George Lucas, Longtailer

From the current issue of Variety:

"George Lucas has a message for studios that are cutting their slates and shifting toward big-budget tentpoles and franchises: You've got it all wrong. The creator of "Star Wars," which stamped the template for the franchise-tentpole film, says many small films and Web distribution are the future.

And in case anyone doubts he means it, Lucasfilm is getting out of the [theatrical-release] movie biz."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.

Spending $100 million on production costs and another $100 million on P&A makes no sense, he said. "For that same $200 million, I can 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."

That's good news for the vast majority of filmmakers, who have little chance of getting box office distribution today. There's abundant supply of filmmaking talent and abundant demand for their work. The only thing standing in the way is the incredibly limited channel of theatrical release. Fewer than 150 films get distribution on 1,000 screens or more (the definition of mainstream release) each year . Meanwhile, more than 13,000 films are now submitted each year to just one independent film fest--the Tribeca Film Festival--alone. Lucas is right that box-office domination of the movie business seems a throwback to an earlier day of scarcity. Today it's getting cheaper and easier to make a movie. Why shouldn't it be cheaper and easier to distribute it, too? 

Comments

[Phillip Marzella]

Hear Hear

[Simon de Haast]

This begs the question of what the very concept of TV set is evolving into...with iPod video and the like, DVB-H cellular broadcasting handsets, and associated bit-based distribution models, this is setting the scene for a very interesting longtail landscape. As technology speeds up our lives, certain aspects of it will lag, with our waiting time creating more opportunities for time-killing services like mobile tv.

[Charles Tashiro]

Lucas is right as far as he goes. The real revolution is not just a question of filmmakers having new means of distribution, however. Rather, because of outlets like YouTube and other venues, the two hour narrative feature itself is fast losing its grip on the public imagination as the measure of "real" filmmaking. As that happens, filmmakers not only can make more direct contact with viewers. They can also explore expressive options that heretofore have been stifled by the obsession to "tell a story," suitable for the pseudo-novelistic format. Narrative features will continue to be made, but creative energies can now be both released and rewarded with other approaches.

[Francis Hamit]

George Lucas has always been a leader in The Industry, and if he does this, others will surely follow. The line between "Feature" and "Prime Time" has become very blurred lately, with some television pilot episodes costing more than a small motion picture to produce. Given the "make it or break it" two week window that most theatrical features enjoy, building an audience through other channels has more appeal for those who want to provide new and compelling narratives rather than "more of the same". It is time for filmmakers to reclaim creativity from the marketing department. That does not mean that traditional narrative threads will be discarded -- nothing sells better than the comfortable and the familiar--but that there is room once more for the small story, carefully observed. There may even be room for screenwriters and directors over 40.

[Lokesh Kumar]

Google's acquisition of YouTube tells me that George Lucas is right.

[Brendan Piper]

A lot of people have been commenting on how Lucas made, his mark with the blockbuster, which isn't exactly true, he made Star Wars for 13 million, which if adjusted for inflation would be 40 million bucks today, not a typical blockbuster movie, considering Pirates was 130 million and Xmen 3 was 200 million, but still a pretty good budget. At the time he was a very cost effective filmmaker. One could say that it could have been made even cheaper today with the lower cost of production equipment. However even with the lowered cost of entry episode III was 113 million dollars so we are talking almost twice the price of the original movie. Also, I think revenge of the sith's 113 million vs. A New Hope's 40 million is proof positive that money can't buy quality.

Just some numbers I have been thinking about.

[Christian Ter]

Rather, because of outlets like YouTube and other venues, the two hour narrative feature itself is fast losing its grip on the public imagination as the measure of "real" filmmaking. As that happens, filmmakers not only can make more direct contact with viewers. They can also explore expressive options that heretofore have been stifled by the obsession to "tell a story".
http://www.qqcc.info/sitemap.htm
That does not mean that traditional narrative threads will be discarded -- nothing sells better than the comfortable and the familiar--but that there is room once more for the small story, carefully observed. There may even be room for screenwriters and directors over 40.

[Pat Coyle]

I love this concept. I've long disliked the movie going experience, and look forward to seeing more titles available, as long as they're as good as Star Wars.

[Joe De Carlo]

I think Lucas is right on. My wife and I haven't gone to the movies in years, we wait for them to come out on DVD. Now that more people have widescreen HD TV's and surround sound stereos, it makes enjoying a movie at home better than going to the theater. Not to mention crazy price of snacks that they charge. I also read somewhere that Lucas will be making more Star Wars episodes, but it will be a TV series. That will be great!

[Ros Sutton]

A few decades ago, cinemas were in trouble. Commentators predicted cinema audiences would continue to decline because we could watch movies at home. Since then the cinema industry has seen audiences grow again.

Why? Could it be that going to the cinema to see a blockbuster film is not just about watching a film - its an overall experience to get out and have a good experience, shared with friends or family?

[shuyinhe]

I love this concept. I've long disliked the movie going experience, and look forward to seeing more titles available, as long as they're as good as Star Wars.