Dr. DVD

Okay, say you're a studio chief and you are faced with a situation where you can greenlight one of two projects.

Project A: A very ambitious sci-fi movie from an award winning director that promises to really push the boundaries of special FX . It carries a pretty heft price tag and the director has yet to have a major commercial success, but critics like him/her and they have a loyal cult following.

Project B: A movie with a lower budget where most of the $$ goes to paying comedic actors where the plot more or less involves them doing what the title (Burping and Farting) claims. Let's say for the record you got Will Ferrell and Kevin James attached, and for the sheer shock factor, Kate Upton. She plays a gorgeous woman with a defect making her also engage in said title actions at times. The director is a low priced hired gun who knows little about what they are doing.

Which would you greenlight? Remember , you have to think from a business perspective. Also, I want to add the factor that once one is made, you can't make the other (i.e. you can't greenlight the gross-out comedy to make the studio money so you can get the sci-fi movie made).

GoldenJCJ

Sadly the low brow comedy. But not with Will Farrell. Isn't he considered the least profitable star in Hollywood?

Thinking from only a business standpoint I'm only thinking about making money. Now if I'm in the movie making business to actually make a decent movie and look at the money aspect second to the creative aspect then that's another story. The problem with Hollywood is the money comes first and artistry comes second. Not unexpected but that's the way it is.

gryffinmaster

BambooLounge

Obviously the burping and farting comedy...I want to keep my high salaried job.


So yes, I would green light Grown-Ups 2 instead of Pacific Rim.

Think of it this way, while you may much rather see Pacific Rim (I certainly do), would you choose to see it if someone offered to pay you millions to see Grown Ups 2 instead?

Goat3001

Assuming that all the pieces are in place for a very good film, the sci-fi movie without much thought. Even if it doesn't do gangbusters in the box office it will likely gather success in the home video market. The fan base, while small, will likely be rabid (as they usually are) leading to the possibility of a TV show, comic books or a sequel even if that sequel is direct to DVD/Netflix.

The burping and farting movie would bomb. How many outright bad (poorly reviewed) comedies have turned worthwhile profits lately?

ETA: Holy shit, Grown Ups made $162 million? I thought it bombed. Well I might have to re-evaluate things.

fitprod

The low brow comedy... Generally lower cost, and less risk.

As Bamboo said, I'd rather see the "ambitious" sci-fi movie, but I understand the financial risk associated with a new, non-branded, sci-fi film. - See Cloud Atlas and other "daring" original sci-fi that tanked. (Hell, even check the numbers on Judge Dredd, which everyone liked, but tanked.)

fitprod

Dr. DVD

What makes you so sure I am talking about these two movies specifically? I made it as basic as possible so no "real life" parallels could be drawn......

cleaver

The director of a) not having a great commercial track record is the deciding factor for me. Cameron and Nolan had great track records before Avatar and Inception, which is the exception not the rule for high concept scifi.

BambooLounge

Could've just been coincidence, but your descriptions of each pretty much align with how people generally would describe the two movies.

Those being the films or not being the films doesn't change my answer though. I'd go with the film that will make me the most money/allow me to keep my job.

The goal for me (long term) would be to produce as many profitable burp and fart movies as I could so that I wouldn't be in this situation of having to pick either low brow or high brow. I'd like to be able to fund films for both profit and prestige even if it means making films with more or less of one than the other.

Raul3

The way you put it, the burping/farting movie.

But in real life we would need more details. What if we are talking about (two movies that I like): Star Wars and Big Daddy? With one you will be have at least 3 movies, and of course a lot of merchandise, and all of that extra money.

So it may not be that simple in real life.

Groucho

Since this is specifically stated to be a business decision, and not a creative one, I'll have to go with the star driven movie about burping and farting.

Rypro 525

I saw that Grown Ups 2 has a 80 million dollar budget, so that 'burping and farting' movie if you get a big star won't be all that cheap

asianxcore

Why isn't this thread called Pacific Rim Vs. Grown Ups 2?

Solid Snake

You're not really good at whatever game you're wanting to play. Probably could have had more thought into the decision were you to clarify better the whole idea of this.

Mattflix

It's showbusiness. The studios are corporations that are there to make money, not art. Occasionally we get lucky when the movies turn out to be good. They will crunch the numbers and see that the comedy will be more cost effective and will go for that one more times than not. Not that I'm happy about it, but this is the reality.

So Dredd bombed, Iron Man 3 is a success. The result will be more generic action blowouts like the latter. They are responding to the demand. It's far more risky to put out something that will hopefully set a trend. And most sci-fi movies aren't Star Wars, and there's a lot more clutter out nowadays for a unique one to stand out.

milo bloom

I thought that was how studios work? The pablum pays the bills, the daring brings the prestige. Kinda like how the SciFi network kept nuBSG on the air as long as they did because it was so critically acclaimed, but it was the Flying Sharks Take Over the World movies that paid the bills.

Jaymole

I would try to incorporate as much farting and burping into the Sci-fi film and greenlight that.

Just think how much more entertaining 2001: A Space Odyssey would have been if the Starchild farted at the end.

d2cheer

I doubt 2001: A Space Odyssey would have been greenlight today. Same movie but change it to 2055: A Space Odyssey since we are passed 2001 smart asses.

Groucho

Didn't he?

Jaymole

No, I don't think so, but you never know with Kubrick...his movies are filled with so much detail that you sometimes need to watch them over and over again to notice all the burps and farts.

Obi-Wanma

I think you're leaving out an important factor in the decision making process... Do I get to bang Kate Upton?

The Bus

This is a silly question with only one right answer.

Mabuse

The answer is neither.

An ambitious sci-fi movie from a director with a good track record would be ideal.

A comedy from a writer and actor with a good track record would also be ideal.

Giles

no sniff card = no sale

RichC2

Both.

Unique sci-fi pics tend to do extremely well abroad (Inception, Matrix, Avatar). Comedies usually pull better in their domestic locations. Which

That said in the case of Pacific Rim and Grown Ups I probably wouldn't green light either. Pacific Rim looks solid but is extremely derivative (Avatar was similarly so, but that was more of a tech demo to begin with). Grown Ups 2 is a sequel to a terrible original.