Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hollywood's Tenet Experiment Has Failed.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hollywood's Tenet Experiment Has Failed.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/...E1NRTa6OyHDcu0

    Christopher Nolan’s blockbuster was supposed to save U.S. theaters. Now the future looks bleaker than ever.

    Christopher Nolan’s Tenet was supposed to be a boon for movie theaters, a light in the darkness after the coronavirus pandemic shut down cinemas for months. Here was an original film from a beloved director, one of the biggest titles of our postponed summer-movie season—surely this would be enough to lure people back to the big screen. Around the world, that’s proven largely true: Over three weeks, Tenet has made more than $207 million globally, a healthy number given the circumstances. But in the United States, the Warner Bros. film has grossed less than $30 million since August 31—a number so low that it’s scaring other major movies off the release schedule. Now the question isn’t whether theaters can return to normalcy, but whether they can survive this pandemic at all.
    Experience The Atlantic Festival. Wherever you are.

    Join today’s brightest minds and boldest thinkers at our first-ever virtual festival, September 21-24.

    Tenet’s lackluster overall performance has started a domino effect. Wonder Woman 1984, a much-anticipated superhero sequel, bumped its release date from October 2 to Christmas, a clear sign that its studio, Warner Bros., was shaken by Tenet’s underwhelming box-office receipts. Universal’s buzzy horror remake Candyman was also delayed—until sometime in 2021. October is now devoid of tentpole releases, and November has only two: Marvel’s Black Widow (set for November 6) and the latest James Bond film, No Time to Die (November 20). Assuming those dates hold—and they may very well not—U.S. cinemas now have two months to keep their doors open with Tenet as the only blockbuster on offer.

    When Warner Bros. announced its final plans for Tenet in July, I wrote that Hollywood was prioritizing worldwide grosses and treating American viewers as an afterthought. After all, many theater chains across the U.S. remained closed, as they had since March. But most states jumped at the promise that Tenet symbolized, and 44 out of 50 allowed their cinemas to resume operations, albeit with capacity restrictions. Against all odds, Tenet got a wide U.S. release, showing in nearly 3,000 theaters this past weekend. Yes, cinemas in major markets such as New York and Los Angeles remained closed, but after Tenet made a reported $20 million two weekends ago, the hope was that it’d post a similar number last week—a sign that audiences were returning to the movies en masse.

    Instead, it seems Tenet has only been enough to attract die-hard film fans—people like myself who were happy to rent a whole theater to themselves just to enjoy a movie again. The shiny $20 million number that Warner Bros. reported for Tenet’s opening Labor Day weekend turns out to have been a heavily padded figure. The film actually made just $9.4 million over the three-day weekend; the rest of the grosses came from early preview screenings and sales in Canada. In its second weekend, Tenet made just $6.7 million. Normally, a drop of only 29 percent would be regarded by studios as a sign of excellent word of mouth. But Tenet cost $200 million to make and needs to gross more than double that to break even; Warner Bros. might be able to eke that number out worldwide over the next few months, but very little of it will come from the U.S.

    net was the cinema industry’s guinea pig—a way for studios to gauge audience willingness to return to theaters in every country amid a pandemic. The reality is that most of the world has handled the coronavirus far better than America has: China averaged 26 daily cases over the past two weeks, Japan 543, and Canada 681. Given that Hollywood can no longer count on one of its biggest markets—the U.S.—it’s hard to know what course studios should chart next. Releasing movies on demand, even at a marquee price, to try to recoup costs isn’t workable for a film as expensive as Tenet or Wonder Woman 1984. Disney recently attempted a hybrid approach for Mulan, putting it in theaters internationally while charging Disney+ subscribers $30 to watch it at home. Its opening in China was underwhelming ($23 million), and although Disney hasn’t provided official data on streaming grosses, industry estimates have them pegged at around $33 million over Labor Day—not nearly enough for a movie budgeted at $200 million.

    If things were already looking bleak for American cinemas, the immediate future now looks catastrophic. This past weekend, the total domestic box office was less than $15 million—Indiewire estimates that sum amounts to $5,000 per theater, which isn’t enough to pay for basic operating costs. As studios grow more skittish about releasing major films, those numbers will only dwindle. Tenet was supposed to be the industry’s lifeline; for now, Hollywood has nothing else to pin its hopes on.
    We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.

    DAVID SIMS is a staff writer at The Atlantic, where he covers culture.
    Connect

  • #2
    I don't see how the movie companies can keep a film on the shelf indefinitely. One of the Perry Mason novels has a line in it something to the effect that "One dollar paid in cash is better than billing a hundred dollars and getting beat out of it."

    Hundreds of millions of dollars have been paid out to create assets that are sitting on the shelf collecting zero dollars of return. Isn't someone going to say "Let's get what we can out of it" sooner or later? The banks or financing companies are going to want some kind of a return on their investment.

    I suppose part of the problem is that they can't make new movies either, so after the in-the-can material is out there, there's nothing new to put on the shelf to replace it.

    Who'da thought a 100+ year old industry could implode so quickly...

    Comment


    • #3
      I know most, if not all, big movie studios carry 'completion bonds' and other types of insurance on their productions.
      Izzit possible WB would have some sort of coverage against something like the Coronapacoplyse that could help
      them recover at least some of their losses? (Obviously, a 'completion bond' would be useless, since the film was
      completed, but I'm wondering if there is some other type insurance they might have which covers this kind of event.)

      Comment


      • #4
        On Saturday, I bought tickets to see TENET at 9:55 pm with my daughter, hoping for an empty or nearly empty auditorium - something like 4 to 8 other people, max. As the day went on, the crowd grew to 22 people. I returned my tickets and got my money back.

        (It was the Liemax auditorium at AMC Westminster Promenade. I normally avoid that location because of previous problems, but I understand they installed the first and only 4k LaserLiemax in Colorado and that felt like my best option to see TENET.)

        This story is just an anecdote, but I would imagine there are other people who feel similarly. I know from the chatter on Twitter that a lot of people out there simply don't feel comfortable going to the movies, period.

        I'll be watching the showtimes for another opportunity to see it with a tiny crowd... and yes, I recognize that cinemas need crowds larger than 4 to 8 people to survive.

        I paid $20 to watch Bill and Ted Face the Music at home. That was far cheaper for my family of four than going out to the cinema, and I have decent-sized (125") 2.35:1 screen.


        I fear for the future of cinemas,and I'm both heartbroken and enraged about what is happening.

        "It is what it is."

        Comment


        • #5
          I think one of the problems contributing to the sub-par box-office numbers for Tenet is the movie itself.

          If Christopher Nolan's name wasn't associated with this project how would anyone sell it? The main character, played by John David Washington, doesn't even have a name. He's just the protagonist. I haven't seen the movie, but I want to. However its Rotten Tomatoes score isn't hitting it out of the ballpark; at 74% it's just under the "certified fresh" level, only a couple points higher than Interstellar. Remember how "Honest Trailers" made fun of Interstellar? "Muurrrrrpphhh!!!" Some of the critics, even ones delivering positive reviews say not everything works in this movie. Worse yet, apparently there are moments where the movie just gets silly or unintentionally funny.

          There is no doubt the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is scaring many would-be movie-goers away from commercial cinemas. But bad or even mediocre movies will repel potential theater customers regardless whether it's safe to visit a theater or not.

          Comment


          • #6
            This obvious movie-industry hatchet job makes my blood boil, because it LEAVES OUT MOST OF THE FACTS that contribute to the situation in favor of doom-and-gloom sensationalism. Yet another reason why nobody trusts the media. They don't tell the whole story.

            Let's just deal with the actual circumstances that have contributed to this movie doing what it's doing.

            1. It came out Labor Day weekend, which is always one of the slowest weekends of the year in cinemas.
            2. As has been pointed out, it has a no-name cast. Zero marquee value. Hardly anybody says "Hey, it's a Christopher Nolan movie!"
            3. It has a confusing title people don't know about, and it's not a proven property like so many "summer blockbusters" are.
            4. It has a lot of dialogue that you can't fucking hear, which will lead to bad word of mouth.
            5. It has a plot that I'd bet 75% of people can't follow, which will have the same result.
            6. Oh, and there is a pandemic going on and some people are indeed skittish, especially in the big cities where all the money is.
            7. Theaters are working with about 50% or less capacity. Some are at 25%. Some are at less than that.
            8. L.A. and New York -- the two biggest markets in the country -- are not open, and several other pockets of exhibition are still closed too.
            9. NOBODY EVER SAID it was going to be back to business as usual in one weekend. The industry has ALWAYS said it would be a slow climb back.

            Why aren't any writers pointing this shit out? Because it ruins their doom-and-gloom excitement, that's why.

            Then to add #10 to the above list, this is just my opinion, but I think it's a crappy movie. My wife and I watched "Tenet" on Sunday. I have absolutely zero memory of it. I couldn't follow the story. I have NO IDEA WHAT IT WAS EVEN ABOUT. I didn't get to know the characters because I couldn't learn anything about them because the whole thing was a blur of action and noise.... and this is being acclaimed as really great groundbreaking cinema?

            I blame some of these complaints on the convoluted storyline (which seems to be standard equipment on a lot of movies these days), and some of them on the sound mix, which has about half of the dialogue buried either in noise or behind gas-mask-type costuming.



            Comment


            • #7
              I don't think that Nolan had ever envisioned this movie to be the "saving grace" of cinema, it's more like Nolan's commitment to a theatrical release and the stuff happening around the world that this came to be like it is. It's one of his most experimental big budget films to date. I think in a normal market, it would've done mostly fine, but it's not really the most accessible movie for a broad audience.

              Still, I think you need to give WB some credits here. While Disney has chosen to release their stuff direct-to-streaming, WB has at least, committed itself to a theatrical release of this movie and I don't think they wanted it to fail on purpose. And by all means, if you look at it internationally and if you look at the rather difficult circumstances around the entire globe, it didn't even do all that bad. It's unfortunate that the lukewarm reception in the U.S. has let WB to postpone WW84, because that might have been a movie that would've appealed to a bigger audience. This also leaves many cinemas that are open without anything else to really show for until the end of the year...

              Originally posted by Mike Blakesley View Post
              Then to add #10 to the above list, this is just my opinion, but I think it's a crappy movie. My wife and I watched "Tenet" on Sunday. I have absolutely zero memory of it. I couldn't follow the story. I have NO IDEA WHAT IT WAS EVEN ABOUT. I didn't get to know the characters because I couldn't learn anything about them because the whole thing was a blur of action and noise.... and this is being acclaimed as really great groundbreaking cinema?

              I blame some of these complaints on the convoluted storyline (which seems to be standard equipment on a lot of movies these days), and some of them on the sound mix, which has about half of the dialogue buried either in noise or behind gas-mask-type costuming.
              Let it first "sink in" and then give it a second try later on. It's a bit like the first time you drank coffee or beer, it's somewhat of an acquired taste. It will taste better on the second try. They say that most of the great classic movies start out this way... I don't see that potential in this movie, but some movies age better than others.

              Ah, and after seeing this movie about four times now (twice while being paid for it): It helps if you don't think too much about the whole time reversal stuff, as in trying to make it work in your head. If you really try to get your head around the concept, the whole thing comes crashing down, because the movie violates its own rules almost every single time it brings those concepts into play. It's this why I don't think I'll ever consider it a real classic, just a somewhat convoluted attempt at achieving something impossible.

              On the sound issues: Like some of Nolan's previous mixes, I consider this mix broken. It helps if you bring down everything a notch and give the center speaker a bump. People will generally thank you by complaining less about main protagonists without a given name being totally unintelligible.
              Last edited by Marcel Birgelen; 09-15-2020, 01:41 AM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Jim Cassedy View Post
                I know most, if not all, big movie studios carry 'completion bonds' and other types of insurance on their productions.
                Izzit possible WB would have some sort of coverage against something like the Coronapacoplyse that could help
                them recover at least some of their losses? (Obviously, a 'completion bond' would be useless, since the film was
                completed, but I'm wondering if there is some other type insurance they might have which covers this kind of event.)
                Are you saying that you think the studios are pulling the old “Jewish lightning” trick?

                (Okay... we can call it “Mafia lightning”... it’s just a figure of speech to mean “burning down the store to collect on insurance.” Use whatever term you want.)

                I didn’t think of that but I wouldn’t put it past them. I’ve heard worse stories about Hollywood.

                Comment


                • #9
                  No, I wasn't implying that the studios were pulling something underhanded- - I was just wondering if they maybe had some sort of insurance relief against this sort of thing that would somewhat mitigate or minimize their losses in an unusual situation like this. (I guess I suppose you can get insurance against ANYTHING, if you are willing to pay for it )

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Usually completion bonds are taken out to cover an on-screen actor getting injured, sickened or killed during a movie's production. I would be surprised if the policies covered any seemingly unlikely, out of the blue scenarios such as a global pandemic. In 2019 some people (a few scientists, epidemiologists, doctors and science fiction writers) were worried about pandemics. But it wasn't on the radar for anyone else.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I doubt it's realistic to insure yourself against what happened this year in any way that makes economical sense. If there would be anyway to do so, the insurance companies and their backers would go up in smoke in an instant.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        You ask, Variety resonds
                        https://variety.com/2020/film/financ...is-1234770521/

                        Why Hollywood Is Facing a COVID-19 Insurance Crisis
                        By Gene Maddaus
                        Rana Joy Glickman has produced lots of independent films over the last 20 years. But on her latest project, “The Blazing World,” she did something she had never done before: she did not buy cast insurance.

                        Ordinarily, it’s an essential item. Without it, a production could face a total loss if the director or principal actor gets sick or dies during filming. But in the era of COVID-19, such insurance is extremely expensive — if it’s available at all.

                        “That definitely came with a certain degree of anxiety,” Glickman says. “But there are so few guarantees about anything in the independent film world.”

                        In her case, it worked out. The film shot for a month in Dripping Springs, Texas, and nobody got sick. Glickman also had financiers who were willing to take the risk.


                        But many productions are struggling to figure out what to do. Commercial banks are not providing completion bonds without insurance, and traditional insurers aren’t willing to cover losses from COVID-19. Many projects have simply collapsed, while others are exploring outside-the-box solutions.

                        “Things are challenging because the old ways don’t work,” says Kent Hamilton, president of Front Row Insurance. “Some people in some cases are taking the risk — they’ve just gone for it.”

                        Other Front Row clients have bought a policy from Elite Risk, a new entrant in the film and TV insurance marketplace. The owner, Jeff Kleid, has specialized in offering crop insurance to cannabis growers. After the Mandalay Bay shooting in Las Vegas, he sold “active shooter” policies.

                        Now, Kleid is offering film and TV production insurance that covers COVID-19. The policies come with low coverage limits — generally around $3 million, maximum — and high premiums, about 10% of the coverage amount. That’s many times more than productions are used to paying.

                        “Ours is a small solution,” Kleid says. “We’re not looking to be the solution for everybody. We’re looking to get a few people back to work.”

                        Brad Krevoy, producer of the Hallmark Channel series “When Calls the Heart” and a series of holiday films for Netflix, has bought Elite Risk policies for some productions in Canada. The film projects have modest budgets — less than $5 million — and Canada has a strict 14-day isolation period for cast and crew entering the country.

                        “It’s a good system,” Krevoy says. “We’re busier than we’ve ever been.”

                        Arthur J. Gallagher & Co., one of the leading brokers of film and TV insurance, is working with SpottedRisk, another wholesale underwriter of specialty products. Spotted started a few years ago analyzing data to advise brands on celebrity endorsement deals. In the wake of the #MeToo movement, the firm pivoted to offer “disgrace insurance,” in which it used its data to try to predict the likelihood of a scandal.

                        Spotted is now offering cast insurance for COVID-19 and “civil authority” coverage — which pays out in the event of a government-ordered shutdown. CEO Janet Comenos says the policy limits have ranged from $8.1 million to $41 million — with a premium of 7-10% of the coverage limit. The firm acts as a wholesaler, selling coverage on behalf of Lloyd’s of London and other carriers.


                        Both Elite Risk and Spotted have very limited capacity. Elite has insured 15 projects so far, while Spotted has done four projects. Both are seeking to get further backing, which would allow them to write more policies.

                        “The demand is far outweighing the supply,” Comenos says.

                        Elite is a wholesaler on behalf of a captive insurance company, which Kleid declined to identify but which others in the industry identified as Ottawa Corporate Ltd., based in North Carolina. Ottawa is licensed by the state’s Department of Insurance, which confirmed via email that the company has met its licensing requirements, which include submitting a business plan and financial statements. As a captive — essentially a privately held, alternative insurer — the firm is not required to make its statements public, and is not covered by the industry’s independent rating system.

                        “A captive is only as good as its financial stability,” says Brian Kingman, managing director of the entertainment practice at Arthur J. Gallagher. “It’s not as transparent. So that’s a question mark.”

                        Comenos, CEO of Spotted, said she found Elite Risk’s business model “upsetting.”

                        “It’s really critical with new and emerging risks that the insurance is written on A-rated paper, and that’s not the case for them,” she said. “Their paper is unrated.”

                        In response, Kleid says that he has been in regular contact with the state regulators, adjusting its projections as needed, but that the firm is still well within its risk capacity.

                        “My name is solid in the film and TV industry,” Kleid says. “The product we’re offering is new, but the people they’re buying from have a trust factor, and that’s me.”

                        Kleid also notes that he has 25 years of experience in the insurance industry, which Spotted does not.

                        “SpottedRisk is a technology company that came up with a solution for figuring out how to price things,” Kleid says. “They’ve hunkered down on the entertainment space and have been able to get attention… But everything they’ve learned in their model, there’s no way to quantify that data. You should go with who you trust. We’ve got to do it one policy at a time.”

                        Kingman, of Arthur J. Gallagher, says it is disappointing that two firms are “badmouthing each other.” He says he’s working with both companies to try to get the price down and find a product that will help clients.

                        “There’s enough room in the marketplace for two,” he says. “They’re both facilities that are trying to fill a void in a much-needed market. We’re trying to build each of them up and make sure they are operating to our expectations.”

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X