Hollywood ... as in, the end of ....

Yes, Netflix financial statement looks ok. Amazon and Netflix are both operating on razor thin profits of about 2%. But Amazon's 2% is $2.3billion (hey, maybe 2% isn't so bad) vs Netflix 2% of $186m. So Amazon can outspend Netflix.
 
It can, if it wants to, because its market cap is around one trillion. With a "t". The question, however, is Amazon's long term plans. So far, it hasn't been quite as aggressive as Netflix.

PS. OK, so I failed to mention Amazon as a 'big player" in the streaming world. I still hold a grudge against it for the stove top oven that failed to work out of the box back in 2005.
 
puredrifting said:
I saw Dunkirk in 70mm in San Diego while on a trip recently. First time I have been in a theater in about a year so it wouldn't be appealing to me. Hollywood is putting out very few stories that interest me.
Click to expand...

You made it through Dunkirk? I walked out after 50 minutes. It was loud and boring. But the new at-home-type full recliner seats were excellent.
 
Batutta said:
So goddman LOUD. The bass in the TCL Chinese theater was so intense it gave me a headache.
Click to expand...

it was loud where I saw it in San Diego but at least it was clean and not distorted loud. Supposedly Nolan has screening instructions that it should be played at xx dB floor but I don't know if that's true, I read it in one of the articles. As far as boring, I didn't find it too boring but I am a history fanatic and I love that the entire film hardly had any dialog and almost no exposition. I didn't think it was great, but I thought it was good and I felt that technically, knowing how much of it was done in camera and with optical effects, not digital moving Photoshop, gave me a good appreciation of it.
 
That chart is too zoomed in. I'd like to see one that goes back to 1930 or 1940. Then we can see the decline that Hollywood has successfully thrived in for decades.
 
Yes, I've seen that one, but I was hoping to see one going to at least 2015. The online internet did get significant traffic until the last few years. That chart looks like a flat line for 47 years (because it doesn't have enough vertical resolution) and the other one, which zooms into 95 to present makes it look like a dramatic decline. Neither give the full picture and their combined information isn't clear. There were likely several ups/downs in the last 50 years, but the big chart doesn't have enough resolution to show it.
 
Ok, the data going back to 1980 shows that ticket sales have actually risen by 8% since 1980 but declined since 2002. That's what I like about data. It can be very deceiving, depending on how you view it. If you look at 1980 ticket sales and compare to 2016, you get a rosy picture. If you compare 2002 and 2016, it looks bad.
 
Last edited:
For statistical purposes, one has to take out the standard deviation anyway. The box office, including the attendance, will have ups and downs and that can depend on a number of factors, from the economy to the quality of the films shown, etc. Trying to detect trends ain't easy.

PS. For me, online video took off around 2007 when I found the "Irony of Fate" on YouTube in glorious 240p.

Paul F said:
Ok, the data going back to 1980 shows that ticket sales have actually risen by 8% since 1980. That's what I like about data. It can be very deceiving, depending on how you view it.
Click to expand...

In 1980, the US had a population of ~ 226 million. Now, it's around 320. The demos should give a ~ 45% increase in tix sold over this time frame.
 
DLD said:
...In 1980, the US had a population of ~ 226 million. Now, it's around 320. The demos should give a ~ 45% increase in tix sold over this time frame.
Click to expand...

Yes, excellent. We could look at per-capita ticket sales instead of total sales to get the per person interest in going to the movies. That would look more depressed.
 
The per-capita revenue is surprisingly robust against a declining per-capita ticket sales. Add inflation and then it doesn't looks so good (divide the blue line values by 3).
 
The adjusment I would prefer wouldn't be inflation, but total expense by Hollywood, or at least the total sum for the major studios. This would tell me if profitability is up or down.
 
A Hollywood exec would reply that Netflix and Amazon - to say nothing of HBO, Showtime, BBC, Canal+, etc. - are acting as de facto film studios and their totals should be taken into account.

And he would have a point.

Of course, that plays into the end of old Hollywood too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top