The Film Industry

1) The introduction of inner city multiplex's has led to an emormous increase of film screens in the UK, but this has not led to an increase of the number of films being shown. This is due to the large film companies such as Odeon and Vue, they only show big blockbuster type films that are current such 'The green hornet' and ' The black swan', this is because they realise that the market is far wider and popular for such high budget films. Due to this the decrease of independant film houses has occured and less 'unknown' films are being shown, therefore closing the gap of films being shown. On one day at a multiplex, there may be 5 releases shown on 20 screens that run every hour, and this is repeated across great britian this is why there is no increase of films being shown in the UK. 2) 'Blockbuster saturation' may be occuring due to the facts that from 2004 to 2008 cinema's have lost 7million paying costumers. One factor could be due to the ease of piracy, torrent seeding has become massive in the past 5 years and is incredibly popular, this means blockbuster films can be downloaded and shown two days after release. It is clear that the blockbusters may be getting too samey and predictable and audiences are turned off by this. in 2004 'shrek 2' was top of box office then 6 years later 'shrek forever after' is released grossing another nice profit- is the film industry become to predictable, and therefore leading to blockbuster saturation. 3) The average money spent for one release in the UK by distrubutors is £627, 000. 4) This recent demand for UK film releases means that more money will have to be spent a year on the distrubtion, and if the films for some reason become unpopular and less people start to view them large amounts of money will be lost. With the current market destroyer (piracy) expanding day by day this may results in a great deal of loss in money, it is risky. 5) If the average cost per production/distrubtion of a US film in $102.8m and this price tag is rising, it may mean that less films are released meaning cinema's only show very big blostbusters and an illimination of good independant cinema. Hollywood production may become for one way, and only start making 'dream' blockbusters such as 'Avatar' making the viewers have a far shallow view on cinema. 6) The Us' top 3 most bankable actos in order of popularity are George Clooney, Johnny Depp and Leonardo Dicaprio. All three actors have been in numerous blockbusters for over 10 years now that proves your longetivity of career in hollywood is incredibly important. In my opinion the most bankable male actors for the 'youth' market are Simon Pegg, Jamie Bell, Nicholas Hoult and Keira Knightley. This proves that male seem to dominate the lead role in hollywood. 7) Avatar made enormous profits Transformers nearly did New moon made 5 times itself a huge profit Up was fairly close but not good enough The hangover only spent $35 and made a great profit Star Trek didn't do too well, and made no money The blind side with a fairly small budget in comparison made money Alvin and the chipmunks made a studio profit Sherlock Holmes narrowly missed out on making a profit 8) 'Into the wilds' was a recent very popular Paramount Vantage production, the connection of output is that the films are used with the same company money but with a great lot less spent on advertising, production, release and distrubution. Paramount are a huge film company and vantage acts like a sister company, still fully associated but with a different approach to money and distrubtion. (500) days of summer was a very popular almost cult film made by fox searchlight, it was based around a strange romance between two people in love with the music around them. The film did vey well are the budget was not too high and the box office loved it, but also on top of this the soundtrack sold on itunes and on cd made a lot of money. When the money is made the money is pushed straight back into the company.