think of it this way: RDJ reportedly made $75 million for his role in Endgame. That was a big movie with a lot of cast. He didn't even have
THAT much screen time.
Emma Stone is an A-list actor who's profile and salary have been on a sharp incline. Making a film like this just for her alone, if it can lock her into potentially high earning future projects, knowing that between ticket sales, streaming rights and other things down the road on top of potential tax savings due to financial under-performance in theaters
(that famous Hollywood math) it will end up costing potentially less than her salary on the next big movie she's involved with makes this kind of project a heck of a lot easier to approve, especially if you can tie her into 2-3 more moves with it.
But you get more than Emma out of this. Watch the promotion and you'll hear Ruffalo talk about being out his comfort zone and trying something new like they pressured him into this... Listen further and he'll mention how being attached to a big franchise for years is great but it makes people start to see you as being like your character and it makes you start to feel like your character and... he's talking about being typecast.
Disney also threw him a bone so he could do a role where he didn't seem like kind of an idiot-savant as the alter ego to Hulk which makes it easier for him to get other roles in the future. It allows him to showcase his "range" and make clear he was only acting like a dopey socially awkward person in all those movies and their promotion and that he isn't
actually like that.
He acts like someone pushed him into doing this but I'm sure he
very much wanted this project.
Ramy Youssef has done a lot of small profile stuff but he was also on the cast of Disney's Wish. They're clearly looking to do more with him and giving him a role where he plays opposite Emma Stone and Willem Dafoe for 95% of his screen time is sure a nice little sign of respect.*
I wouldn't be shocked to find out they were trying to rope Christopher Abbott in, too.
Beyond that, you've got the production designers and costumers and others who have all gotten promotional spotlights around this little movie with their names shown and them being interviewed.
If any of these people are seen as in demand, or of potential value for the next thing they want on a Marvel move but are maybe, a little less interested in being involved in "those kind of projects", this kind of thing can be an easy way to get a foot in the door with these sort of folks who typically make far, far less than onscreen talent but who's work can have a significant impact on the perceived quality of the final product.
And of course, making movies for the "art" gives the the studio and the company that owns them cred that makes them seen as more desirable to various creatives they'd like to attract
(and probably under-pay, if they can) and is as much of an ego boost for a selection of executives as it is for the creatives involved and can also be used as a way to bring in and retain producers that have a good track record but aren't really enthused about creating the hollow but highly profitable stuff studios crave.
So yeah, it's all ultimately about the money but with what they can squeeze out of a project like this, making a few movies like this a year can be a real bargain... plus, it's a roll of the dice. If the movie is nominated for best picture, it's likely to make back it's
(relatively minor) cost in theatrical run due to public interest and if it actually wins, it's pretty much guaranteed to be profitable.
We're not talking tent-pole money but enough that they end up getting all that other benefit for free.
Unlike the Disney movies most people have heard of this year, they were prepared from the start to take a theatrical loss on this one and their budget for it reflects the level they decided they were okay with loosing.
Just imagine if it were that
cheap to convince RDJ to get Iron Man back on the big screen.
It's basically the whole reason Mirimax existed until Harvey started wanting bigger and bigger budgets.
It's why Fox Searchlight was created and the reason that Searchlight survived the acquisition.
Anyway, this is a big part of the reality behind how these kinds of movies get made. There's a lot more to it that ranges from relations with and incentives from cities, states, and countries and establishing footholds with cheaper local labor
(this one was done almost entirely on sound-stages in Budapest, of all places - including most of the "outdoor" shots**) as well as retaining valuable assets
(we could be talking people, things or other resources they'd like to keep tied up) between major productions, testing work with new vendors/partners, equipment, etc. - the list really goes on and on.
If real art ends up getting made in the process, that's a byproduct and a boon for people who enjoy more interesting and thought-provoking cinema.
My feeling is, that's the result, here.
For the actors already near the top who've previously snagged one of the gold dudes, a best-case scenario a lot of times is for the movies to get great critical response but for them to
not be financially successful because they were never making money that mattered to them from these to begin with and they just
LOVE having stuff like this brought up in interviews for other projects: That powerful gem they were so amazing in that never got the popular attention it deserved but that they did because it felt like an important film that needed to be made and they just fell in love with the script and had to do it...
That's great for you as an actor if interviewers are reminded to bring that up while you're on your promotional junket for Avatar 3.
*yes, yes - wish failed (also, not that it matters but I didn't like it) but they're clearly looking to work more with this guy.
**again, SOUNDSTAGES in Budapest. Mostly Americans with fake British accents playing characters traversing a steampunk western Europe filmed in the capital of Hungary. They weren't on location that whole time for unique scenery and landscapes.
