Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Maverick is the real outlier/unicorn of the Covid after theater history to this point.
No film has done as well when you consider how movie going audiences have Been since and where they were before…
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney (and others) at the Box Office - Current State of Affairs
- Thread starter Disney Analyst
- Start date
No film has done as well when you consider how movie going audiences have Been since and where they were before…
TP2000
Well-Known Member
Just capturing these three comments for posterity, as I posted my reply only a couple minutes before you acted as though I didn't understand what the strike issues are about.
I understand it, but the average American doesn't. The average American in Des Moines, Iowa just sees snotty Susan Sarandon who lectured Americans to defund their local police departments a few years ago now on strike. It's not a sympathetic look for the unions.
I put this in another thread somewhere, but I'll say it again. If I were in charge of SAG-AFTRA I would ban any A or B List celebrity from appearing in the media on behalf of the union. Only use struggling actors who work as waiters and baristas to speak for the union and explain what they are fighting for. If you want to help sway public opinion, the public needs to know this isn't famous Millionaires fighting with other Millionaires.
SAG-AFTRA hasn't done a good job with that messaging and imagery yet. They need to fix it fast.
Chi84
Premium Member
Yes, the government will get involved when there are threats to the public health and safety. Some people have issues with that also, so I’m not sure why you’re making any of this about sympathy.Just a gut instinct. Susan Sarandon is a far less sympathetic figure for most Americans than a factory worker in Ohio. Just the truth.
Which is why the Hollywood strike isn't activating a response from either the White House or the California Governor's office. As yet, not even the LA Mayor is getting involved. That speaks volumes.
If General Motors went on strike and shut down production, or air traffic controllers go on strike, the White House gets involved ASAP. If coal miners went on strike, the Governor's of Kentucky and West Virginia would get involved ASAP. Because those are the types of industrials that are not only vital to the health and security of the nation, but they are hugely concerning issues for voters.
So far... the government at the federal, state and even local levels are not getting involved in the strike, aside from issuing boilerplate pablum via their spokesmen about "standing for fairness".
TP2000
Well-Known Member
Exactly. The government wouldn't get involved in an actor's strike because actor's are entirely Non-Essential employees. The immediate health and safety and security of the nation does not depend on that industry.
Thus, another reason why the average American doesn't care about the Hollywood strikes. Who cares?
Chi84
Premium Member
That explains so much.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
It sure seems like the money that studios used to be able to make - movies and tv - is drying up amid rising costs
So the companies that own them are trying to figure out a way to severely limit the take of the talent?
…gee…I can’t for the life of me figure out why there’s a disagreement?
So the companies that own them are trying to figure out a way to severely limit the take of the talent?
…gee…I can’t for the life of me figure out why there’s a disagreement?
TP2000
Well-Known Member
It's part a rolling conversation from earlier in this thread, I think last Friday afternoon or maybe Saturday.
A few of us mentioned that nobody really cares about the Hollywood strikes, and some were offended by that, so I tried to explain why I think the Hollywood strikes aren't of any real concern to average Americans. They just don't care about it because thus far the Hollywood actors haven't become sympathetic figures in the eyes of most Americans.
SAG-AFTRA needs to alter their messaging and strike visuals, and keep the celebrities hidden, if they want public sympathy for the strike.
BuddyThomas
Well-Known Member
You seem to think you know a lot about the average American. You also seem to think you know a lot about movies you have not seen. But since you have no interest in new movies, perhaps this is your personal dream come true. But to say “who cares” is really ridiculous and just despicable actually. Some on here work in the entertainment industry and I am one of them. You continuously demean the industry and it’s pretty disgusting.
Disney Irish
Premium Member
I would add Mario into that, but yes the pandemic may have ended up changing the box office forever after all. Something that was feared would happen at the beginning and during the pandemic.
But this isn't new, studios have always tried to find ways to limit the pay of talents. As old as the industry.....It sure seems like the money that studios used to be able to make - movies and tv - is drying up amid rising costs
So the companies that own them are trying to figure out a way to severely limit the take of the talent?
…gee…I can’t for the life of me figure out why there’s a disagreement?
As the shift goes to less reliance on box office and more on streaming and digital platforms, talent is going to end up having less traditional backend deals and more deals based on minutes watched. And when that happens watch the explosion in how much they promote the streamers....
TP2000
Well-Known Member
Because I'm an average American.
Hell, I'm so average I had to move to Utah just to stand out a bit.
I do not know anything about the plots, or characters, or artistic merits of movies I have not seen. Which is why I don't discuss plots, or characters, or artistic merits about those movies.
But I do know what the box office data and financial facts are behind many recent movies. Because those facts and data are released publicly and available online from reputable sources. Which is why I do discuss the box office data and financial facts of movies I have not seen.
flynnibus
Premium Member
It just means the end of a one type of business model.As much as I'm trying to avoid saying it's the end of Hollywood and Disney, but based on this thread, this is the most depressing thread I ever read. I mean, people fear mongering (Even though I kind of was part of it.), the actors and writers going on strike (For God knows how long it'll take), etc, I feel like this is becoming the next great depression era where there is no hope to get through it. Man, I hate being negative!But at least I didn't say it's the end of Hollywood or Disney!
Movies aren't going away. Acting isn't going away. Studios aren't going away.
But the way they have been doing business for the last 50yrs is going away. They've been fighting it for the last 20 trying to make the theatre experience more premium... and have jacked prices and their distribution models to try to offset the decay... but the little boy can't hold the dike together any longer.
Major changes are going to have to happen to keep this business model viable.
Chi84
Premium Member
This doesn’t make sense.
TP2000
Well-Known Member
I'm an average American who is retired and had plenty of time to read about three newspaper articles on the Hollywood strike and understands that the main issues at play for both management and labor are streaming's shaky business model and its tiny residual payments to actors, plus the rapid rise of AI and its ability to replace costly human writers and actors with very cheap computer generated text/images.
Does that help?
Still, SAG-AFTRA leadership needs to keep the Susan Sarandons of the world from hogging the camera at the sidewalk strikes, because actors and actresses like her are hurting their case with average Americans.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
I would say avatar and Mario…even that dumb multi Spider-Man…were the kinda “modern legs” we’ve seen for quite some time. Ridiculous opening and then just had a bit of “I guess?” Money flow in after.
Maverick was a legit…old school legs. Cause it was a movie people wanted for 35 years…slow and steady.
It’s what LFL should be doing…but the company doesn’t get that at all.
The difference is advertising was what they had to draw upon before. That’s how they made the money…
That’s not really an option now. The public doesn’t have to tolerate ads. That’s the brave new world that has the actors and the studios in a bind. There really isn’t enough money to go around…
The model might just not work.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
I think he means he’s woefully boring
TP2000
Well-Known Member
I think he means he’s woefully boring
Thank you for getting it.
But if you move to Utah and just make a couple witty remarks at the neighborhood's July 4th kiddy bike parade, you should see how fast your dance card fills up.
BuddyThomas
Well-Known Member
I don’t know why you always try to deliberately be so contentious about this kind of thing on here. The actors and writers are fighting for very valid causes. If you are against them, that means you are with the studios. But you have never been with the studios in your previous posts against “Burbank”. You can’t have it both ways.
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
Yet you wouldn’t stop going on about the supposedly objectionable gay themes of Strange World.
Jedijax719
Well-Known Member
The pandemic has resulted in the inflation we see now (at least it plays a major role). Production of pretty much anything isn't keeping up with demand. That includes anything involved with making movies since there's SO much construction and tech involved. So, the natural result (when the strike is somehow resolved at some point) is lower production spending possibly/probably resulting in less quality from the tech end of things. This will be noticeable on the big screen and, despite how things ends up, the big screen is where most of the criticism is targeted. It may be targeted a bit toward the small screen BUT (1) things may or may not be as noticeable (as long as they aren't as bad as the ending of Wandavision) and (2) let's face it, viewers are a bit more accepting of technical hiccups on the small screen. That is why people TORE into how Tarkin and Leia looked in Rogue One but were near 100% accepting of Luke in Mandalorian.
A very simplistic way of looking at things would be to say that when theaters suffer, streaming thrives. But I don't know if that necessarily holds true. Maybe both suffer. Maybe people just would rather watch YT or Tik Tok $h!+
A very simplistic way of looking at things would be to say that when theaters suffer, streaming thrives. But I don't know if that necessarily holds true. Maybe both suffer. Maybe people just would rather watch YT or Tik Tok $h!+
Tha Realest
Well-Known Member
Paramount + will give it $200M to stream. Problem solved, right?