Barnack

WW: https://www.the-numbers.com/box-office-records/worldwide/all-movies/cumulative/released-in-2008 Dom: https://www.the-numbers.com/box-office-records/domestic/all-movies/cumulative/released-in-2008 If those do not work: https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/ https://www.boxofficemojo.com/year/world/2018/ Try pausing your VPN, he seem to block people connecting via those sometime.

Old message but: https://cdn.film.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/2-0-Approved-Projects-List.pdf It had a 100 millions in tax credit eligible spending in CA alone (the maximum it make sense tax credit wise), similar to say Netflix the Gray man or Bumblebee, add a very expensive above the line list of name and credits, but at the same time outside Lebron James seem to be a purely Los Angeles production, still look like a 120-130 or even 140m affair.

Are they not quite Disney exclusive heavy in most market ? Regardless usually post-theatrical deal are made with theatrical performance in mind, i.e. playing the movie on your streaming or tv platform will cost you x% of the your market theartical or a ramp of the domestic market, if the movie did x or y it became the type of movie that cost 17 millions instead of 12, that why studio push for 100 or 200m domestic and not other round number usually, those 2 being important historical landmark for post-theatrical contract. I could imagine most of those contract got voided in the covid theatrical market and renegotiated, theatrical performance not being a good predictor of the demand for a movie anymore.

Here the timeline of the biggest movie of all time (unadjusted) Birth of a nation (pre-oscar, I imagine would have won everything) Gone with the wind Sound of music Godfather Jaws (lost to one flew over the cuckoo's nest) Star wars (lost to annie hall) ET (lost to Ghandi) Jurassic Park (same year's has Schindler list, not nominated) Titanic Avatar (lost to Hurt Locker) EndGames (not nominated) --- If you are an non-scifi epic giant movie that destroy the box office, your chance to win are really high historically

That almost always the case to have multiples forces behind those cancellation campaign, it is often about people that were not liked or had bad contract regardless of the social cause offense (Megan Kelly for example, did not had the ratings worth her contract, Disney didn't own the Roseanne show, she owned it and was a very powerful producer so despite the giant record viewership I imagine it was not that profitable for them has it sounded like), NBC got into a 8 year's contract with the Golden Globe in 2018 paying them 60 millions a year for the diffusion right (3 time the cost they had between 2010-2017) and close to the Oscar 75 million price tag. Even before COVID that price tag was aligned to become way too much with the live tv rating trends we could imagine, with it, that became a terrible deal, if they can find a moral clause in the contract and can walk out of it, that would be great for them. If the industry can take full control of their award season, I imagine that nice for them or at least not seen has obviously bad even if there was a lot of money in the globe in the past, that one that didn't go in their pocket for the show itself and did not control. Combined with the fact that apparently that group was strange and unliked (a beloved group would have much more rope)

The gravity of death for fictional character is to stop seeing them in new fiction, to stop them interacting with characters that goes on and so on, if you use some timeline tricks for the dying having 0 actual consequence, where is the gravity ?

Well yes, but if we look a FSS drop, a movie having thursday or not is a factor.

When the last movie with thursday numbers that did not roll it into their weekend ?

Usually in the movie section it is licensing of popular movie character on toys, books, theme park and video games or renting movie production location like studios lot/equipment/special SFX to other studios.

I had a excel document called studio dvb bubble around that I can copy paste here, this is looking at paramount and warner brothers from 2004 to 2017, the peak is usually believed to between 2004 and 2008. 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Paramount Theatrical 408.5 643.7 866.1 1466.2 1717 1321 1376 2175 1310 1239 1209 841 605 808 Home entertainment 1295.7 1555.5 2115.9 2493.3 2724 2501 2096 1890 1662 1300 1164 871 783 849 Licensing 672 650.8 1121.4 1294.3 1333 1383 1383 1417 1394 1203 1115 980 1100 1315 Ancillary 137.5 55.2 170.4 221.8 262 277 298 441 454 540 237 191 174 317 Total 2513.7 2905.2 4273.8 5475.6 6033 5482 5153 5923 4820 4282 3725 2883 2662 3289 Warner Theatrical 1982 1868 1337 2131 1861 2085 2249 2100 1894 2158 1959 1578 2180 2268 Home entertainment 3730 3709 3142 3483 3320 2820 2707 2829 2175 2118 1913 1717 1481 1567 Licensing 1621 1791 1583 1451 1574 1459 1605 1557 1746 1652 1686 1579 1630 1853 Ancillary 484 490 154 166 191 129 125 160 227 191 271 269 321 350 Total 7333 7368 6216 7231 6946 6493 6686 6646 6042 6119 5839 5143 5612 6038 What you see is a displacement from "traditional" home entertainment i.e. Dvds to licensing you seem to have predicted here. Has of 2017 I did not make up even before inflation adjustment I think, it could have ended up a bit like the CD bubble for the music industry a special time in the complete history of Hollywood, the dvd bubble changed the notion of risk and revenues versus anything before and after I think. During that time frame for both the studios, theatrical share of a movie revenues of movies jumped by more than 50% from the peak of the dvds to the 2017 result, showin that the post theatrical revenues declined versus them quite a bit. P.S. I am terrible a copy pasting table on this, I imagine you can copy paste them in your excel like program you use to consult them, they are from annual financial report. Lionsgate is a company with a nice break down: http://investors.lionsgate.com/financial-reports/annual-reports-and-proxy-statements/annual-reports They were by far the most detailed of the 'studios', all the others being subdivision of giant entity, with Liongates you could see how a slate of movies made in revenues for their first 3 years of existence from each source for a while and made the shifts quite obvious.

That one in that list was a bit funny: April 20 — HFPA’s Crisis Communications Firm Quits When your crisis communications firm quits on you, that quite the signal.

It was a small budget Liongates movie and achieve to pile nominations, if the next Titanic do fail it will be official, but has of now it is hard to discern between we just didn't had a titanic-ROTK since them versus a change of pattern in voting. The Oscars did move away from one movie dominating, but movie production did move away from that type of movie that was dominating (and they were rare to be at that level).

Like the poster just below I would wait for that next type and level of movie to come up and fail to do that type of dominating run to occur to say that it is officially a thing of the past, maybe contained non franchise epic of the sort are a thing of the past (seeing how much Nolan is getting for is movie I do not thing that it is the case), Avatar was a BP win away, your example of Slumdog MIllionaire is a good one I think it was a small budget movie quite far from Titanic in term of technical and most category and still won 8. The 10 or more happened only 4 time in history after all, so 18 year,s since the last time is not a specially long time, there was 26 year,s between West side story and Titanic. Did not saw it, but one year Jimmy Kimmel was the host and they visited a movie theater that was playing A Wrinkle in time, that was already a lot, most year you can detect a lot of influence, but this year they relaxed the rules even more so maybe your feeling are quite funded.

It did occur in the past at some level, one example Harrison Ford was about to give the best picture oscar to Steven Spielberg here, Shakespeare in love was a surprise winner: Some journalist already had wrote their article after Spielberg won best director (with Saving Private Ryan winning BP in them) before the announcement.

I learned just one hours ago that the Oscar were last night, this is very telling about how little it reached pop culture outside the US (if it did there)

Going by the quality of the extra material (commentary track, making of type of bonus), maybe what distinguish more the experience of a bought movie versus when they appear on Netflix in a way, movie quality also weighted in the equation. Memento (Nolan commentary mainly) Star wars Trilogy special edition (Lucas commentary) Lords of the rings trilogy (commentary and a lot of making of material) The Thing (Carpenter and Russell) Casablanca (Roger Ebert track), Citizen Kane Roger Ebert has well Apocalypse Now (coppola, that movie making inspired book and documentaries) The Ridley Scott one, Alien/Blade Runner A History of Violence (Cronenberg) Cornetto trilogy (mainly for Hot fuzz and Shaun of the death) Gone with the Wind I think it would be around 20 dvds with the cheating of using box set

Depending of the character played it does not necessarily need to, think Kevin Spacey and House of Card, many people watched it knowing the rumors or when it got out in the media, it does not necessarily at the detriment of the subjective experience to know that the person playing the horrible president had that criminal past. If he was a big name and playing Mister Rogers, we could imagine it hurting the box office, but a c-b lister in a who did the murder mystery ? A bit like Johnny Depp not being an issue to the subjective experience of the previous entry (well it was a really small role), maybe it does not need to here as well.

I am not sure I would go as far has really bad has a movie for the 1933 Kong but for it has charms.

I think green or blue screen composition was just a bit after 1933, back in those days they projected image on a transparent screen behind the actor and it was almost all in camera effects. https://cinefex.com/blog/tag/dunning-process/

I imagine you mean by LOTR in general the movies, because the pop culture footprint is ridiculously giant. I think Gandalf, the eye that watch, the battle of helm's deep, the ring to rule them all and many other elements are now part of pop culture and the movies helped popularise them, many LOTR elements the way they presented Dwarfs, Halfling/Hobbits, Elves, Orcs and so on were already so much into our pop-culture before the movies because AD&D, Warhammer-warcraft used them and became popular that it was hard for the movies to put them even more on the map, but I imagine that they did.

That exactly what I thought that person meant. While suspecting maybe they work as a critic or other jobs that could force them to watch them and follow them even if they do not care (but that would make speaking about them for free on a message board still strange)

I mean if that was : can't wait for see Black Widow, Shang-Chi, Eternals for free. Not a joke, that make no sense, most of your message seem to be hollywood with an account of a english speaking message board that talk almost exclusively about hollywood contain. No one that do not care about Nigerian cinema can't wait to see 3 of their next movies for free even has a joke, register on a Nigerian movie forum and talk about their box office results.

Not fully certain if you quoted the good message but apparently no, only 554 millions lived in a rural areas in 2019 apparently (would be just below 40% by now)

I can see Disney and other having flagship theater (maybe near or in their parks ?) in flagship spot, but a company like Netflix or others like that getting a massive amount of them ? Isn't low ROI and arguable use of money for them even if it turn really well ?

Look great to me.