Our film studio is struggling to make a profit. Should we continue to make thought-provoking films or should we shift to more banal fare? Pick a side and argue your point.
The Haveman Chronicle (Summer) Powered by WordPress
Max Magazine Theme was created by 
I believe that we should not give up making films that actually mean something even though we are struggling. What we need to do is improve the brand image surrounding how we get that information out. Let us face it, we can make banal fare and bottom of the barrel productions but we still need to sell them. Just because we are doing a bad job of getting our quality material out does not mean we should sell out. For one, doing so will alienate the fledgling viewing base that is loyal to us and then we will have convert them and attract new viewers. I don’t think that is the safer bet. What we should be doing is taking as many lessons from Vice and incorporating them into our firm.
To say that smart and informed viewers are a dying breed is an insult to viewers everywhere. I think that people are opening up more and more with their disgust with the mainstream media. This is our chance to carve an empire from this niche market. We should not shy away from it and try to play someone else’s game; we need to play our own. I advocate that we improve our public relations and research teams to make our reach more substantial. We need to show our viewers that we have the same thirst for the truth. We need to show them we will do it in a modern way that is in touch with how modern people think and act.
I would agree with you also. Don’t give up just to attempt to make a buck easier.
You have a great idea to better our chances to grow our profit. This is the time for us to strike with impactful material. Marketing is a great way to push our material into the media so to grab the audience. With so many avenues for media now a days we have a great chance for exposure.
My argument would be to stay with what we are doing and continue making the movies as we always have with them still being the thought-provocative films. I know that the argument is that the way we have been making these films have been losing money for our studio. I would suggest that instead of changing the way we make films, and possibly taking the chance of lowering our standards, that we instead try a different approach in the way we market our films. Use the internet more such as social media to promote our films, find venues that are interested in our thought-provoking films and use this way also to find audiences that like what we produce. I think we just have to find that niche’ group/audience that already likes films such as what we produce, but they may not know about our studio and what we do. This is where we need to research and reach out too, to find the market that is interested in what we do and produce. If we focus and go after this market of individuals and stop wasting money on the mainstream I think we may have a chance to turn our film studio around and make a come back and still keep producing the movies that are what we want and are still in the thought-provocative venue we want.
It is all about the salesmanship. I have seen absolute dud movies make it very far because of an incredible PR team. There have also been movies that blow my head away with how awesome they are and I have never heard of them because their advertising team is not getting the message out that far.
Kevin – I agree, and I’ve witnessed the same thing with movies that same like totally duds that end up doing great in the box office or in sales just because of how well a PR team does to promote the film. It’s amazing what good advertising can do, and honestly, if money is invested into a good PR company then sales can usually start to increase.
I would have to agree with your sentiment that even “dud movies” can make it big with a good marketing campaign. I am always disappointed when I am a sucker for the marketing and think I am going to be watching a good movie and then find out it is terrible.
This a great idea! We can change our marketing strategy. On top of that, we could make more thought-provoking films that are catered to a certain audience that would increase our number of consumers. We could still make it educational, but just make it niche and more available to those people. In this way we will not be compromising our values and still increase profit.
I think we should continue to produce thought-provoking films instead of switching to more banal fair. I believe there are enough companies who produce that type of movie. There are not nearly as many who are brave enough to produce movies that make people think. Even though we have not been making as much money with these movies as we have might have made with some other type, I feel we should not sacrifice quality in order to make more profit. If there is anything that needs to be changed in our film studio, it could be the distribution of our movies. Maybe it is time to take a look at where our movies are being seen and who is watching them and see if there are untapped resources we are not utilizing. I feel this is a much better avenue to pursue than banal movie making.
Good point that there are already many companies making movies that are run-of-the-mill. Another interesting point that you make is bravery. It does take a lot more bravery to be original and go with your vision. Even if we are making independent films, there’s always a chance at the Sun Dance film festival. Quentin Tarantino is unique and eventually he was recognized. Tim Burton is another one of those too. I think we have a chance.
I think it is important to stick with the integrity of the company. If the company was founded on the basis of producing thought-provoking intellectual materials it should stay true to its roots. Since our film studio is struggling to make ends meet by only producing this material maybe it should weigh its options. I don’t think it should completely change over to only producing banal material but perhaps there is another way. Continuing to make thought-provoking material as it clearly does have an interested market, however perhaps opening another branch our film company which has a looser focus. The base of the company should not abandon what it was built on, but perhaps advance with the times and as the popularity shifts. I think it’s very important to continue to produce thought-provoking films for our company. Depending on the importance to our higher ups of our material getting out there, we could even play with the idea of becoming a nonprofit, seeing as our material is valuable and necessary for people to watch.
I completely agree with you – the integrity of the company is key. I think that just so long as the company can grow with the times and really tailor their films to the same audience but in maybe in a more interesting way then they would be able to increase revenue.
It’s better to have a small, interested audience than to have a small, bored audience, which is what we’d get if we decided to shift to more banal, fare. Continuing to produce thought-provoking films means that our film studio still has originality. We can still shift our films in a different direction but still staying within our same guidelines that we have been. For example, if we usually make independent romantic films, then maybe we look at producing independent drama or comedy films. We are still stepping out of the box and looking at what can make us some more money without completely lacking originality. We could also try focusing some of our remaining profit on new marketing techniques; for example, if we are only advertising our films in news papers, we may consider promoting our films via social media or other internet forums.
From a profit stand point though, should we really completely give up on a money horse like the more banal stuff? If we know films or ideas are going to bring in the money, doesn’t that tell us who are audience is? I do agree that it is better for our studio’s originality to produce the big thought-provoking films that will be talked about for years to come, too.
It depends if we require more money or we can survive doing the stuff we love. This is a common question people ask themselves concerning their job. In this context, it’s more the work involved with the job that is the issue. I would much rather make less if I can still survive off the money and make movies that I am proud of. Just going with the flow of current fads and doing something generic and overrated sounds like selling out. I don’t mean to sound like a hipster here. I find with almost any kind of work in life there are a couple of ways to look at it – work to live, or live to work. I always dreamed of living to work, to find the perfect job once I graduate college. Maybe that dream of mine will die once I enter the job market.
Another reason I vote for the making of thought-provoking films is the research I did about Jeopardy increasing IQ. I am sure in contrast there are many films and TV shows that actually lower a person’s IQ. What the world really needs now is innovative thinking and new ideas. I hope that against all odds we will strive to continue making films of intellectual value. One day they will be discovered and praised!
I agree on your point is it more about the money than the quality of workmanship that we as in the movie corporations provide for there clients, the sad part that I see in today’s generation of movie seekers is the dollar over quality, I mean who wants to pay 25$+ dollars to see a boring old remix of the Adams family? people want action, people want something to talk about after the movie, kind of like bragging rights… “Did you see that” … well I did….LOL. and if the movie theaters want to fill seats at the price there charging then they need to step up there game and get a bit how do I say risque with what there willing to show. I know action is always a top seller always has and always will and I know that will never change but I also think that the more realistic the movies get the more people will want to play them out in real life, and to me that is where we as a society needs to wake up a draw a more defined line between what could and what should be shown.
If a film studio is struggling to make a profit should they continue to make it thought provoking films or should they shift to more banal fare? well in looking up the definition of banal fare I found that it means “a devoid of freshness or originality”, I do think that every one that watches a film these days would like to see freshness in there movie going appearance so I would have to stick with the for front winner that would catch a fresh look at a new idea or a new adventure of an old idea on the big screen and stick with the type of films that may be provocative, and can bring in lets say for the lack of words more bang for our buck, but with that being said for each there own so I would also have to argue that we still need to forecast on the other groups of potential clients that may not like those types of films, that way we do not just limit our profit to one group of clients. Yes I understand that in today’s age of movies it is sometimes more of the quality than the actual movie its self i.e. three dementional and dolby surround sound, is where I see most ticket sales going, but we sometimes have to wonder is sound and picture quality enough to fill the seats of does a movie production company also need to put some quality into there story plot as well, and on a side note I think that selling violent movies to our consumers even though it is good for ticket sales I think we have to also think about the image that we as an organization are showing our clients, and the future generations of young people around the world.
As this is a business, and our focus is on turning a profit, I’m shocked we haven’t already made the decision to pander to the lowest common denominator.
Honestly, this is a difficult decision, but I tend to think the two aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive. There are some directors capable of making “smart” movies that still appeal to broad audiences, and even in the most effects-heavy crowd-pleasing movies there’s no replacement for good writing and direction. But, ultimately, if we’re a business, we should be trying to give the people what they want, and then expanding to other higher-minded projects once the studio is financially stable.
Yes! We are a business first and this about profit, thus even as “low-brow” as it may seem to turn to what could be considered less thought-provoking and more crass, we have to look at the demand from our audience, and ultimately where the money is going to flow.
To ultimately answer this question I would have to ask our advertising / marketing section about our audience: who are they, where are they spending their money — in theatres or do we have more consumers buying the films on DVD or internet downloads?
Also instead of looking at the type of movie, would there be any way to boost our profits by looking at product placement and branding films to get our names out there? For this the more banal fare could be more productive, but essentially it is the thought-provoking films that capture the attention of the bigger names — better done films get Oscars and recognition, and ultimately more cash flow. I don’t see why there can’t be some compromise but ultimately if we are in decline now, whatever we are doing isn’t working and tactics needs to be changed.
If our market is currently investing in the big, once-in-a-blue-moon, thought provoking film, we need to switch to the more banal, “easy” fare. Vice versa: if the banal fare is just draining our pockets, it is time to invest in the bigger names and bigger films.
Although thought-provoking films such as documentaries, historical, biographical, and low budget films can have an important message and expand your educational horizon, I believe we should make a change and shift to more banal fare. My understanding of banal fare is the “blockbuster†film which may not challenge the intellect, but millions of movie-goers will pay to watch them. I agree with Michael Eisner, President of Paramount Pictures and then CEO of Disney. As per our textbook, he wrote in an internal memo “We have no obligation to make history. We have no obligation to make art. We have no obligation to make a statement. Our only obligation is to make money†(as quoted in “Friend†2000, p.214). I agree whole-heartedly with this statement as our studio is in the business of returning the highest possible profit to our shareholders. In my opinion, being financially secure is more important than making movies for small niche markets and not realizing a profit. It is not in our studios best interest to continue producing thought-provoking films with the hope that things will get better. I understand that making popular mainstream films also entails risk. However, it takes money to make money, and on balance I believe this is the direction our film studio needs to take. If banal fare films can make huge profits I would leave the thought-provoking films for the studios who want to go bankrupt.
I believe that we should continue to make thought provoking films with adjustments in other areas. I think that if we can get more attention and more of an audience interested in the films, then we would have a better profit margin. I understand that as movies are made and have good ratings, they get more money which relates to the people behind those films and the profits they achieve; some would give up and just go where the money is, but I believe that movies are and should be more then a business strictly to make money. Films are a form of art and a way for directors and producers and actors, etc to express their creative side. It’s a way for audiences to receive a message that otherwise could not be presented in front of them. If we can focus more on expanding our fan base and viewers, then I believe our profits will rise. Expanding can include reaching out to social media or working with advertisement companies to get the word out. I believe thought provoking films are important for the public and the maker of the film especially if the producer can bring in a modern approach to the film to give it that fresh look that viewers are constantly looking for. But overall, I believe that if we can work in other areas to increase our profit, we will begin to see results.
In a society that constantly demands new everything, every second of the day, I would stick to thought provoking material. Just like large gaming companies like Blizzard and EA have received flak for not changing enough of their constant content into something new and exciting, the film industry isn’t generally far behind in that complaint. Plus, we don’t want Adam Sandler to start trying to pitch the same trash to us every month, so lets just steer as far away from that reputation as possible.
I’ve seen a few people state that we should shift marketing strategies for our film studio. I too think that is a solid idea. As long as we stay true to our values and mission, the strategies will practically write themselves. We can do things like produce shorts to introduce ideas that we will explore in our films to generate interest in the community, or we can partner with a local establishment to do ticket give-a-ways. When people win they will surely bring their friends or loved ones. The last thing we want to do is bring them in to some sort of banal fare. What would be the point? I would rather continue to create thought provoking films and have an impact on a slightly smaller scale than to have no impact at all. Improved marketing strategies will allow us to generate the revenue we need to continue doing what we believe in.
I’ve seen a few people state that we should shift marketing strategies for our film studio. I too think that is a solid idea. As long as we stay true to our values and mission, the strategies will practically write themselves. We can do things like produce shorts to introduce ideas that we will explore in our films to generate interest in the community, or we can partner with a local establishment to do ticket give-a-ways. When people win they will surely bring their friends or loved ones. The last thing we want to do is bring them in to some sort of banal fare. What would be the point? I would rather continue to create thought provoking films and have an impact on a slightly smaller scale than to have no impact at all.