Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Movie Talk
Reload this Page >

Question on the highest Grossing Independent Film

Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

Question on the highest Grossing Independent Film

Old 03-16-04, 09:59 PM
  #1  
Banned
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Rockford, IL
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Question on the highest Grossing Independent Film

I know that Passion of the Christ has just become the highest grossing independent film, but here's a good question

Wouldn't the correct title be STAR WARS?

Didn't Lucas pay for these films himself, so in turn making them independent films?
Old 03-16-04, 10:32 PM
  #2  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 8,085
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
He didn't pay for them himself.
Old 03-16-04, 10:35 PM
  #3  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Somewhere between Heaven and Hell
Posts: 34,097
Received 724 Likes on 529 Posts
How much did Blair Witch Project make? Are we talking gross or budget to gross?
Old 03-16-04, 10:53 PM
  #4  
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hollywood
Posts: 1,022
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I was going to say Blair Witch was a much more impressive endeavor considering it cost under half a million to make; however, its distributor spent millions marketing it. So budget should probably include the marketing costs too.

Anyway, I believe Star Wars was originally a 20th Century Fox film which was given back to Lucas under the condition of making Empire and Jedi. I could be wrong.
Old 03-16-04, 10:57 PM
  #5  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 8,085
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
But people actually liked the Passion as opposed to Blair Witch Project which not too many like. Most people walked out of the theatre feeling scammed.
Old 03-16-04, 10:57 PM
  #6  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 4,551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by RyoHazuki
He didn't pay for them himself.
He DID pay for the new films, Episode I and II. While the original trilogy are not independant films, techincally the new films are. Fox only acts as distributor, holding a position really no different than NewMarket in relation to Passion of the Christ. So, TECHNICALLY Star Wars Episode I is the highest grossing independant film. But I think due to the nature of the film, and what it is, and its obvious success and studio roots, nobody really considers it as such. I think Lucasfilm is too big a company for anyone to start triumphing them as a independant company, I guess.
Old 03-17-04, 11:41 AM
  #7  
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: "Sitting on a beach, earning 20%"
Posts: 6,154
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Episode I is the highest grossing independent film of all time. PERIOD

The film meets and exceeds every criterion for independence. It was financed entirely outside of Hollywood. People just discredit it because it doesn't fit their perception of what an independent film should be. It's like one of those "what is truely punk?" arguements. There's a lot of fools that stretch and fool with the definition of "independent" as it suits their agenda.
Old 03-17-04, 11:51 AM
  #8  
Moderator
 
Groucho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 71,383
Received 122 Likes on 84 Posts
The Phantom Menace and The Passion of the Christ are both independent films to the point that they were pretty much financed by one person. The fact that the individuals in question are fabulously rich makes some skeptical to think of them as "independant" films...but they really are.

In terms of biggest profit, however, I think Christ is going to be the winner. In terms of Budget:Profit ratio, I believe Blair Witch Project is still the one to beat.
Old 03-17-04, 11:55 AM
  #9  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 7,466
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by Pants
Episode I is the highest grossing independent film of all time. PERIOD

The film meets and exceeds every criterion for independence. It was financed entirely outside of Hollywood. People just discredit it because it doesn't fit their perception of what an independent film should be. It's like one of those "what is truely punk?" arguements. There's a lot of fools that stretch and fool with the definition of "independent" as it suits their agenda.
I guess I just wonder if it is independant because Lucasfilm has gotten to be so large . . . they've got 42 projects under their belt . . . are they still not considered "part of Hollywood"?

Plus, 20th Century Fox is one of the producers . . . doesn't that disqualify it from being an independant movie?
Old 03-17-04, 12:17 PM
  #10  
Needs to contact an admin about multiple accounts
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 2,730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally posted by talemyn
Plus, 20th Century Fox is one of the producers . . . doesn't that disqualify it from being an independant movie?
Fox was just a distributor. And I think their profit was capped at 50 million.
Old 03-17-04, 12:33 PM
  #11  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Rypro 525's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: a frikin hellhole
Posts: 28,264
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
also why are movies like bend it like beckham and boys don't cry consitered indies because they are distributed by fox searchlght.
Old 03-17-04, 12:39 PM
  #12  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Is Dreamworks an independent studio?

'Cause if Dreamworks isn't an independent, then Lucasfilm isn't either. Both firms are privately held. Lucasfilm is older than Dreamworks and has more employees. And both companies have similar revenues.

http://www.hoovers.com/lucasfilm-ltd...actsheet.xhtml

http://www.hoovers.com/dreamworks-sk...actsheet.xhtml

Let's fact it--the fact that Spielberg and Lucas both own their own studios doesn't set them apart from the Hollywood establishment: it means they ARE the Hollywood establishment. (And no, the fact that Lucas lives a few hundred miles to the north doesn't matter.)
Old 03-17-04, 12:41 PM
  #13  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
William Fuld's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 4,072
Received 135 Likes on 80 Posts
Originally posted by Rypro 525
also why are movies like bend it like beckham and boys don't cry consitered indies because they are distributed by fox searchlght.
Because they were financed independently from the major studios.
Old 03-17-04, 04:37 PM
  #14  
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: "Sitting on a beach, earning 20%"
Posts: 6,154
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally posted by talemyn
. . . are they still not considered "part of Hollywood"?
Lucasfilm is NOT part of Hollywood. I would define a Hollywood Studio as being a public or privately held company actively engaged in financing, production, marketing, and distribution of films. If you're of a mind to declare companies like Revolution Stuidos, Regency, Morgan Creek, and Spyglass as being Hollywood Studios then I guess Lucasfilm is a Hollywood Studio, but I just don't see it that way. They're a producer only.
Originally posted by talemyn
Plus, 20th Century Fox is one of the producers . . . doesn't that disqualify it from being an independant movie?
No they are not. They are only distributors of the film. Not only that but they recieve no percentage of proceeds (which is common in most distribution deals) but rather they are only payed a flat fee buy Lucasfilm.
Originally posted by Rypro 525
also why are movies like bend it like beckham and boys don't cry consitered indies because they are distributed by fox searchlght.
Because they were financed independently and then "picked up" for distribution after they were completed.

Cause if Dreamworks isn't an independent, then Lucasfilm isn't either. Both firms are privately held. Lucasfilm is older than Dreamworks and has more employees. And both companies have similar revenues.
Dreamworks operates like a studio traditionally operates. Lucasfilm is very different. In the case of the prequals George Lucas litterally pays for them with his own money. There is sophisticated financing based around ancilliary profits from merchandising, but the investment is entirely that of one man. Over at Dreamworks Spielberg, Katzenberg, and Geffen don't open their wallets and finance Old School

Last edited by Pants; 03-17-04 at 04:52 PM.

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.