Posted on 10/05/2006 11:42:52 PM PDT by MadIvan
GEORGE Lucas, the creator of Star Wars, is getting out of the movie-making business, saying that big-budget releases are too risky, that Americans are abandoning cinemas and that the future of film will be smaller-budget releases distributed over the internet.
To Hollywood executives suffering declining audiences and revenues in the face of online and pay-per-view competition, the special-effects master may seem to have been seduced by the dark side. But, as ever, he is looking to the future.
"We don't want to make movies. We're about to get into television. As far as Lucasfilm is concerned, we've moved away from the feature-film thing because it's too expensive and it's too risky," Lucas told Variety magazine this week at an opening ceremony for a new School of Cinematic Arts at the University of Southern California, to which he has donated $175 million (£93 million).
"I think the secret to the future is quantity," he said, adding that instead of spending $200 million on a big-budget release, he could make "50-60 two-hour movies".
"That's 120 hours as opposed to two hours. In the future market, that's where it's going to land, because it's going to be all pay-per-view and downloadable [on the internet]."
Lucas believes that, in future, Americans will prefer to watch films at home, abandoning the cinema, a cornerstone of their culture.
"I don't think anything's going to be a habit anymore. I think people are going to be drawn to a certain medium in their leisure time and they're going to do it because there is a desire to do it at that particular moment in time. Everything is going to be a matter of choice. I think that's going to be a huge revolution."
Lucas still has film commitments in the pipeline, notably the fourth part of the Indiana Jones series - on which he worked "for about 15 years" - and the long-touted Red Tails, portraying the Tuskegee airmen of the Second World War.
Howard Suber, a professor of film and television at UCLA, told The Scotsman: "The days of the theatrical film [presented in cinemas] are numbered. Shortly we will see a film released simultaneously around the world in people's homes.
"There is clearly, undisputedly, a shift to watching movies in the home on the part of the average person and a reluctance to go to the theatre, with the rise of high- definition TV sets in the home. Evidently it's now accelerating exponentially.
"It's hard to say how many people would be willing to watch a film on the internet. Watching a movie in a theatre in a crowd is different from watching it at home. You would think directors especially would be thinking in terms of how the home-movie experience is different.
"George Lucas's name is magical when it comes to the Star Wars series, but he doesn't have a track record for intricate character pieces, as Willow showed."
Cult director Stephen Soderbergh this year tried out the "day-in-date" strategy for his release of Bubble, which was released simultaneously in cinemas, on pay-per-view high-definition TV and DVD. It did not do well, but it was not a big-budget movie, a distinction Prof Suber is quick to make in terms of the strategy.
He added: "Eventually, somebody with Lucas's clout will say, 'Star Wars 8 will be released day-in-date around the world'. What will happen is the studios will discover that you can make an incredible amount of money, and they'll be able to save millions in print costs, the techno-mechanic costs of producing films, and they won't have to split revenues with theatre-owners."
Regards, Ivan
Ping!
Hey Egomaniac,
Part of the reason box office numbers is down is because of self-absorbed junk like the Phantom Menance.
Plus, the last 3 Star Wars movies sucked.
I think there is something to be said for watching quality entertainment at home withour dealing with the crowds of buffoons one finds in the theatre.
Plus the simple economics...theatres have priced themselves out of "simple fun".
Where I live the ticket is anywhere from 8-11.00, a Coke is around 4.00 and popcorn is 5.00. So taking ma and pa and the kids to the movies can be pricey. All this for the opportunity to watch a film with a couple hundred clowns, screaming babies, cell phones, gangsta kids and loud talkers...
Since I haven't been in a theater since the original 'Godfather', and I refuse to pay for cable/satellite TV, I'll stick with FreeRepublic for my entertainment-news-stories-hobby.
Why support Hollyweird?
Bookmark
Make good movies with good acting, dialog, storyline and include redeeming values.. exclude the unnecessary violence, sex, special affects overkill and twisted immoral themes.. oh wait, Hollywood did that back in it's earlier days, no wonder I keep watching old movies.
You know, you have no room to bitch about Lucas spending money on digital editing, twenty million in his pocket and millions for story rights.
Why?
George Lucas self-funded the last three Star Wars movies out of his own pocket and paid 20th Century Fox some ridiculously low flat fee, like $20 million, for worldwide distribution.
His movies have NOT been Hollywood studio pieces with bloated guarantees and fees. The last Star Wars trilogy was as self-financed as Mel Gibson's POTC which I'm sure you applauded Mr. Gibson for "taking a risk" and putting his own money on the line for a great product.
If Lucas was churning out crap like MI: III or Superman (Good movie but the business history behind it was abysmal.) where stockholders and studios were ransacked for tens of millions you'd have a gripe. However it's his money, his system and he can do what he likes with it.
If you think that what you pay at the theater, you know your self-serving bitch and moan fest, of $12 for a ticket and $7 has anything to do with the price of producing a movie you're delusional. As I recall in 1999 when The Phantom Menace opened The Blair Witch Project was in one of the other theaters. One cost $200 million to make, the other cost $400,000 to make. The ticket prices for both movies were identical.
I'd love to see a knock off of "Knights of the Old Republic", particularly if it's made as a series. Only a small segment of the population has been exposed to the story. Revan could become the new "J.R."
not only that, id rather buy a video game then watch a computer generated movie i have no control over
at least with video game i dont have to play it pc way
BSG is a step back from more entertaining, less confused programs like SG-1.Eureka is good, in an ordinary way, and the new Doctor Who proves you can have good sci-fi mellerdrammer with cheap crappy effects. Personally I'd rather revisit Red Dwarf, but that was lightning in a bottle.
You're in California. Half of the prices you mention are direct and indirect taxes.
Charles Band made some decent little flicks with Full Moon some years back. They were formulaic and maybe predictable, but who didn't love Dollman versus the Demonic Toys, or the first few Puppet master movies?
Direct to video is crap right now, as is Sci-fi network original movie work, because of too much gore. If I see another CG decapitation spurting blood, I'll lock out the network.
Check out Prison Break, if you can. It's fantastic.
That girl on Battlestar Galactica is HOT!
While his politics stink, Lucas is correct in spotting the future of entertainment.
The cinema's days are numbered.
G. Lucas should just concentrate on writing / directing / producing good films....instead of vehicles with no plot designed for the ego of the special effects gangs...
When SPFX takes place of a story line....well, the results are obvious.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.