6 Things The Film Industry Doesn't Want You To Know About

I thought the accounting was interesting...

larry

Harry Potter "losing" money:

http://www.deadline.com/2010/07/stud...ey-accounting/

Yeah, really. It's kind of scary to think about.

Yeah, with Hollywood's bookkeeping, you basically get jacked in terms of getting a percentage cut unless you have clout. If you're breaking into Hollywood, take whatever upfront money they throw at you, because that's probably all you'll see unless you're Spielberg's nephew (even then.) But that's really nothing new, and nor is it unique to Hollywood.

The "stealing scripts" thing though is more complicated than the article lets on (and even the article writer admits it's more "stealing ideas.") While the stuff the article says has happened, I don't think it's always that clear cut. Studios have a lot of projects in various stages of development, and the chances of making a film that can kindasorta be similar to an idea someone pitched but went nowhere is actually kind of common. In fact, studios often have you sign a release when you give them a script (assuming you got through the hoops to get one to them) that says, "We may have something that is similar to what you're giving to us. This release absolves us from any lawsuits if we make a movie that resembles yours in the slightest."

And stealing ideas/scripts from young, unknown writers is almost unheard of. If a studio finds a writer has a great idea/script, they just buy it. They have plenty of money to pay the first writer for the script and then have it rewritten to what they want.

BTW, if you've every wondered why two very similar films come out at the same time, it's often due to "script stealing" where a writer pitches a script and gets turned down at studio A which "steals" the idea and has another writer produce a script meanwhile the original writer has produced a script and managed to get it accepted at studio B.

As a former accountant I can tell you creative accounting is not unusual in the corporate world.
It is simply a matter of getting the acquiescence of auditors.
With the "right" persuasion that is often not hard to do.

Case in point: the Great Wall Street Fraud we are all suffering thru.
Or the Arthur Anderson / Enron B.S.
And on and on....

Actually, it only proves people are stupid and EVERTHING is For Sale.

BTW - the point about the studio/theater split % is nothing more then cherry picking. If you look at Regal Cinema's financials, they average approx. 54% of the ticket price as gross revenue.

While that has happened, it could also be "Studio A had idea X in development but was going nowhere. Studio B suddenly announced they were going ahead with a movie that was superficially like idea X. Studio A, wanting to eat Studio B's lunch, rushes their moribund idea X into the greenlit stage. Both films based on idea X get released within a few weeks of each other."

Sometimes it's stealing, sometimes it's monkey see, monkey do.

As to a few of these, I have a good friend who shopped ideas around and had to resort to legal action to get thieves to cease and desist. One of these was brought against two names everyone would recognize. Another friend had the same happen to him. Moral: don't pitch something until you have written it.

Theaters have been screwed six ways from Sunday ever since movies were invented. It's old news.

The changing of the copyright laws is annoying, but do you really think you would get films restored if they hadn't been changed? Tried to get a good print of Beat the Devil or One-Eyed Jacks?

They'll kill off Netflix just as soon as they can figure out how. It's a miracle it's been such a good deal for as long as it has been. Good luck at getting collectors to go back to collecting optical media at the fever pitch they did seven or eight years ago, however.

Fake reviews. It's always been so. Find a reviewers who are close to your taste and follow them, preferably people who maybe dislike some films you like now and then.

You're right....not a chance in the world.



I don't think the studios need to expend the energy; NF is doing it to themselves quite nicely.



Greed talks, B.S. walks.

Funny there's any revelation about Money Changers in Hollywood. From the start it was always that way. What's New?

Shouldn't ", now in a witness protection program," have followed?

larry

In a scriptwriting book I have, the writer says if you ever is given a choice between a fixed sum of money or % of the profit, always go with the first unless you work for George Lucas. Hollywood will always find a way of not letting the movie turn profit.

Thanks for the article. Good read, but nothing shocking. It's business. That's how it goes. Kind of like Lucas and his tinkering: If it can be done, it will be done.

In a scriptwriting book I have, the writer says if you ever is given a choice between a fixed sum of money or % of the profit, always go with the first unless you work for George Lucas. Hollywood will always find a way of not letting the movie turn profit.

As they say, you want a percentage of the gross, not a percentage of the net.

Even the gross can be manipulated. Since the production company and distribution company has their own gross.

In this situation, and in most others, I would recommend taking the $$$ and run.

I have personally seen where royalty calculations have been...uh...modified by managment.

Good info; they're just like any huge corporations or banksters.

When they become too big, it just feeds on itself to ensure eternity and moral-less.

If you can even get the gross. You usually need clout to get that, and if you have clout, you usually have a team of agents and lawyers who have a vested interest in getting as big a percentage for you as they can (because they earn a percentage of your check. Bigger your check, the bigger theirs is.)