Paul Blart: Mall Cop registered one of the most impressive openings in recent years over the weekend, accumulating an incredible $33.8m over the first three days of the 4-day Martin Luther King Jr., holiday frame. The opening ranks as the third biggest January opening of all time, behind last year’s Cloverfield (a muscular $40m) and 1997’s re-release of A New Hope (an even more impressive $35.9m). The film led all others in a frame that saw fantastic openings for new releases and impressive holds for older ones.
The January/February period, much like the late August/September one, has traditionally been a dumping ground for studios, which have devoted their energies more to the summer blockbusters and the awards-oriented holiday films. The early year has historically been given over to the holdovers from late in the previous year, which, often buoyed by various awards, always make a substantial amount of their totals during the first quarter of the new year. The new releases this weekend continue a recent trend of impressive January openings which defy the traditional model. Last year, Cloverfield and 27 Dresses opened with $40m and $23m, respectively. Last weekend, Gran Torino’s wide release registered a superb $29.5m—Clint Eastwood’s biggest opening to date—while Bride Wars and The Unborn opened, respectively, with $21.1m and $19.8m. This weekend, in addition to Paul Blart’s $33.8m opening, My Bloody Valentine 3-D opened with $21.9m, Notorious with $21.5m, and Hotel for Dogs with $17.7m. These four openings amount to, respectively, the 3rd, 14th, 16th, and 27th biggest January openings of all time.
Paul Blart benefited immensely from Sony’s marketing. The studio gave the film an unusually strong push, with ads appearing everywhere. The film’s trailer was not particularly brilliant, but evidently contained sufficiently attractive content to tweak the interest of audiences looking for light material at a rather sombre time. The sour economy, in fact, might well be the main reason behind the film’s massive opening. Comedies tend to do well in tough economic times, and Paul Blart is an inexpensive, harmless, PG-rated comedy. Kevin James, the film’s star, stands to benefit greatly from the successful opening. Best known for his comedy show King of Queens, James has in recent years built a reputation as an innocuous comedic actor, appearing alongside Adam Sandler in I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry and with Will Smith in Hitch. Paul Blart is, in effect, James’ breakout hit, and he can be sure to receive more lucrative offers in the future. As for the film, its opening places it in a very good position to achieve what thus far has proven to be an insurmountable feat: passing the $100m mark. Of all January releases, only A New Hope’s re-release has crossed the $100m mark. The only other January films that passed the $100m mark were films that, like Black Hawk Down, opened in limited release in December and had their wide release in January. Several January releases have come close to the mark, including The Hand That Rocks the Cradle, Save the Last Dance, and last year’s The Bucket List, but no film has passed the $100m mark. At this point, Blart is certain to cross the mark.
Sliding down a notch to second place, Gran Torino delivered a powerful second weekend in wide release. The film dropped by a mere 25% for a $22.2m 3-day frame, bringing its total to over $73m. Its second weekend is so large, in fact, that it would have ranked #13 on the list of biggest January openings. Gran Torino’s success affirms the drawing power of its senior director and star, Clint Eastwood, who stands a good chance of being nominated for an Oscar for his performance in the film. Irrespective of the Oscars, the film is guaranteed a final tally above $120m, ranking as Eastwood’s biggest film and one of the biggest surprises in recent years.
Opening in third place, My Bloody Valentine 3-D registered an estimated $21.9m in 2,534 theatres over the weekend. The film, a remake of a 1980s slasher film, benefited from being released in the 3D format, which should help its legs a bit in the weeks to come. The film, at this point, looks to finish somewhere between $50m and $55m.
Following closely on Valentine’s heels, Notorious registered a powerful $21.5m from just 1,638 theatres, for a per theatre average in excess of $13,000—the highest in the top 25. The biopic, detailing the life of 1990s rap and hip-hop star Notorious BIG, follows in the tradition of hip-hop-related films, chief among them 2002’s 8 Mile, that tend to perform better than anticipated because of their underappreciated fanbase. The downside, however, is that such films tend to have poor legs, since much of the fanbase rushes out to view the films during the first weekend. Notorious is likely to end up with the worst legs among the four major openers this weekend, and will struggle to reach $50m.
Hotel for Dogs, a family film starring Don Cheadle and Julia Roberts’ young niece Emma Roberts, opened in fifth place with $17.7m. The film occupies a position which has become traditional for January films, that of the modestly successful January family release. Snow Dogs, a 2002 film starring Cuba Gooding Jr., is the most successful example (except for Paul Blart). It opened with $17.8m and went on to gross over $81m. Hotel for Dogs is unlikely to have such a good run, but looks to be able to reach $60m, outpacing two of the three new releases ahead of it.
Dropping 44%, Bride Wars collected $11.8m in its second frame. The Anne Hathaway-Kate Hudson starrer had a decent opening and is holding up reasonably well, at roughly the same pace as 2008’s 27 Dresses. Look for a finish somewhere between $61-65m. The Unborn, meanwhile, collected $9.8m in its second frame, down 50% for a $33.1m total thus far. Look for a finish slightly below $50m.
Defiance, a Holocaust drama starring Daniel Craig, had a good expansion over the weekend, grossing $9.2m in 1,789 theatres. The film has largely been left out of the award shows, so it is unlikely to receive any upcoming awards-related bumps. It should have, however, a reasonably healthy run and might finish above $30m. Last Chance Harvey, starring Emma Thompson and Dustin Hoffman, also had a good expansion, grossing roughly $4.7m in 1,054 theatres. Look for the film to finish with around $15m in total.
The four Christmas Day releases experienced moderate drops over the weekend, continuing to underperform in relation to their wonderful opening days. Marley and Me dropped 45% to $6.3m, for a running total of $132.7m. The film looks to finish at around $146-150m. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button held up better, dropping 39% to $5.6m, for a $102.6m total. The film is bound to receive major Oscar attention beginning this week, when nominations are announced, which will help it considerably in the weeks to come. The film should finish with at least $130m, but whether it can reach $150m will depend largely on how great the Oscar effect will be, and how well it can hold on to theatres. Bedtime Stories slid by 45% to $4.8m, for a total of $103.8m, while Valkyrie dropped by 42% to $3.9m, for a total of $77.6m. Look for the two films to finish with, respectively, $115-120m and $85-88m.
Slumdog Millionaire, the film of the moment, benefited greatly from its success at the Golden Globes, and increased by 56% despite losing 19 theatres. The film added another $5.9m to its tally, currently at $42.7m. The film’s average rose above $10,000 for the first time in six weeks. This bodes well for the film as it prepares to expand to over 1,000 theatres next week, an expansion no doubt meant to capitalize on the announcement of Oscar nomination. The buzz surrounding the film, which will follow it not only to the awards but, given the high possibility of a win, will last for a while thereafter, is certain to translate into a total above $100m, with an increasingly good chance at $125m.
The Wrestler and Revolutionary Road registered increases as well, spurred by Mickey Rourke’s and Kate Winslet’s Golden Globes wins. Both films grossed around $1.75m during the weekend, bringing their totals to $5.1m and $5.7m. It is difficult to predict what their final tally will be, since much of the future prospects for both films depends on their success at the Oscars and how well their expansion will be managed, but it appears likely that The Wrestler will end up with a higher total.
The top 10 films this weekend grossed a mighty $160.2m, while the top 12 registered a phenomenal $170.6m. This ranks as by far the biggest January weekend of all time, handily beating the previous record-holder, the same weekend frame last year, which was led by Cloverfield and registered $132.4m for the top 12. Additionally, this weekend ranks as the 18th biggest weekend of all time, and ranks as the third biggest weekend of all time outside the summer period. Astonishingly, it came within $8m of matching the recent holiday frame led by Marley and Me in December 2008. These figures bode well for this January, which looks to break last January's record total of $841m.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
At the Movies, During the Recession
Introduction
General wisdom dictates that business slows down during a recession as consumers, because of shrinking incomes and rising unemployment, cut back on their spending. Some industries, such as the food and beverage industry, however, have historically been recession-proof. That is, the items they produce are deemed so necessary to daily living that consumers are unlikely to cut back on them, opting, instead, to forego the purchase of more expensive and dispensable items, such as new cars. This is why companies like Wal-Mart or McDonald’s have thus far weathered the current economic slump reasonably well while the car companies are facing total collapse.
The film industry occupies a curious position in this binary between recession-proof and recession-prone industries. Historically, the film industry has performed quite well during economically depressed times, and has even thrived in otherwise terrible economic conditions. The Great Depression, for example, produced such blockbusters as King Kong and Snow White and the Seven Dwarves. A closer look at the box office in North America during the most recent economic slumps—those of the early 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s—reveals that the film industry (at least in terms of box office receipts) is indeed largely recession-proof.
A History Lesson
The recession of the early 1980s, which began in mid-1981 and lasted until late 1982, was the most serious since the Great Depression, with unemployment peaking at well above 10%. Yet the 1981-1982 period was one of the most buoyant in box office history, producing two of the greatest hits in film history, Raiders of the Lost Ark and E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial. 1981’s gain over 1980—an impressive eight percent—was particularly remarkable given the huge success of The Empire Strikes Back, the sequel to the then-biggest film of all time, 1977’s A New Hope. 1982’s gain over 1981 was even more remarkable, with the box office surging past the previous year by over 16%, by far the biggest year-to-year increase in the last three decades. The gains can be credited in large part to E.T., which surpassed A New Hope to become the biggest film of all time and which performed consistently well for over a year during the severe slump. Some of the credit, however, must also be given to the comedies, particularly Porky’s, which opened in March 1982, and Tootsie, which opened at around the time that the economy began to rebound.
The 1990-1991 period offers the closest correlation between the performance of the box office and that of the general economy. Box office receipts dropped in both 1990 and 1991. But the drop in 1990 was just 0.2%, so small as to be insignificant, while the drop in 1991, 4.4%, though significant, was not particularly grave. I would suggest that the declines had more to do with the success of the previous years. 1989 was a spectacular year for the box office. The industry registered a series of big hits, lead by Batman’s huge $251m, as well as a number of major sequels, including Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Lethal Weapon 2, Back to the Future II, and Ghostbusters II. Honey, I Shrunk the Kid and Look Who’s Talking proved to be surprisingly big successes as well. Several 1989 releases carried over to 1990, including Driving Miss Daisy, and aided the year in (almost) keeping up with 1989. 1990’s biggest hit, Home Alone, registered one of the most shocking performances in box office history, but due to its November release, the film’s receipts were split between two years. The less than $12m decline in the box office from 1989 to 1990 could easily have been compensated for by some of Home Alone’s $285m total. The huge successes of the 1989 and 1990 films were not matched by the 1991 releases, despite the success of Terminator 2, whose $205m gross still fell below that of Ghost’s $217m in 1990. As well, while early 1991 was aided by The Silence of the Lambs ($130m), the film could not compensate for the huge success of the March releases of 1990: Pretty Woman ($178m), Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles ($135m), and The Hunt for Red October ($122m).
The box office did not reach (and surpass) the 1989 benchmark until 1993, thanks in large part to Jurassic Park’s $357m gross. Ticket prices, which had surged in 1990 thanks to the success of the 1989 films, began to decline in 1991 and dropped for three years running, before increasing again in 1995. I think it is fair to argue that the greater economic slump did have an effect on the box office, but that the primary reason for the box office slump was a weaker line-up of films. The 1990-1992 period had a sufficient number of big hits (particularly Home Alone) to confirm that consumers were willing to spend money on tickets if the films were appealing enough. This assertion was to be proven correct for the remainder of the 1990s, when, beginning with 1993, each year offered a series of increasingly big blockbusters mixed with smaller but nevertheless successful films.
The trend continued well into this decade, entirely bypassing the mild recession which broadly covered the 2001-2003 period. Fortuitously for the film industry, those years corresponded to the release period of the hugely successful Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings franchises, as well as of the increasingly dominant superhero and CGI animated films. The expansion of the box office market which began in 1992 came to a halt only in 2005, at a time when the general economy expanded. The reason, as with 1990, is that the previous year was simply too great for the subsequent year to match. 2004 was assured a success in Spider-Man 2, which duly delivered with $374m, but the huge successes of Shrek 2 ($441m) and especially The Passion of the Christ ($370m) were entirely unexpected. 2005’s decline was the second worst in the last three decades, surpassed only by the 7% slump in 1985, which can also be credited to the success of the previous year’s surprisingly huge Beverly Hills Cop and Ghostbusters.
Assessing the Effects of the Current Recession
On December 1st, 2008, the National Economic Bureau announced that the United States had entered a recession in December, 2007. The box office performance of the 2008 releases, thus, must be assessed with respect to a recessionary background. The figures, thus far, suggest a condition similar to that in the late 1980s and early 1990s, whereby the decline in box office receipts is largely insignificant. 2008 receipts fell by a mere 0.4% in 2008 according to Box Office Mojo; they increased by 2%, according to the Hollywood Reporter. The different figures correspond to different means and periods of measurement, but the point is clear either way: the performance of the 2008 films remained largely unchanged from that of the 2007 films. That in itself is a remarkable feat. 2007 had not less than 11 $200m+ releases, with four of those surpassing $300m and a fifth, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, coming within $8m of the benchmark. In contrast, as of the present moment, just six films have made it past $200m, with three above $300m. The large difference is with the top film of the year. 2007 was lead by Spider-Man 3, whose $336.5m total was disappointing given its huge opening. In contrast, The Dark Knight followed its record-breaking opening with a phenomenal $531m total, which is set to grow with the film’s re-release in the coming weeks. The Dark Knight proves, as Home Alone did in the early 1990s and E.T. and Raiders of the Lost Ark in the early 1980s, that the appeal of the particular product, rather than general economic conditions, dictate the fortunes of the film industry. Had The Dark Knight been as badly received as Spider-Man 3, it would have set back the 2008 box office by $200m, adding more than two percentage points to the year-to-year decline.
The increasingly dire economic slump in recent months has been counteracted by an increasingly buoyant box office. During the holidays, Marley and Me, Bedtime Stories, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, and Valkyrie all opened strongly on the same weekend, and have continued to perform well. Thus far this year, Gran Torino has had a magnificent expansion, while Bride Wars and the Unborn have opened well as well. This weekend appears to add to the successes of this year, with large openings for Paul Blart, Notorious, and My Bloody Valentine. The release schedule for this year does not suggest a particularly spectacular year, but all indications thus far point toward a more or less similar performance this year as in 2008, with Transformers 2 leading the year with a smaller tally than The Dark Knight.
Looking for the Causes
It is clear, then, that the box office is largely unaffected by larger economic recessions, and that declines, more often than not, tend to be caused by industry-specific deficiencies such as unappealing films. What, then, might be some of the reasons behind the resilience of the film industry in tough economic times? I would suggest that the resilience of the film market is grounded on the following factors:
1. (Relatively) Low Ticket Prices
Although ticket prices have increased in recent years, the average ticket is by no means so expensive as to render film viewing unaffordable to the majority of consumers. As long as a release is appealing enough to warrant a payment of $7-10, filmgoers, as has been proven repeatedly in recent years, are willing to spend the money to watch it.
2. Escapist/Entertainment Value
The escapist nature of cinema has always been one of its most appealing aspects. When the going gets tough, there is no better means of escaping reality, at least for a short while, than to go to the nearest theatre and watch a film. Comedies in particular stand to benefit from this impulse, but all films stand to gain.
3. Cultural Value
For many people, going to the movies is simply a part of life, much like watching television or listening to music. The value of cinema as a cultural institution guarantees it, at a minimum, a base audience that numbers in the millions. This is true of the car industry as well, of course, but film tickets cost far, far less than cars, allowing film devotees to indulge themselves with little to no consequence.
4. Product Diversity
Despite the frequent complaints about the lack of originality in cinema, the number of annual theatrical releases is so great that something of interest is available to anyone willing to pay. Such diversity is vital in times when people are less willing to spend on anything but that which is of greatest interest to them.
All this is to say that the film industry has the resources to sustain itself in tough economic times. This does not mean, however, that the film industry will be unaffected by the larger economic currents. The pressures on the companies behind the studios, such as Sony, have been so great that the production of films is bound to be affected negatively. From the consumer’s perspective, I suspect that total spending during filmgoing will decrease as consumers cut back on peripheral items, such as food and drinks. Theatre owners will feel this more so than studios. More worrying for the film companies is the inevitable slump in associated merchandise sales. Film companies are thus not in the best of conditions, but they are bound to bear the current slump out much better than their counterparts in other industries.
Sources:
http://boxofficemojo.com/yearly/
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3i7fcfe6ddd3b5d6c2eb0c8cc511b3bb7f
The information concerning the recessions is derived from various reports on the BBC, CNN, and other media sources I have consulted over the last few months.
General wisdom dictates that business slows down during a recession as consumers, because of shrinking incomes and rising unemployment, cut back on their spending. Some industries, such as the food and beverage industry, however, have historically been recession-proof. That is, the items they produce are deemed so necessary to daily living that consumers are unlikely to cut back on them, opting, instead, to forego the purchase of more expensive and dispensable items, such as new cars. This is why companies like Wal-Mart or McDonald’s have thus far weathered the current economic slump reasonably well while the car companies are facing total collapse.
The film industry occupies a curious position in this binary between recession-proof and recession-prone industries. Historically, the film industry has performed quite well during economically depressed times, and has even thrived in otherwise terrible economic conditions. The Great Depression, for example, produced such blockbusters as King Kong and Snow White and the Seven Dwarves. A closer look at the box office in North America during the most recent economic slumps—those of the early 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s—reveals that the film industry (at least in terms of box office receipts) is indeed largely recession-proof.
A History Lesson
The recession of the early 1980s, which began in mid-1981 and lasted until late 1982, was the most serious since the Great Depression, with unemployment peaking at well above 10%. Yet the 1981-1982 period was one of the most buoyant in box office history, producing two of the greatest hits in film history, Raiders of the Lost Ark and E.T.: The Extra-Terrestrial. 1981’s gain over 1980—an impressive eight percent—was particularly remarkable given the huge success of The Empire Strikes Back, the sequel to the then-biggest film of all time, 1977’s A New Hope. 1982’s gain over 1981 was even more remarkable, with the box office surging past the previous year by over 16%, by far the biggest year-to-year increase in the last three decades. The gains can be credited in large part to E.T., which surpassed A New Hope to become the biggest film of all time and which performed consistently well for over a year during the severe slump. Some of the credit, however, must also be given to the comedies, particularly Porky’s, which opened in March 1982, and Tootsie, which opened at around the time that the economy began to rebound.
The 1990-1991 period offers the closest correlation between the performance of the box office and that of the general economy. Box office receipts dropped in both 1990 and 1991. But the drop in 1990 was just 0.2%, so small as to be insignificant, while the drop in 1991, 4.4%, though significant, was not particularly grave. I would suggest that the declines had more to do with the success of the previous years. 1989 was a spectacular year for the box office. The industry registered a series of big hits, lead by Batman’s huge $251m, as well as a number of major sequels, including Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Lethal Weapon 2, Back to the Future II, and Ghostbusters II. Honey, I Shrunk the Kid and Look Who’s Talking proved to be surprisingly big successes as well. Several 1989 releases carried over to 1990, including Driving Miss Daisy, and aided the year in (almost) keeping up with 1989. 1990’s biggest hit, Home Alone, registered one of the most shocking performances in box office history, but due to its November release, the film’s receipts were split between two years. The less than $12m decline in the box office from 1989 to 1990 could easily have been compensated for by some of Home Alone’s $285m total. The huge successes of the 1989 and 1990 films were not matched by the 1991 releases, despite the success of Terminator 2, whose $205m gross still fell below that of Ghost’s $217m in 1990. As well, while early 1991 was aided by The Silence of the Lambs ($130m), the film could not compensate for the huge success of the March releases of 1990: Pretty Woman ($178m), Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles ($135m), and The Hunt for Red October ($122m).
The box office did not reach (and surpass) the 1989 benchmark until 1993, thanks in large part to Jurassic Park’s $357m gross. Ticket prices, which had surged in 1990 thanks to the success of the 1989 films, began to decline in 1991 and dropped for three years running, before increasing again in 1995. I think it is fair to argue that the greater economic slump did have an effect on the box office, but that the primary reason for the box office slump was a weaker line-up of films. The 1990-1992 period had a sufficient number of big hits (particularly Home Alone) to confirm that consumers were willing to spend money on tickets if the films were appealing enough. This assertion was to be proven correct for the remainder of the 1990s, when, beginning with 1993, each year offered a series of increasingly big blockbusters mixed with smaller but nevertheless successful films.
The trend continued well into this decade, entirely bypassing the mild recession which broadly covered the 2001-2003 period. Fortuitously for the film industry, those years corresponded to the release period of the hugely successful Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings franchises, as well as of the increasingly dominant superhero and CGI animated films. The expansion of the box office market which began in 1992 came to a halt only in 2005, at a time when the general economy expanded. The reason, as with 1990, is that the previous year was simply too great for the subsequent year to match. 2004 was assured a success in Spider-Man 2, which duly delivered with $374m, but the huge successes of Shrek 2 ($441m) and especially The Passion of the Christ ($370m) were entirely unexpected. 2005’s decline was the second worst in the last three decades, surpassed only by the 7% slump in 1985, which can also be credited to the success of the previous year’s surprisingly huge Beverly Hills Cop and Ghostbusters.
Assessing the Effects of the Current Recession
On December 1st, 2008, the National Economic Bureau announced that the United States had entered a recession in December, 2007. The box office performance of the 2008 releases, thus, must be assessed with respect to a recessionary background. The figures, thus far, suggest a condition similar to that in the late 1980s and early 1990s, whereby the decline in box office receipts is largely insignificant. 2008 receipts fell by a mere 0.4% in 2008 according to Box Office Mojo; they increased by 2%, according to the Hollywood Reporter. The different figures correspond to different means and periods of measurement, but the point is clear either way: the performance of the 2008 films remained largely unchanged from that of the 2007 films. That in itself is a remarkable feat. 2007 had not less than 11 $200m+ releases, with four of those surpassing $300m and a fifth, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, coming within $8m of the benchmark. In contrast, as of the present moment, just six films have made it past $200m, with three above $300m. The large difference is with the top film of the year. 2007 was lead by Spider-Man 3, whose $336.5m total was disappointing given its huge opening. In contrast, The Dark Knight followed its record-breaking opening with a phenomenal $531m total, which is set to grow with the film’s re-release in the coming weeks. The Dark Knight proves, as Home Alone did in the early 1990s and E.T. and Raiders of the Lost Ark in the early 1980s, that the appeal of the particular product, rather than general economic conditions, dictate the fortunes of the film industry. Had The Dark Knight been as badly received as Spider-Man 3, it would have set back the 2008 box office by $200m, adding more than two percentage points to the year-to-year decline.
The increasingly dire economic slump in recent months has been counteracted by an increasingly buoyant box office. During the holidays, Marley and Me, Bedtime Stories, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, and Valkyrie all opened strongly on the same weekend, and have continued to perform well. Thus far this year, Gran Torino has had a magnificent expansion, while Bride Wars and the Unborn have opened well as well. This weekend appears to add to the successes of this year, with large openings for Paul Blart, Notorious, and My Bloody Valentine. The release schedule for this year does not suggest a particularly spectacular year, but all indications thus far point toward a more or less similar performance this year as in 2008, with Transformers 2 leading the year with a smaller tally than The Dark Knight.
Looking for the Causes
It is clear, then, that the box office is largely unaffected by larger economic recessions, and that declines, more often than not, tend to be caused by industry-specific deficiencies such as unappealing films. What, then, might be some of the reasons behind the resilience of the film industry in tough economic times? I would suggest that the resilience of the film market is grounded on the following factors:
1. (Relatively) Low Ticket Prices
Although ticket prices have increased in recent years, the average ticket is by no means so expensive as to render film viewing unaffordable to the majority of consumers. As long as a release is appealing enough to warrant a payment of $7-10, filmgoers, as has been proven repeatedly in recent years, are willing to spend the money to watch it.
2. Escapist/Entertainment Value
The escapist nature of cinema has always been one of its most appealing aspects. When the going gets tough, there is no better means of escaping reality, at least for a short while, than to go to the nearest theatre and watch a film. Comedies in particular stand to benefit from this impulse, but all films stand to gain.
3. Cultural Value
For many people, going to the movies is simply a part of life, much like watching television or listening to music. The value of cinema as a cultural institution guarantees it, at a minimum, a base audience that numbers in the millions. This is true of the car industry as well, of course, but film tickets cost far, far less than cars, allowing film devotees to indulge themselves with little to no consequence.
4. Product Diversity
Despite the frequent complaints about the lack of originality in cinema, the number of annual theatrical releases is so great that something of interest is available to anyone willing to pay. Such diversity is vital in times when people are less willing to spend on anything but that which is of greatest interest to them.
All this is to say that the film industry has the resources to sustain itself in tough economic times. This does not mean, however, that the film industry will be unaffected by the larger economic currents. The pressures on the companies behind the studios, such as Sony, have been so great that the production of films is bound to be affected negatively. From the consumer’s perspective, I suspect that total spending during filmgoing will decrease as consumers cut back on peripheral items, such as food and drinks. Theatre owners will feel this more so than studios. More worrying for the film companies is the inevitable slump in associated merchandise sales. Film companies are thus not in the best of conditions, but they are bound to bear the current slump out much better than their counterparts in other industries.
Sources:
http://boxofficemojo.com/yearly/
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3i7fcfe6ddd3b5d6c2eb0c8cc511b3bb7f
The information concerning the recessions is derived from various reports on the BBC, CNN, and other media sources I have consulted over the last few months.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
