Are Studios Committing Movie Suicide?

[dude stannis]

I think the superhero genre is going to burn itself out in the next two summers. People complain about this year's summer, but it was one of the most refreshing summers in a long time. It offered a good variety of genres as opposed to superhero after superhero.

 

[Deaths Head II]

Thank goodness I say. The last two summers were lame.

I think we're getting a really good assortment in the super hero genre for next year so it's not really fair to just lump them all as "super hero film." We have two period piece super hero films: Cap in the 40s and First Class in the 60s and Singer referred to FC as the first Silver Age film. Green Lantern is likely to be way more sci fi then any other super hero film and I think Thor's a unique creature in it's own right with it's mix of mythology, more sci fi-ish elements, and superheroics. 2012 seems a lot more standard with another Spider-Man film and Superman film. Not that I'm complaining, but it's just that 2011 feels a lot more diverse. Kinda makes me hope the Antman movies comes out in 2012 but I doubt it. Of course we have Avengers though, so we'll have our first real team up film.

 

[Slushy]

Haven't seen a summer this packed since 2007, the year of the threequels!

 

[Heretic]

if 2011 is diverse, then 2010 was darn near insane. RED, Jonah Hex, The Losers, Iron Man 2, 30 Days Of Night: Dark Days, Kick Ass, Scott Pilgrim and (though not based on a comic) Defendor were all very different movies...and I tend to doubt that the quality will be as high in 2011 as many of those either.

 

[terry78]

if 2011 is diverse, then 2010 was darn near insane. RED, Jonah Hex, The Losers, Iron Man 2, 30 Days Of Night: Dark Days, Kick Ass, Scott Pilgrim and (though not based on a comic) Defendor were all very different movies...and I tend to doubt that the quality will be as high in 2011 as many of those either.

Different, yet due to most of them being comic book based, the same.

 

[Heretic]

Different, yet due to most of them being comic book based, the same.

Being based on a comic book does not make two movies the same. That is a rather ridiculous statement. Are all movies based on novels the same? Are all original scripts based on nothing the same? You truly believe that a Strangers In Paradise movie, Sandman, and Guardians Of The Galaxy would all basically be the same? Are you unable to tell the difference between Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs and The Shining?

 

[jmc]

Personally, I don't know why studios don't release alot of big budget movies in mid-August or September. Usually, the holiday movie season dies off by early August which leaves mid-August throughout September left with usually horrible movies. The only good thing about September is that one early Oscar contender. Then October is filled with horror films while the other huge movies come out in November and December. Mid-August to September could be great for big budget films.

Hell, some studios are already aware of releasing one or two big budget films in April. It's possible for success and Fast & Furious proved it last year.

It's totally absurd, if a film is good enough it will sell tickets no matter when it's released. I guarantee if you move some of next years slate to a different time of the year they will do just as well box office wise, if not better due to there being not as much competition. You release a superhero flick against a bunch of Oscar film who you thinks gonna win that battle?

 

[Deaths Head II]

if 2011 is diverse, then 2010 was darn near insane. RED, Jonah Hex, The Losers, Iron Man 2, 30 Days Of Night: Dark Days, Kick Ass, Scott Pilgrim and (though not based on a comic) Defendor were all very different movies...and I tend to doubt that the quality will be as high in 2011 as many of those either.

I thought Defendor was 2009?

And I was referring to super hero films, not comic book films. And I think most of the 2011 offerings are going to be better overall to boot. Not to mention how many action films this year followed the "group of highly skilled badass mercanaries/agents go rouge" format, including the Losers and Red. Not that they're bad movies, but I'd hardly call that diverse.

 

[Heretic]

I thought Defendor was 2009?

And I was referring to super hero films, not comic book films. And I think most of the 2011 offerings are going to be better overall to boot. Not to mention how many action films this year followed the "group of highly skilled badass mercanaries/agents go rouge" format, including the Losers and Red. Not that they're bad movies, but I'd hardly call that diverse.

Defendor is considered a 2010 movie, I believe. Not sure if it played some festivals or whatever in 2009...

This year there was a glut of "wrongly accused government ops people have to clear their name and get revenge" movies. I remember seeing a preview for A team, The Losers and Salt all before the same movie.

But that is hardly because of comic books. Every romantic comedy made in the last decade is basically the same movie...but I wouldnt blame "movies not based on comics" for that.

Comic books are so diverse that you could see a major release every month and not have an overkill of one particular type of movie.

 

[Warhammer]

It's totally absurd, if a film is good enough it will sell tickets no matter when it's released. I guarantee if you move some of next years slate to a different time of the year they will do just as well box office wise, if not better due to there being not as much competition. You release a superhero flick against a bunch of Oscar film who you thinks gonna win that battle?

Yes sir. Exactly what I'm saying. I think it's just tradition in Hollywood to put all the big blockbusters between May and July these days and not an actual method anymore. These days with so many different types of films, people will go see movies regardless of the weather outside and time of the year. The claim that people want to go to the movie theater to cool down during a hot day or thinking that kids/teenagers/college students will have more availability to see films is pretty much irrelevant nowadays. Films will still make the money. If anything, if they aren't released in the summer, the only difference is that films won't be so frontloaded and will actually have decent legs.

 

[:eek:]

Movies are a little more spread out over the year in other countries. Pixar's summer releases for example are often released in August or September in Europe. And next year's Tintin-movie will be released earlier in Europe than America, in October.

 

[Shifty]

ALL MONTHLY GROSSES July, 2010 $1,318,779,853

JANUARY GROSSES 2010 $1,059,375,618
FEBRUARY GROSSES 2009 $769,343,640
MARCH GROSSES 2010 $832,163,895
APRIL GROSSES 2010 $751,931,353
MAY GROSSES 2009 $1,018,427,704
JUNE GROSSES 2009 $1,086,729,130
JULY GROSSES 2010 $1,318,779,853
AUGUST GROSSES 2007 $920,473,600
SEPTEMBER GROSSES 2007$554,716,620
OCTOBER GROSSES 2009 $693,424,688
NOVEMBER GROSSES 2009 $994,696,073
DECEMBER GROSSES 2009 $1,066,648,494

BIGGEST OPENING WEEKENDS
JANUARY Cloverfield $40,058,229
FEBRUARY Passion of the Christ $83,848,082
MARCH Alice in Wonderland $116,101,023
APRIL Fast and Furious $70,950,500
MAY Spider-Man 3 $151,116,516
JUNE Toy Story 3 $110,307,189
JULY The Dark Knight $158,411,483
AUGUST The Bourne Ultimatum $69,283,690
SEPTEMBER Sweet Home Alabama $35,648,740
OCTOBER Jackass 3-D $50,353,641
NOVEMBER New Moon $142,839,137
DECEMBER I Am Legend $77,211,321

 

[dark_b]

It's totally absurd, if a film is good enough it will sell tickets no matter when it's released. I guarantee if you move some of next years slate to a different time of the year they will do just as well box office wise, if not better due to there being not as much competition. You release a superhero flick against a bunch of Oscar film who you thinks gonna win that battle?

i agree with this post.

 

[terry78]

But then you have some of us in the fanboy scene say that movies not released in Oct-Dec. or May-July are placed in a "dumping ground." Over here in the U.S. anyway. And you got media outlets actually referring to that time period as such.

 

[MadVillainy]

March is coming as a good month to release bigger budget R rated films

 

[Asteroid-Man]

I wish there were more Inglourious Basterds, District 9's, Inceptions and Avatars than comic movies and remakes/reboots.

Funny how at the end of '08/beginning of '09 people were saying 2009 was going to suck - haha.

 

[Warhammer]

January is untapped potential for a big budget film. It it needs is a studio willing to put a film there, which I don't see why not.

 

[Deaths Head II]

January is untapped potential for a big budget film. It it needs is a studio willing to put a film there, which I don't see why not.

I agree, but it seems like studios still consider January to be a dumping ground for films not worth releasing in December of the previous year.

 

[Figs]

Movies are a little more spread out over the year in other countries. Pixar's summer releases for example are often released in August or September in Europe. And next year's Tintin-movie will be released earlier in Europe than America, in October.

That's why I think all those CGI cartoon flicks should be released right after the busy summer which should be for mainly big budget action type films that people like to see during the summer. Europe has it right.

But then you have some of us in the fanboy

scene say that movies not released in Oct-Dec. or May-July are placed in a "dumping ground." Over here in the U.S. anyway. And you got media outlets actually referring to that time period as such.

Isn't it mainly January and February that are the dumping grounds? I never knew August and September were part of that group too.

 

[terry78]

August has ramped itself up to become part of the summer blockbuster party for the last few years I think. Sept. still has the stigma.

 

[jmc]

Well if the films were spread out more there would be no stigma. Certain months are only 'dumping grounds' because the studios have decreed it that way. What better time to release a big blockbuster than in these so called 'dumping grounds', there's no competition, plus it gives audiences a chance to breath.

 

[Warhammer]

I agree, but it seems like studios still consider January to be a dumping ground for films not worth releasing in December of the previous year.

Sadly, that's true. Cloverfield got released in January with no competition whatsoever and made 170 million. I doubt even the studio execs figured it'd make that much.

 

[bullets]

Well if the films were spread out more there would be no stigma. Certain months are only 'dumping grounds' because the studios have decreed it that way. What better time to release a big blockbuster than in these so called 'dumping grounds', there's no competition, plus it gives audiences a chance to breath.

I always thought the assumed people wouldn't be frequenting the theatre as much those times of year because of school , no vacation , etc . If they were to release a major franchise film in September I'm sure it would still do great business .

 

[Warhammer]

I always thought the assumed people wouldn't be frequenting the theatre as much those times of year because of school , no vacation , etc . If they were to release a major franchise film in September I'm sure it would still do great business .

I think the stigma came from that though but I mean, look at November or Alice in Wonderland last March. One way or another, it'll get that money. It just won't be as frontloaded.

 

[dark_b]

I always thought the assumed people wouldn't be frequenting the theatre as much those times of year because of school , no vacation , etc . If they were to release a major franchise film in September I'm sure it would still do great business .

Avatar made a lot of money from januar to march.

ALice was realesed in march.