Adam
@adam-
Interesting take, but there's another side that Bravo is missing here. As someone who's worked in the industry, those $200M Marvel movies essentially fertilize everything else the studio produces. While those films may be their main bet, they also need to cover the themselves with a bunch of smaller budget films to address various audiences that make up the movie going public. This way they don't miss out on films that organically usurp manufactured blockbusters. Dark horses will always emerge in an-otherwise saturated marketplace. Thats what keeps it interesting, and why those weird, subtle, personal films that usually come out during the spring and awards season keep things from being too lopsided.
5 replies
1 recast
12 reactions
Bravo Johnson
@bravojohnson
This is trickle-down economics for Hollywood - and it’s just as mythical. The economics don’t work that way anymore. Those “weird, subtle, personal films” are funded through international co-productions, European to Asian government grants, or genuinely independent investors, not superhero movie profits. There was a system like this once, but it collapsed well before Disney bought Marvel in 2009. What we have now isn’t studios nurturing diverse storytelling - it’s global capital flows and government arts funding filling some of the void that American studios abandoned. I’ll take European and Asian subsidies to make a movie but lets dispense with the fantasy of a “market”
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction