I guess Ill just have to ignore you since you just want to make sarcastic posts with an asshole tone.
There is absolutely no need for it in this discussion.
We are not discussing anything high stakes enough to put up with you being an asshole for absolutely no reason
There is lots of evidence mid budget adult films donât get made now because of comic book films.
Thats my issue.
Remind me what you consider to be mid-budget these days
I think sharing said evidence would further the discussion.
I think supply and demand also goes into what films get made. People want to see big budget blockbusters so studios put those out.
How much demand is there for âmid-budget adult filmsâ? Seems like Sinners and OBAA did pretty well. If there were no Marvel Studios, how many more movies like those would be made?
A few making various related points. And please skip the supposed gotcha if someone find one point in one of these example articles that counters, some point made earlier in this discussion.
That varies year to year and as this phenomenon has progressed. See the articles above.
You would know better than me what might be considered mid today?
I think mid budget adult films donât get made because of economic issues that exist whether or not they make comic book movies. If you take away comic book movies, studios would just make some other action/thriller movies that have more potential for a high ROI in international markets, not more mid level adult films.
It doesnât matter what my definition is. It matters what you think it means, so I can let you know whether thatâs realistically considered mid-budget. Youâre talking about a particular type of movie, and I want to see what that is overall. Try to guess what you think mid-budget is and then give relatively recent examples of movies you feel fit under that.
As a starter, both Beetlejuice Beetlejuice and Sinners are on the high side of what Iâd usually define as mid-budget.
40-80m
I would say Blumhouse and Saw movies destroyed the industry more than the blockbusters. Theyâre always trying to find the cheapest movies they can that can make the most money. They arenât out looking for $50 million movies to capitalize on. Theyâre looking for $1-5 million or less movies they think might make $60, 70, or $100 million.
Speaking only for myself, I only go to movies in the theater if itâs something I want to see on a big screen. To me, a movie like Sinners doesnât lose much by watching it at home on a large flat screen with surround sound.
With movie prices what they are, Iâm only going to a couple of movies a year. I can wait for the others to stream.
I think with inflation, the number is probably closer today to $65-90 million for the movies youâre looking for (Iâd have said $60-70 pre-pandemic for this). $40 is still considered relatively low budget ($25-40 is in this range). Anything below $15 million is tiny buget, but I donât think there are a lot of movies being made for $20 million.
Usually, with some tweaks they can get a $35 million production value script down to $25 million with creative locations and tax credits. Those same types of tweaks can be made for a $20 million movie to get it below $15 million. I think for the lower budget movies, the range is usually between $3-5 million with $5 million being on the high side. With digital filmmaking and creative use of stars, locations, and tax credits you can make it look a lot more expensive than that. There isnât a whole lot thatâs good coming in under $3 million, from my experience.
Sinners is a perfect example of a movie that is dramatically better on a big screen. The bigger the better in this case. It was a small scale film shot on IMAX 65mm (never been done before). Itâs too bad you didnât get to see it in IMAX.
I donât even know what version youâre able to see on a TV screen because there were so many versions based on what type of theater it was. It was made to be consumed at all levels, but it was built to be seen on the biggest and best screen possible. Now that itâs won cinematography, that should be an even bigger incentive for you to see it on the big screen if it ever gets re-released.
We definitely donât agree on this point. Every film is orders of magnitude better in a theatre imo regardless of how good your home setup is.
Film is meant to be seen communally.
I look at it as the industry changing and the blockbusters and cheap movies benefiting from the changes that made mid budget adult movies less viable, not the former causing changes that priced out the latter.
Then your real enemy should be streaming services, not comic book movies.
To further this, here are some examples that fit your range that Iâve revised up a bit:
Sinners
Marty Supreme
A Quiet Place: Day One
The Garfield Movie
Air
The Bride
65 (never heard of this)
Five Nights at Freddyâs 2 (low side of this range below it but still think it applies as mid-budget)
The Alto Knights (also low side of this range but still mid-budget)
How many of these types of movies are you hoping for per year?