The amount of attention paid to movies is directly related to pictures of qual-ity. It's the movies that are works of art that create this inter-est, even if they're not on the ten-highest-grosses list too often.
I completely agree with this statement. Just because some movies make more money than others is no reason for them to be "worse" movies. There are many other factors that cause a movie to make more or less money than just whether it is a great movie or not.
Without ancillary rights, most pictures would lose money. Commercial success has no relationship to a good or bad picture. Good pictures become hits. Good pictures become flops. Bad pictures make money, bad pictures lose money.
In these times, this seems to be a huge problem in the film industry. Instead of film and movies being considered as forms of art, it has transitioned to almost complete business. That's why they call it show business and not show art. This idea of how much money the movie will make and how much commercial success it will make is ruining the whole sense of art in film
Clearly, movies are not the only product subjected to mar-The Studio ■ 209 ket-audience research. Polling has infected every area of our national life. But I can't imagine_ Roger Ailes ending a report to George Bush or Ronald Reagan with, "However, I can't tell you how people are going to vote."
This is a great comparison of movie research to political research with audience pleasure. It's crazy to think that this whole industry is run by the audience. Whether or not the film itself is good or not and whether or not there were millions of dollars invested in it with the best studio and producers running it; in the end it is all up to the audience. This subjectivity could sometimes be a very bad thing for great pieces of work
That only one person might have said it doesn't matter. ..The Studio ■ 207 It's treated as if the entire group voiced the same objection. Every opinion, no matter how wild, is given weight, and suggestions about what needs fixing are directly related to what the execs heard at the focus group discussion.
I realize that this is exactly why they have the test audience give their opinions but they should really consider how many people gave a certain opinion and what classification of audience they were in. I say this because I realize that they are trying to please the widest range of audience that they can but as stated earlier it's really not possible to please the whole variety of them and so things like that should really be taken into consideration.
This, of course, turns them all into instant critics and delights them, since they now know that their reactions will affect the final picture
I wonder if them having this mentality changes how they perceive and critique the movie. I know for a fact that I would have a completely different reaction if I were to go to simply enjoy a movie versus if I were to go to analyze and find all the flaws in a movie.
Then the comments travel down the chain of command, until someone I've never seen before is giving an opinion.
Things like this must honestly be the most annoying thing ever, especially when the person is making comments and opinions that are hurtful. In some sense the whole process makes sense but at the same time it seems too extra and complicated to my liking.
What are called ancillary rights now provide them with great protection for their invest-ments: videocassettes, cable television, free television, airline in-flight use. And of course, international rights outside the United States and Canada represent about 50 percent of the total gross. And each country has its video rights, to bring in further income. In addition, many of the studios have bought their way back into theater ow.nership. As I understand it, they stay below 50 percent so as not to violate the Supreme Court order separating the studios from theater ownership. Add in merchandising-the toys spun1 out of Jurassic Park, to name only one example--theme parks built upon blockbuster pic-tures, and studio-ownership of cable television stations. And the financial pages are full of stories about mergers between studios and the television networks. All of this enormous in-come is based on the movies the studios turn out. One mega-hit can produce ancillary income of a billion dollars.
I knew that movies (especially ones that are mega hits) make quite a lot of money but I never realized that there were so many different sources of income for the movie.
the picture is now being taken over by people with whom I have very little influence.
This is probably what a lot of these people feel like and it is most definitely a very good point.