Econlib Resources
Subscribe to EconLog
XML (Full articles)RDF (Excerpts) Feedburner (One-click subscriptions) Subscribe by author
Bryan CaplanDavid Henderson Garett Jones More
FAQ
(Instructions and more options)
|
TRACKBACKS (3 to date)
TrackBack URL: http://econlog.econlib.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/207
The author at Houston's Clear Thinkers in a related article titled The real economics of Hollywood writes:
COMMENTS (3 to date)
B. Scot writes:
Nick Cage was paid 20 million for Gone in Sixty Seconds, his highest yet. We can only dream of having such opportunity cost dilemmas. Posted February 24, 2005 12:32 AM
Jim Glass writes:
There was a longer and more informative article on all this recently in the New Yorker. Here are excerpts and here's the whole thing. At least Cage acted in a whole movie for his $20 mil. For "Shrek 2" Mike Myers, Eddie Murphy, and Cameron Diaz each got $10 million just for doing a few days of voiceovers. From the article: Thomson believes that profit participation has done the movies a lot of damage, because it allows people to profit from the success of an investment with no risk to themselves on the downside. [And] "creative control" is another source of trouble. When United Artists gave Michael Cimino the right of final cut on “Heaven’s Gate,” in 1980, it meant, Thomson says, that Cimino "owned a thing he had not paid for." He could indulge himself with other people’s money. “Heaven’s Gate” is, canonically, “the movie that killed the New Hollywood.” It almost killed United Artists, too... One of the things about profit participation is that the actors who are paid millions to "open" a movie get to keep their advances against profits even if there aren't any profits. This cost has done a lot to kill off smaller movies, and to create films like the Matrix sequels that are designed to open on 18,000 screens worldwide simultaneously, so that “by the time we’ve all seen that it sucked, it’s a hit.” BTW, Final Cut, the book about the making of Heaven's Gate, has been reissued and is a great read about how Hollywood works. Posted February 24, 2005 12:30 PM
Lawrance George Lux writes:
Of the various parties involved in the movie industry, which ones earn the highest economic rents, and why? The Producers. They line up the Cash, distribute Cash flows, work on the Cuff for Advertising and Distribution, get first cut of the pie, and quadruple their initial gain if they can establish a viable Video/DVD market for the Product; all this while working on the next property. lgl Posted February 24, 2005 3:28 PM
Comments for this entry
have been closed
|
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||