Skip to main content

Film Can Make Money

There is a fallacy in supply and demand theory that all remotely relevant supply will equally fulfill a particular demand.
While the idea seems reasonable, it's not accurate.
Let's take an example from film. This could apply to visual arts, music, or any business. It's just easy to find the numbers on film, see what goes on in the making of the product, and theorize about what led to a particular success or failure.
There's an argument that so many movies come out each year that any particular movie has (statistically) a less-than-0.7% chance of being a box office success (the math usually checks out).
Deadpool was considered a box-office success. It made $783.1M on its $58M budget.
In Hollywood, making 2-4 times your budget is considered a success.
Deadpool made more than 13 times its budget.
It was a passion project from a 1st-time director.

Now, that doesn't mean that passion projects will succeed or that movies have a better chance of succeeding than we expect. It means that Deadpool did something right.
Some studios think its hard-R rating, excessive humor, or novelty led to its success, and while studios are testing those hypotheses, I'd like to present my own: Deadpool had 3 advantages that any piece of art could have: It was good, it filled a demand others couldn't fill, and that demand was very strong.

We sometimes think "With all the movies out there, mine must not stand a chance", but that's assuming all movies will fulfill the demand for "a movie".
The demand isn't actually for "a movie", because there is no market for a mediocre product or for a truly awful product.
There is a market for entertainment that's "so bad it's good", and there is a market for a quality product.
You might find it useful to change the question to "Compared to the good movies in the industry, does mine stand a chance? Or does mine fall in the category of "mediocre" or "truly awful"?" (please, don't be biased on this one. Your career is at stake).
If your film falls into the category of "good" or "so bad, it's good" rather than the category of "films", you probably just AT LEAST doubled your chances.
If your film falls into the category of "mediocre" or "truly awful", that film won't have a market.

But Deadpool wasn't just good. Deadpool touched a unique niche market.
Here's where any industry can benefit. The fallacy is that the demand for a movie can be satisfied with any movie, but the demand isn't for "a movie".
Doctor Strange does not fill the demand for a horror movie, but it does fulfill the demand for a well-made superhero movie with comedy and Benedict Cumberbatch.
Batman v Superman does not fill the demand for a comedy, but it does fill the demand for a dark and gritty superhero movie.
After 15 years of superhero movie blockbusters and after 8 years of having Lame Deadpool onscreen, the Deadpool fans had developed a demand for Real Deadpool. Literally no other movie could fulfill this demand.
So find a need, fill the need.

Deadpool not only filled a unique need, but a STRONG need.
Deadpool fans wanted Real Deadpool onscreen so badly that they were probably willing to personally crowdfund the entire $58M budget if necessary. And while there were ~150 films that year, only 1 of them could fulfill the very strong need for Real Deadpool.
I'm not talking about hotly anticipated movies like Psych: The Movie, Star Wars: Episode IX, or Avengers: Infinity War. People really want those movies to come out, but they expect those movies.
I'm talking about movies that people want so badly that they will pay 2-5 times the normal amount to see this movie, because the need HASN'T been filled and it's possible that the need might never get filled. It doesn't have to fill a financial need, just an emotional need.
I guarantee you the Community movie will do very well at the box office, simply because the fans have such a strong emotional need for the film that they will go see it several times and they will try to convince their friends to go see it, too.
So find a need, fill a need. The stronger the need, the greater the profit.

So yes, there are a lot of movies released every year.
There are a lot of pieces of visual art released every year.
There's a lot of music released every year.
There are a lot of businesses launched every year. 
here are a lot of apps released every year.

But how many of them are high-quality?
And how many of them reach a market that the others can't fill?
And how many of them reach a market that's hungry for a specific product?
And is yours one of the products that's high-quality and fills a demand that the market is hungry for and that others can't fill?
If so, you go from a market with too much competition to a market with no competition.

Find a need, fill a need. The stronger the need, the greater the profit.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Should The Book of Mormon Be A Movie?

Over the last few years, my brother and I have been brainstorming about how to make an epic movie (or series of movies) out of The Book of Mormon. We didn't want something simple. We want something epic - a grand adventure for the ages, like we sometimes say the Book of Mormon itself is. I've heard a lot of people love the idea, and I've heard a lot of concerns. I'd like to address some of the concerns and see if I can help. Perhaps you could help me address my major concern with making the Book of Mormon into a movie. If you have any more concerns, let me know. I'd love to discuss them. Concern #1: "It would be rated R." This is the single most frequent concern I hear. I even heard this from someone who played in the Bible videos. To be fair, it's a legitimate concern. There are plenty of lots of R-rated ancient war movies - from Gladiator  (2000), to 300  (2006) to the extended edition of The Hobbit: Battle of the Five Armies  (2014/2015). Th...

Age of Ultron as a Hawkeye Movie

We sometimes say that Tony is the ultimate antagonist of the MCU. We sometimes say that Avengers: Age of Ultron is a movie more about Hawkeye than any other character. But it turns out: You could rewrite Age of Ultron in a way that takes out Cap, Thor, Hulk, and Nat and you would have effectively the same movie. The plot of Avengers: Age of Ultron  is pretty simple: When Tony Stark gets manipulated into creating a robot to protect the planet that goes awry, the rest of the Avengers try to stop the robot from destroying the earth. Cap, Thor, Hulk, and Nat don't actually help  Ultron or the Avengers to succeed in their goals. So let's re-imagine Age of Ultron  as a solo Hawkeye movie. In this version, Hawkeye becomes the main character, and b ecause of their traumatic experiences involving Stark, Wanda and Lame Quicksilver are still villains. Tony is rewritten as an obvious villain, giving us 4 major villains:  Tony, Wanda, Lame Quicksilver, and Ultron, ...

Chloe Bennet? Please?

Every time I see anything about Avengers: Infinity War , I feel bogged down, even though I should be really excited for it. I finally realized the reason: No Chloe Bennet. At this point, all I care about with the MCU is what the official title of Spider-Man: The Winter Formal will be (because what else do you call the sequel to Homecoming ?), what new genres they'll explore, and how they'll have the TV shows will affect the movies. Chloe Bennet's character from Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. would be a fantastic addition to Avengers: Infinity  War . Her character is powerful enough to be helpful to the team, is from a show people already like, and is extremely easy to introduce to an audience that has never seen Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D . I would love to see Chloe Bennet in a Marvel movie. (The fact that she's extremely attractive doesn't hurt.)