Barnack

Do we officially know if it has co-production status with higher retention share ?

Even variety is suggesting that it is probably coming from Disney https://variety.com/2018/film/news/oscars-popular-film-category-what-it-means-1202899599/ Does that mean more Disney-pandering skits like last year’s stale “Wrinkle in Time” bit (Disney-owned ABC airs the Oscars)? Probably, particularly given that it’s clear ABC had a hand in these moves. Is the ceremony going to morph into a borderline sketch/variety show that feels like a painful stretch for content? One assumes they’re still figuring all that out, but step one ought to be hiring a strong television producer to get something like that off the ground, rather than another round of film personnel. You’re making a television show. Lean on television talent. But, again, it’s a condescending move and it may have just undercut efforts to push Coogler’s film into competition with all worthy contenders, not just the ones that busted blocks. (And what an irony that would be if indeed Disney/ABC pushed for these changes.) They are paying what around 1 billion for the show until 2028 that must give them some open year's to their request, it is not silly to suggest that they could want a popular movie category (that their own movie would dominate not being a negative here, but for the ads revenues of the show itself also). And there: https://variety.com/2018/tv/news/abc-oscar-changes-ratings-popular-film-1202899515/

It must, at least after a while. In hockey for example, goaltender and defenceman have their own best of the year at their position trophy, forward does not, forward almost always win the annual MVP award. In baseball pitcher almost never win MVP, remove the CY young maybe they would win more often (almost certainly).

It seem to have some lack of distinction between the Academy administration/leadership and is voters. It is probably not the people never voting for those movie that are suggesting that category. In 2018 the superbowl had a 10% crash in the 18-49 demo and a 7% in general drop, despite the help from the growing streaming viewership. But arguably they had a bit of a panic and it caused them to set up some no kneeling during the national anthem rule. In the past most buzzed movies was linked to quality, now not so much you can predict the most buzzed film a year in advance before anyone saw them and without looking at the director name. There is almost no big successful movies (that are big not because of a franchise pre-awareness but by their quality) that did get nominated in the best picture category in the 2010s, it is almost automatic to get in for them.

Well yes ? Not sure what is the relevance of that comment, if Disney bought ABC 6 decade only to be a fresher acquisition ? 2 decade seem more than enough time to have control over a tv network no ?

Criteria I would imagine will be a certain box office at a certain date (just before sending the ballot I imagine), but they didn't say what it would be. Has for B., not sure how much of the message is that one or that small movies winning is not something that is to be celebrated but an issue, that the best movies winning is not what the award should be about, either message (and it is probably a mix of both that will be the perception) is quite bad.

I imagine this come from Disney owning the distribution rights of the show and being able to push demands on them ? Same goes for rumors of them being a factor in Kimmel (A Disney employee) doing it. It would be real vote that a giant third party firm that is much bigger than the Academy (and not much smaller than Disney) will be in charge of.

Stuff like Blind Side, Hidden Figures, King Speech perform better there than at professional award group, there is quite the difference between them and many award. From awards that try to predict the Academy Awards and get their popularity has being considered good predictor, then obviously not. Not sure how much of this is not more an enduring myth created by the Weinstein themselve, Shakespear in love was a 100m movie box office success story after all and right after the year's after 1998: 1999: 130m American Beauty success story 2000: 187m Gladiator blockbuster 2001: 170m Beautiful mind big studio movie with a 80m budget in 2018 dollar 2002: 170m Chicago big blockbuster 2003: The lord of the rings Has if those movie were not classic popular studio wide release movie type of winner, one Miramax winner but a big comedy musical making a giant amount of money. Crash or maybe in a more symbolic way Hurt Locker beating Avatar feel more like the real turning point. 1998 is when even Spielberg started to play the game more aggressively that is true but they could certainly still win for a good decade after that. Studio making less and less movies (and after the early 2000s franchise success more and more sequels), independent being able to make more and more of them and cheaper ways to be seen by voters than 4 walling theater and getting voters in person to see them are force that would have existed regardless of Weinsteins and has little to do about a shift of taste/mission of the voters.

A lot of those according to people familiar with the proceeding phrasing is not fully clear to me. Are they https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_balloon from Disney to test how the trade/industry react to some PR scenario or they are from people familiar to how studio tend to work but with not specific knowledge of the current situation.

May as well end the academy award and go to a professional voters system (like almost all the other award have). The hole point of the exercice is wanting to know what people that actually do movies think and the difference with the others.

How does one could possibly devise something to make any movie not win (and we are talking in one case about a major MPAA studio movie, why would the industry make a device for is own studio movie not be available to win an Oscar)

For having seen it for the first time last year or in 2016, it did hold up very well. That will stop the always negative on movie financial potential, Spike Lee never got to 100m, not even with Denzel, not even with Denzel in a very good thriller movie. Focus Feature never reached 100m either. Any movie in the 2010 that didn't had a Christmas release that reached 100m from a 10-15m start semi-wide type ?

That sound like a myth, oscar bait movies are in expression since what the 40/50s and them made and released to take advantage of the award season is really old. What changed with the VHS and got bigger with the Dvds is non studios being able to do it better, non studios movies becoming bigger in general and bigger with the Oscar at the same time.

I think the best stunt issue is hurting the movies, you do not want audience to know when it was a stunt person and when it was not. The reason giving are: Niche industry too few stunts coordinator. Ceremony too long (that does not explain why not do it during the untelevised ceremony they have 2 week before) Keeping the action actor aura alive is an important one, imagine having Cruise stunt double from a movie getting nominated that destroy the magic a little bit.

The issue is that the people that care about viewership and come up with solution has no control on how a different group of people vote. It is not the Golden Globes. Has for the new category, it would be terrible, like animation and foreign are already terrible, this one sound even worst. Going back to the 2009-2010 era voting system that had Avatar, Blind Side, Up, Bastard, District 9, Inception, Toy-Sotry 3, etc... in would be my non-educated proposition.

Firing of a writing job someone because of past stuff he written make arguably more sense than firing him of is directing job.

CBS didn't talk about les-moonves accusation's during their earning call: https://deadline.com/2018/08/les-moonves-breaks-silence-on-cbs-earnings-call-1202438900/ IF you read a call just after Solo director stuff happened, not close to any mention: https://www.thewaltdisneycompany.com/wp-content/uploads/q3_fy17_earnings_transcript.pdf Question were about ESPN / Over the top streaming plans, would ESPN be on the over the top plan. I.e. Question mostly about TV and theme park, were the money and stock price is for Disney. Not sure the analyst at BMO capital or someone at Merrill Lynch is likely to burn a question about something like that, a 2020 slate single movie director. Maybe if they have a general plan in the future to mitigate in the future the Roseanne/Gunn type of situation and if Fox side will be free of it. But I imagine lot of question will be about the Fox deal.

I imagine even if that has not necessarily any direct effect (distributor not being involved here in any way with the incident). I could imagine that scenario happened. Distribution contract like most of them had the standard: Producer must reasonably pressure talent (naming Depp specially) to make a reasonable amount of promotion for the movie. Depp said to them he would do none not wanting to be exposed to questions about the incident needing to keep those franchise money coming in, voiding the distribution contract, making Global road happy to have a legal valid excuse to walk away, the movie being bad.

How monster big they were domestic is a factor. Other possible factor: Not popular title in China Just exchange rate not being as favorable The first incredible played the American Dream, america when it was great 40 year's ago suburb life style., combined with how strong SH got in the US, it is not that surprising that it played so domestic heavy this time. Nemo/Dory is a bigger surprise.

DeLuca, Michael

With just OW, my prediction is: Extremelly unlikely to be a small OW (under 35m), like Green Hornet / Fan 4 had. Just for a test, predict those movie: Movie A opening in 4,100 theater Movie B has a 130m budget Movie C has a 52m domestic theatrical release budget Movie D has 100m view on youtube Would you ever say that because just knowing that a movie open in 4,100 theater just tell you that it can do 8m or 250m that there is no correlation, that you do not look on theater count when predicting an openning ? That a 180m movie can do Valerian/King Arthur opening and lower than a Break Out 5m movie or break that all time record and do Jurassic World opening that there is no tendency what so ever, a 0 correlation for the bigger budget to have bigger opening OW ?

Solo is an example of us downplaying youtube views way too much (I know I was in quite denial about an aging fanbase that watch them on tv/facebook/twitter more than manually going on youtube, etc..), a bit like cinemascore it is quite fuzzy but extreme like that should be telling almost every-time. Solo had just 30% of Last Jedi views with how box office report calculated them (29.2%), Domestic Estimated ticket according to mojo Last jedi: 67,594,900 Solo: 22,711,000 22,711,000 / 67,594,900, 33.5%, with Solo being more domestic heavy. OW 9,000,100 / 23,966,200 = 37.5% If we adjust for how more domestic heavy solo was (9,000,100/.544) / (23,966,200/.465) = 32% They played very similarly to their respective trailer views I think.

No it is at the end of the month http://festivaldelapoutine.com/en/

True and easy way out to save face, it would require quite something to remove completely Gunn writer credit on a project like this I would imagine (a full page 1 rewrite even for him not to keep some story by ?) Like Whedon that seem an obvious destination. From the Sony leak about James Gunn, would not surprise me if all studios have offered him support and a job: Hey before the whole world starts treating him with the lust I’ve always had I just wanted to reiterate how serious we are about creating his post marvel home whenever you think that discussion can get real! Amy and Doug want to do the full Sony on him at some point and share the love! And that was before Guardian of the Galaxy 1 had even released.

Fair enough, same could be said for theater count, production budget or marketing budget, no one would go around saying those have zero correlation with the opening weekend of a movie (and even you will find them crazy if they would say so) just because it is hard to make good prediction just from them, the correlation is still very obvious. Yet it would not surprise me if those 3 metric have a lower correlation with OW than youtube trailers viewcount. It is so obvious that there is an extremely strong correlation between people deciding to watch trailers on youtube and their box office, it is not like rotten tomatoes score where you need to work a lot to find one. You will never see a graph like they do for metacritic score or RT score showing absolutely no if not even a negative link between them and the box office. If you compare very similar movie for example Rampage & Skyscraper. Look how much exactly the same they played: Rampage (Warner / New Line) Apr. 13, 2018 35.753 35.496 1.007 Skyscraper (Universal / Legendary) Jul. 13, 2018 24.905 26.649 0.935 Someone would have used the youtube views to predict Skyscraper, he would have been pretty spot on. Look at big superheroes movies, how many played in the same +/-15%: Avengers: Infinity War (Disney) 257.698 243.509 1.058 Incredibles 2 (Disney) 182.688 159.73 1.144 Justice League (Warner Bros.) 93.842 107.332 0.874 Deadpool 2 (Fox) 125.507 101.662 1.235 Thor: Ragnarok (Disney) 122.745 96.56 1.271 Spider-Man: Homecoming (Sony / Columbia) 117.028 93.87 1.247 Wonder Woman (Warner Bros.) 103.251 84.205 1.226 Black Panther (Disney) 202.004 57.837 3.493 Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 (Disney) 146.51 57.324 2.556 Logan (Fox) 88.412 44.196 2 Ant-Man and The Wasp (Disney) 75.812 39.373 1.925 Doing very little of work with the demography of a certain type of movie, the genre/mpaa rating, domestic/intl ratio and we would come out with an over 0.92 correlation ratio I am pretty certain.